Avatar

Lit by the fires of the numinous

@entanglingbriars / entanglingbriars.tumblr.com

A blog about the academic study of religion that also talks a lot about academia and other adjacent things.

It is interesting to note that fasting during Lent originally consisted of a strict vegetarian or vegan diet. It was only in the eighth century that dietary restrictions were reduced to abstinence from meat alone, albeit fish was tolerated. Jerome (Epistulae, CVII, 10), for instance, allowed the consumption of fish provided that it remained occasional. As a result, fish gradually became the Lenten food par excellence. This raised the concern that it may have undermined the ascetic nature of the fast. For instance, in a fifth-century treatise on the contemplative life, the priest Julianus Pomerius (De vita contemplativa, II) expressed his worry vis-à-vis the overindulgence of fish, which he considered to be in opposition to the spirit of Lent.

Carl Frayne (On Imitating the Regimen of Immortality or Facing the Diet of Mortal Reality: A Brief History of Abstinence from Flesh-Eating in Christianity)

I feel bad about how much I hate those “Actually, Native Americans/African tribes (don’t worry about which specific tribes or nations ok just trust me) revered trans people and made them priestesses or honored leaders” posts because idk man, I know they’re supposed to be positive but that kind of just sounds like gender roles with extra steps

If I was trapped in an endless cycle of death and rebirth I would be normal about it

I get to continue to live and experience the world over and over again? Uh, yes please, do you know how much ska I could listen to with that kind of time

NO!!!! The cycle of death and rebirth pick it up pick it up pick it up pick it up!!!!

These Catholic hospitals have an obligation to the Catholic Church, not their patients. The Hippocratic Oath may say “Do no harm,” but the Catholic Church’s oath has a big asterisk next to that phrase that requires checking in with the pope first. And ultimately, the people they hurt the most tend to be low-income people, women, and LGBTQ individuals.
Avatar

apparently this.is.kosher is a fake and just cosplays as a chasid?? wtf 😒

For those who don't know, there is an Instagram account called this.is.kosher. The account is supposedly by an openly gay chassidic man who is trying to normalize and create a safe space for LGBT orthodox Jews. His bio is "I'm here to be the voice for those who can't make their voices heard." Overall, pretty positive message and goal.

Except recently someone who knows him came out and said it is all fake, "Yaakov Levy" (his fake name) is all a character to get followers. He isn't chassidic. People found his personal Instagram account and he doesn't dress chassidic and his peyos are fake and he doesn't even wear tzitzit or a kippah, and you can hear that he doesn't have a chassidic accent when he speaks. People are alleging that he was making fun of queer jews, that he isn't even gay himself, etc. I'm not here to speculate on his sexuality with no proof and I don't think that's appropriate, but we do have proof that he isn't chassidic. In his recent story he didn't refute the allegations and instead stated he just wanted to make a difference.

I don't really know how I feel about it. He did benefit off of an identity he doesn't have, but at the same time I wonder if the impact is a net good, to show people that queer orthodox Jews exist. But now to find he isn't even orthodox is.. hard to swallow.

Yeah I just learned the news a few hours ago, I've been meaning on making a post about it with reciepts because as a queer Jew who grew up Orthodox, this is a huge betrayal. I'm too busy to make a full post, but basically, in summary:

Yaakov Levy is not his real name. His real name is Erez Oved. Yaakov Levy is a character created in a music video he was in about a year ago. The music video is about homophobia in the Charedi community. As far as we know, and this is all developing information, he was never Charedi.

Based on the fact that Yaakov Levy, a gay Charedi man, is a character in a music video, I believe there are more people responsible for this deception. There are other people featured in his videos, particularly a woman he claims is his sister and a woman he claims is his mother. I don't know yet if they are actually his family members, but I doubt it at this point and suspect they are also actors. I have been trying to do some amateur sleuthing to figure out who they are, but again, my personal life is very busy so I haven't found much.

My issue with This.Is.Kosher is that his content, now that we know he's not actually Charedi (he is actually gay, though), is dangerous.

Why is it dangerous?

It misrepresents what Charedi life is like. While I'm sure there are plenty of Charedi parents and siblings who are supportive of their queer loved ones, the fact of the matter is that it is dangerous to be queer in certain Charedi communities, especially in Israel.

The political climate in Israel is becoming increasingly right-wing. No anti-LGBT legislation has been passed yet, but it's an ever present concern. Homophobia in Charedi communities is a huge issue, and content This.Is.Kosher presents a lie. It would be one thing if Yaakov Levy was real, because then he would be speaking about his experiences. But Yaakov Levy isn't real, Erez Oved is. And he is presenting a world where an openly queer Charedi man is 100% safe and comfortable in his community, when the reality is that a situation like that is rare.

And the thing is, there are queer Orthodox and even Charedi people who have supportive families and live their truth within their communities, but that is not the norm yet. How can we expect homophobia to be taken seriously when Orthodox Jews in denial can just point to This.Is.Kosher and say "homophobia isn't a problem in our community! Look at him!".

Erez Oved is also claiming to be a voice for queer Orthodox Jews, when he is not Orthodox. He is speaking over the voices of actual queer Orthodox Jews, to talk about their experiences, good or bad.

And there's also been evidence that he's been using his This.Is.Kosher account to solicit donations for Yaakov Levy, a gay Charedi man, who isn't even real.

I don't know what Erez Oved's intentions were. Maybe he had good intentions, maybe he didn't, but at the moment he is denying everything on This.Is.Kosher's instagram, and not taking accountibility.

Screenshots:

And here is a link to his Music Video

(goyim I'm going to ask you to refrain from adding your two cents on the matter)

[id in alt text]

Anonymous asked:

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but why do people use the term "xtian/xianity?"

Hi there! I hope you’re having a good day.

So there are a number of reasons people might choose to shorten Christianity/Christian to Xianity/Xian (or Xtianity/Xtian). And because that’s highly individual-specific, I doubt any explanation I give could cover them all, but the reasons I see the most often are:

1) Ease. It’s just shorter to type. So it’s used for the same reason any abbreviation would be, and there’s not much deeper motivation than that.

2) Avoiding using the term “Christ.” “Christ” translates to “messiah” and even tacit recognition of the Jesus figure as the messiah is something that some people, and some Jewish people specifically, choose to avoid. So they remove the term and replace it with X.

3) Not ending up in Christianity-specific tags/spaces. Sometimes someone doesn’t want their post to wind up being sent around by Christian tumblr, and there’s a host of reasons that might be the case, so they don’t use the word Christianity and shorten it to make that happening less likely.

I’ve never seen it done as an intentional mark of disrespect (and indeed don’t see how it could be disrespectful, as X or XP are Christian-origin abbreviations), at least in my anecdotal experience.

Avatar

It originated with the use of the Greek letter "chi" (shaped like an X and the first letter of the word christ) by scribes as a shorthand for Christ. That crossed over into Latin and in turn to English.

Abrahamic god: I will cause a great flood to destroy humans due to their wickedness.

Sumerian god: I will cause a great flood to destroy humans due to them not shutting the fuck up.

I actually read a really interesting article a while back that talked about the ability to rest as a divine prerogative, and that the sounds that provoked the Sumerian gods were the sounds of human wickedness. This reading comes from the fact that the noise (ḫubūru) that the humans make with their cries (rigmu) are described in the same terms as the noise made by wicked gods in their rebellion against Enlil. Which, you know, was actually very interesting, and very different from the "there is no moral reason for the Deluge in Sumerian mythology" stance that I had learned in school.

Women in Iran are defying fresh attempts by authorities to use technology to enforce the compulsory dress code that has been a focus of continuing protests across the country. In April, national police chief Ahmad Reza Radan announced the launch of a "smart" programme involving surveillance cameras to identify women failing to cover their hair or wear loose-fitting clothing in public despite the threat of fines or imprisonment. He warned that those caught breaking the hijab law for a second time would be referred to courts, that cars carrying female passengers with uncovered hair would be confiscated, and that businesses turning a blind eye would be closed. However, his announcement provoked derisive responses on social media, with women posting photos and videos of themselves not wearing the hijab in public spaces across the country.
Source: bbc.com

Do you have any ideas where the weird Christian idea the world is only 6,000 years old came from? My family's been listening to some weirdo lately and fully believe this right now.

Avatar

Young Earth Creationism comes from Seventh Day Adventist writing in the early 20th century. They're fundamentalists, meaning they believe in a literal interpretation of the bible.

In 1923, a fundamentalist, amateur geologist named George Macready Price published a book called The New Geology which purported to prove that the earth was less than 6000 years old, via a biblical literalist interpretation of geology.

Avatar

What's funny is that there are definitely a lot of YEC evangelicals who implicitly consider seventh day adventists hellbound heretics

There are other, non-SDA people who branched off from similar ideas, but as far as I'm aware, New Geology was what really codified Young Earth Creationism.

As with most bizarre religious things in America, we have William Miller to thank for this. The groundwork for YEC had existed since at least the 17th century with other fundamentalist cosmologies, but it took a while for someone (price) to say "according to biblical geology, the earth is 6000 years old"

I wonder if the YEC/6000 year old earth thing is like flat earth where it buys you into a space even if the person who first arrived at the conclusion was a heretical infidel?

the jewish calendar is about 6000 years in right? is that related?

I remember being told it was approx 10,000 years growing up fundie muslim.

I grew up with "the world was created in precisely 4004 BC, well obviously not exactly because of internal rounding and also Ussher probably screwed up the addition but you get the point."

The important reason here is that the length of each generation from Adam to Abraham is spelled out, in years, in the Bible. It also has numbers for the time between Abraham to the Temple, and the lengths of each king's reign after that. And we are pretty sure that the Israelite kingdom that got conquered by the Babylonian Empire was meant to be in our current geological epoch.

Do you remember where the 10,000 number came from? Some of these numbers are fuzzy, but none of them really look like they have 4,000 years worth of flex. So Muslim creationists might be doing something different.

Anyway, young-earth creationism didn't really have to be invented. If you take the Bible literally, it's already there. Ussher wasn't the first either; Bede did about the same math in like the 700s. No "biblical geology" required, and the modern YECs I was reading liked to believe that entirely secular geology agreed with them when it was used honestly.

the 10k was fuzzy, i think it was taking into account archeological evidence for civilization or something. But i remember being told that the christians got about 6k but they probably messed it up a bit. I think there's just more gaps in the islamic record and you don't have a full geneology spelled out with ages.

but also i remember being told that dinosaurs were from before the creation of adam back when jinn used to live on earth.

The current Jewish year, 5783, is based off of a specific calculation of the number of years that have passed since the creation of the world according to the scriptural account in Genesis. This calendar is co-official in Israel, and a local Jewish deli that I go to from time to time announces their founding date in their logo using the same calendar.

I definitely remember that around 5k years was the shortest proposed, but most Young Earth Creationists though it was roughly 10k.

Incidentally, iirc 10k is roughly the time frame for history as opposed to "prehistory".

prayer to whichever dead catholic person is most appropriate: may I not have to run a whole week of surprise camps on crutches. in a knee brace.

Im agnostic raised liberal protestant, but absolutely the catholics got saints right. Sometimes your problem is so fucking specific you need Some Guy. If you're listening, Guy of Workers Who Have Strain Injuries,

No fucking WAY, there's actually a knee injury Guy? Catholicism accidentally reinventing the medical specialty system......

I know you're wondering: are there slutty pictures of him revealing his knees?

Image

Saint Roch, by Francesco Ribalta, c. 1625, Museo de Bellas Artes, Valencia

[image id: st. Roch staring soulfully and hiking up his robe to show that his thigh has a bubo on it, also sluttily revealing his knees]

what the dog doin

Anonymous asked:

Oh man you are SO right about proton/neutron/electron symbolism. Which of the trinity do you think they would've tried to align each particle with?

Proton: The Father. The most fundamental particle. Gives shape and structure to the universe.

Electron: The Holy Spirit. The fast, ephemeral particle that binds the universe together.

Neutron: The Son. The particle that completes the atomic structure, gives it balance and harmony.

Avatar

That’s partialism, Patrick.

ROUND 1; MATCH C

NOTE: i really wanted to fit presbyterian in but couldn't so please note presbyterian technically falls under the reformed church!

No no no no no you all do not understand. Evangelicals can be bad. Right-wing homophobes, biblical literalists, all that. Most of them still believe in something like a loving God though. Calvinism is an order of magnitude worse. Calvinism is the closest thing the real world has ever had to, like, a fantasy-novel evil cult worshipping the god of torment or whatever. You should avoid evangelicals but run like fuck away from Calvinists.

It's more complicated than that. A lot of Evangelicals are Calvinists and a number of denominations that are technically Reformed/Calvinist are fairly chill; PCUSA and the United Church of Christ come to mind. The Southern Baptist Convention is in the slow process of a Calvinist takeover, and they're definitely the nastier sort of Calvinist.

Really interesting discussion by Catharine A. MacKinnon about the intersection of trans rights and feminism. I didn’t read the symposium that followed and can’t speak to it, but her comments are an excellent refutation to pretty much all the common TERF talking points you’ll see.

How do you turn a priest back into a layperson? The process, known as a “rite of degradation,” was formally recorded for the first time in the fourteenth century. You might be more familiar with the term “defrocking,” which, as it turns out, was very literal—the unmaking of a priest entailed stripping him down, methodically removing each layer of garments that marked him as a holy person. There’s good reason for this. A priest’s clothes were a carefully crafted message of holiness. As medieval historian Dyan Elliott writes:

The priest was the walking symbol of his chaste vocation: the white alb represented purity of the soul; his belt, chastity. The bishop wore three tunics: the white linen tunic signified purity; the silk tunic—the work of worms, which were believed to be generated spontaneously without coitus—represented chastity and humility; the third was the color of hyacinth, indicating airy serenity.

The making of a priest involved a ceremonial dressing, adorning him in robes appropriate to his order and anointing his hands with the sacred chrism. The significance of this process extended beyond the moment of ordination: Elliott argues that each time a priest dressed himself, he was reenacting this ritual—as indicated by some prayer books of the Middle Ages, which offered specific words for priests to say as they pulled on their shoes and clothes. Defrocking inverted these vocal utterances, too. A curse accompanied the removal of each layer of clothing:

We take away your sacerdotal vestment and deprive you of sacerdotal honor…we take away your sacerdotal orarium or stole, representing the sweet yoke of God which you despised to carry and the stole of innocence you scorned to observe…

The priest’s fingers were scraped with a piece of glass to remove the sacred oil that once anointed them, and his hair was clipped to obliterate the appearance of his tonsure. As an adage of the twelfth century had it, clergy were as distant from laypeople as human beings from animals. There was a great way to fall; hence the need for a powerful ritual. In designing it, the Church may have been inspired by similar rites for the degradation of knights and military officers. Literature and theater scholar Margaret Loftus Ranald draws on William Segar’s 1590 The Book of Honor and Armes to describe the ritual used to degrade a downfallen knight in the year 1020. Deemed a traitor, the knight was dressed in full armor by his brotherhood and brought to a church where priests were saying prayers usually reserved for burials. At the end of every Psalm, the brotherhood removed a piece armor from the disgraced, proclaiming curses as they went: “This is the Helmet of a disloyall and miscreant Knight.” Once stripped, the knight was rebaptized under the name “Traitor,” after which he was thrown down the stairs he had walked up when receiving his knighthood. The rite of degradation was in use well before it was first formally set down in writing. Its outlines can be seen in the infamous Cadaver Synod of 897, when Pope Stephen VI put the corpse of his predecessor on trial and concluded the macabre affair by stripping the cadaver of its ecclesiastical robes and cutting off two of its anointed fingers. But the rite’s official establishment in the fourteenth century seems to have been a response to the church’s growing concern with heresy. Importantly, defrocking took a priest out of the jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical court. As philologist and historian Leena Löfstedt points out, this rendered the accused back into the authority of the state, which was liable to hand down much harsher punishments. A priest might be defrocked and then turned over to the secular court for execution; the ritual’s symbolic transformation had very real—even lethal—consequences. At the same time, this form of public humiliation could produce unintended consequences. To sympathetic eyes, the sufferings of a defrocked priest could easily come to resemble the passion of Christ—particularly when followed by an execution. We can see this in the contemporary accounts of the 1415 defrocking and execution of the Prague theologian and reformer Jan Hus. Hus’s followers almost immediately came to view it as a martyrdom, as demonstrated in Thomas A. Fudge’s translation of a fifteenth-century passion text describing the events:

But at the last there was disagreement among his sentencers: some of them wanted to shave his head, while others objected…they placed on his head a paper crown with the inscription “this man is an obdurate heretic,” and with three revolting demons drawn on it. And he said, with the air of a beast being led to the sacrifice, not in a loud tone but with the patience of his Lord, “The crown which my redeemer bore on his sacred head was heavy and oppressive. This one, which is light and easy, I ardently long to kiss for your name’s sake, my Lord Jesus Christ.”

Condemned, crowned with demons, Hus was burned at the stake. After the blaze died down, the remaining parts of his body were burned a second time until reduced to ash, and the ashes carefully scooped up and tossed into the Rhine—all to prevent his remains from being treated as holy relics by his supporters. In the chaos of Hus’s degradation, some of his clothes were stolen by the crowd. Even though these onlookers were far from sympathetic to him, the officials overseeing the execution, concerned that the garments would become relics in due time, were obliged to buy the clothes from the appropriators at three times their actual value. Such is the power of dress.
If we believe that God’s character is, as Jonah complained, “gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love,” then we will inevitably also believe that we are supposed to also be “gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love.” If we believe that God is perfectly cool with billions of infants suffering torment, forever and ever, because of the doctrine of original sin, then we will inevitably become or attempt to become people who are also perfectly cool with that.