@inneskeeper this seems relevant to your interests

BUT WAIT! THERE’S MORE! SHE DOIBLES DOWN!

It is actually rare that I get shown stuff that could ACTUALLY be the spawning point of a new and proper named heresy within Holy Roman Catholicism.

“Jesus actually survived the crucifixion” is legitimately one of the most terrifyingly viable heretical traditions you could start. It fulfills the exact ramifications for a popular and overwhelming heresy: It supports and glorifies Christ’s strength (so powerful he could not die in a meaningful way), encouraging different theological philosophies and understandings of the source material, and is COMPLETELY RUINOUS about the WHOLE POINT of Jesus as the Lamb of God. He is destined to die to take on the sins of all humanity forever so we can br forgiven. The death and the resurrection of Christ after his journey into Hell for three days is cosmologically as important as the Trinity. It is one of the pivotal foundations of the entirety of the religion.

If Jesus didn’t die, he didn’t die for us. That changes a LOT of things. But it is at its root a heresy which is not anti-Christian and is instead just a completely irreconcilable veneration.

I love this woman. I need to encourage her to be like this.

tOxIcItY iS a ChArAcTeR tYpE this is fucking amazing

Okay it’s been several hours and I’m still not even slightly over this.

Like, Jesus said “I am the resurrection and the life, except the resurrection bit is metaphorical, because I’m too swole to actually die.”

“For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, but not really, for he made his only begotten son super fucking butch. Like, obviously way too butch to actually succumb to a little crucifying.”

“Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already died. The centurion said to him, ‘Jesus is too shredded to kill, he’s like the Terminator, nothing can take him out.’ Pilate sent Joseph away with nothing, for Jesus was indestructible.”

“The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified but absolutely did not die. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he was just taking a little nap. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He never died, you all really jumped the gun this time.’”

“The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men, but it would take an atomic bomb to kill him, he’ll be fine.”

I’m sorry I’m still stuck on the idea that Jesus couldn’t possibly be a “weak, frail, emotional man” when the shortest and best-known line in the Bible is “Jesus wept” and three out of four Gospels describe Jesus as being extremely emotionally upset and anxious in the Garden of Gethsemane, to the point that in Luke’s gospel he’s described as sweating blood (which is a real thing that happens when your capillaries burst out of extreme stress).

The Gospel of Luke, according to this lady:

Then Jesus went with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to them, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.” He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee along with him. Jesus said to them, “I’m honestly not even really bothered about this, but I’d appreciate it if you stayed up with me. You know, like a sleepover.” Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Not because it’s a big deal or anything, it’s just really annoying and I’d rather not.” And then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping, and was really bummed out about it, because he’d been hoping to play a few rounds of Go Fish with them before he was betrayed.

For he shall grow up before him as the most rugged, aggressive, unkillable weed… he shall be super ripped; and when we shall see him, he’s just gonna be like, super masculine and amazing, you have no idea. (Isaiah 53:2)

“Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for my muscles are super big and I am strong and brutal of heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” (Matthew 11:29)

Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear… Then said Jesus unto Peter, “Yeah! Get him!” and then he decked the guy while he was down for good measure. (John 18:10-11)

And of course, we mustn’t forget the first few verses of Jesus’ most well-known sermon, the Sermon On The Mount:

Blessed are the strong in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are they that suck it up: for they shall be comforted.

Blessed are the aggressive: for they shall inherit the earth.

(Matthew 5:3-5)

as a devout and studious christian, please allow me to say: this is funny as FUCK

“I am the resurrection and the life, except the resurrection bit is metaphorical, because I’m too swole to actually die.”

“The centurion said to him, ‘Jesus is too shredded to kill, he’s like the Terminator, nothing can take him out.’ Pilate sent Joseph away with nothing, for Jesus was indestructible.”

Listen, I was gonna make some cool comments about epic (literally and figuratively) 17th Century female poet Aemelia Lanyer and her epic poem, Salve Deus Rex Judæorum, in which Lanyer describes Jesus exclusively in feminine terms a proto-feminist critique of toxic masculinity, but you guys are just too funny.

I feel we’re sleeping on how @bemusedlybespectacled correctly identified Jesus’ favourite card game as Go Fish.

Help

[Insert Darmok meme here]

cackling at this, can NOT believe it's a real, actual quote. it reads so much like one of those clickhole pieces

One of Harrison Ford’s most famous characters: I hate snakes.

Scientists: We are going to name so many snakes after you.

Old Horror Movie Trailer Reaction Images. Batch 2.

Tag yourself, I’m Waiting to be FILLED!

I think that what's brilliant about The Far Side is how it can imply an entire narrative with only a single panel. It's sequential art without the sequence. Like this one

There's the obvious implication of what's going to happen in the future (there's going to be a hunt), but it also stretches into the past: what circumstances in the anthropology of this group of cavemen must have happened to establish a tradition of dancing with Woolly Mammoths? Why does it, in spite of it's obvious absurdity, feel kind of right that there should be a dance before the cavemen and the mammoths engage in mortal combat? The reluctant fearful expression on the caveman at the bottom; is this his first hunt? Are those his elders trying to reassure him? Does the one mammoth actually seem to fancy him? What about the one looking fearfully back at his friends? How does he feel that the others aren't there to reassure him? One of the mammoths in the upper right looks just as fearful as the cavemen; why? etc.

And all of this is purely evoked. There's only simple line-drawing and two sentences of text, but you see it and it reminds you of other sorts of narratives you've seen or experienced, and your brain constructs a whole temporal sequence; and any possible answer you could get to above the questions would never be as satisfying as what your brain fills in.

I could write an entire essay about this.

In Scott McCloud’s Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art, he offers a definition of comics that he aknowledges excludes single panel cartoons like this. These are a fantastic example of how, even by the logic of his definition, these count as comics.

(McCloud is happy to say that there are plenty of flaws in that book. This is not an attack on his work, simply a contribution to the discussion. I, also, could write essays about this.)

“ #i was drawing upon that book actually “

Nice! Mind-high-five!

As you are evidently a person of impecable taste, may I indulge in a moment of self promotion and link you to my own comics and shizzle?

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?

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

Bringing him one potato

I am not Catholic, but I have always found saints and their highly specialized domains to be fascinating. Among my favorites not previously mentioned here would be St. Anthony, patron saint of lost (and randomly misplaced) objects. Like, let’s be honest, who among us does NOT need a saint we can petition for help finding our car keys for the 37th time this week?

OMG, after 24 years, you have identified Inexplicable Object number 44:

It was St Roch, all along!

I often think of what Thought Viper would have done with a Tumblr. Regardless, I love that Inexplicable Objects hasn't updated since 2001 and the site's still up. Recommended reading. One of my all time favourite websites and a window into how we used to have fun before 'social media'.

I took my confirmation name from St Roch. As a kid I had only seen his name writen as Roach, and have always pronounced it accordingly. I am only now discovering I should have been pronouncing it Rock all along.

(I suspect the ‘potato’ is bread, and that the dog is the one that licked his plague away and bought him bread to eat while he was sick)

I love it as Roach, though.

Although the plague context (which I skimmed over) is now making me wonder if there's more than saint pictured sluttily revealing his leg, and the Inexplicable Saint is another saint of minor leg injuries, as he has a scratch and not a bubo??

Your informed thoughts welcome, @lrgcarter

Well, my first instinct is to not interogate the representational quality of cheap catholic tat too closely...

I think that what's brilliant about The Far Side is how it can imply an entire narrative with only a single panel. It's sequential art without the sequence. Like this one

There's the obvious implication of what's going to happen in the future (there's going to be a hunt), but it also stretches into the past: what circumstances in the anthropology of this group of cavemen must have happened to establish a tradition of dancing with Woolly Mammoths? Why does it, in spite of it's obvious absurdity, feel kind of right that there should be a dance before the cavemen and the mammoths engage in mortal combat? The reluctant fearful expression on the caveman at the bottom; is this his first hunt? Are those his elders trying to reassure him? Does the one mammoth actually seem to fancy him? What about the one looking fearfully back at his friends? How does he feel that the others aren't there to reassure him? One of the mammoths in the upper right looks just as fearful as the cavemen; why? etc.

And all of this is purely evoked. There's only simple line-drawing and two sentences of text, but you see it and it reminds you of other sorts of narratives you've seen or experienced, and your brain constructs a whole temporal sequence; and any possible answer you could get to above the questions would never be as satisfying as what your brain fills in.

I could write an entire essay about this.

In Scott McCloud’s Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art, he offers a definition of comics that he aknowledges excludes single panel cartoons like this. These are a fantastic example of how, even by the logic of his definition, these count as comics.

(McCloud is happy to say that there are plenty of flaws in that book. This is not an attack on his work, simply a contribution to the discussion. I, also, could write essays about this.)

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?

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

Bringing him one potato

I am not Catholic, but I have always found saints and their highly specialized domains to be fascinating. Among my favorites not previously mentioned here would be St. Anthony, patron saint of lost (and randomly misplaced) objects. Like, let’s be honest, who among us does NOT need a saint we can petition for help finding our car keys for the 37th time this week?

OMG, after 24 years, you have identified Inexplicable Object number 44:

It was St Roch, all along!

I often think of what Thought Viper would have done with a Tumblr. Regardless, I love that Inexplicable Objects hasn't updated since 2001 and the site's still up. Recommended reading. One of my all time favourite websites and a window into how we used to have fun before 'social media'.

I took my confirmation name from St Roch. As a kid I had only seen his name writen as Roach, and have always pronounced it accordingly. I am only now discovering I should have been pronouncing it Rock all along.

(I suspect the ‘potato’ is bread, and that the dog is the one that licked his plague away and bought him bread to eat while he was sick)

I need to draw men being obnoxious to their partners and getting In The Way right now immediately.

it is it's nature to Be In The Way.

Just... Pick them up??? Grab a blanket, wrap 'em up, then move them out of the way.

the consequences of doing that:

just needed to make a conclusion to this

Awww

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

Larry Tesler, inventor of the cut, copy, and paste commands, dies at 74

I think the problem I have... one of the problems I have, trying to talk about art or aesthetics is I never learned a damn thing about it when I was young enough to really embrace cringe culture, and now I'm grown up and I just like a lot of stuff indiscriminately and don't really know enough to be ashamed of it.

I mean, I appreciate that there are a lot of very different ways things can be 1) cool and 2) beautiful. I appreciate that things take very different kinds of technical skill. (I have none of those skills so I'm impressed either way). I sort-of appreciate that some things are 'just' pretty while others have a deep and serious message, but unfortunaely I am too stupid to understand the deep and serious message so. Yeah. I entirely appreciate that things have different vibes, but I'm autistic and don't speak Art so it's anybody's guess whether the vibes I'm getting are the official canon ones. I pretty much go by 'does it spark joy' and a hell of a lot of things do.

Point is, the main reason I don't own a metre-high holographic three wolf moon poster is that I can't find one. I have looked.

I'm prefectly happy with that fact about myself. But I'm worried if Yaz ever finds out that will colour their feelings about me having bought two of their paintings. (Jai already knows I have no taste, but nobody tell Yaz, ok?)

Anyway even I know that not all wall art/ornaments/throw rugs/decorative mugs/cushion covers are supposed to be achieving the same effect. The problem is I don't actually know enough about said effects to picture how things will work together. I own a lot of art prints, posters, etc but hardly any of them are on the walls because 1) frames are expensive 2) putting up picture hooks shouldn't be difficult but it is and 3) I don't know what should go where and I am paralysed by the responsibility.

Oh and 4) walls are mostly covered by furniture, damp as hell, sloping ceilings, or all three.

Anyway if anyone can tell me where Rousseau prints go in relation to speed-paintings, watercolour zebras, unclassifiable contempory artists who like sff and Heironymus Bosch, chibi pokemon, commissioned portraits of my larp characters, Ursula Vernon prints, acrylic landscapes from charity shops, sepia-toned plates from vintage natural history books, and collector plates from the diamond unicorn series (not for food use! comes with certificate of authenticity!), please do.

Is Yaz on tumblr? If they are, I need to know this.

Good news for you, this August 23rd.

It’s that time of year again.

Nice

Guess what today is?

Nice.

nice

guys i just found out about this site that does a daily guessing game, it’s phylogenetic wordle- so fun!!!

It seems to me that, in the game of football, whichever team has possession of the ball has an unfair advantage.

To make the game more balanced, I suggest giving each team a ball and having the whole game be played with two balls.

What happens if one team gets possession of BOTH balls?

Are we not back to square one, but doubled?

My gut feeling is that focusing your team on taking the other’s ball will mean you have to sacrifice the defense of your own ball and so everything should balance out.

But, having thought about it more, give each player their own ball. That fixes everything. Should cut down on fouls as well.

the sea brought a gift

It’s the phallus-sea!

there is, in fact, a "platonic explanation for this" if you're not a coward

its so fun to see the diversity of tags on this ranging from "they're literally just standing next to each other" to "deep bonds dont have to be romantic/sexual!" to "yeah friends can fuck nasty, platonically. coward." we're all so correct, there are, in fact, a million platonic explanations for this

The platonic explanation for everything is “it’s made of tiny triangles”

I feel like this is an appeal to Plato, but I do not recall him thinking any such thing. Plato would be more like, 'Triangles are inferior reflections of Triangles,' - might it be a pythagorian thing? We know so little about what the cult of pythagoras really thought that it's plausible... but it feels more like someone mated Pythagoras with Thales and they gave birth to an unholy philosopher baby.

But you might mean something else.

I'm so torn, because I really want to support OP's point because they're so right. But also I want to get the joke I *feel* like I should get.

I don’t have my copy of Timaeus to hand, but my memory is telling me there’s a bit where he suggests that everything is made of tiny triangles which then make cubes and pyramids and eventually the Ultimate Shape To End All Shapes, the 12 sided dice?