What’s a question???

[Felicity]

@thearcaneaxiom

(Yeah, I think it’s a good summery. It feels like the word curiosity doesn’t give a complete connotation though.) I’m not sure, perhaps there are different degrees of what curiosity is? Does that stray from the heart of a question? (I would say that curiosity is the right word, but it just feels less driven to me for some reason, even though that’s what curiosity is, so…. maybe I’m just going in circles here.)

(Ok I see what you mean. Curiosity seems more like a ‘wanting to know more’ for amusement, rather than a hunger or desire for deep knowledge. Although the former could just be because of a certain monkey I always think of whenever I hear the word curious. 😉 )

*Gives a long pained sigh…

(Yeah I know it’s a rather overused question.) 😅

(One answer is independent of the observer, while the other is dependent. This can lead to deeper questions about how much of our reality is really simply our minds interpretations of a truer reality. Time and space for example feel like concrete concepts that exist in their own right independent from us, but many suggest that these are really just our interpretations of what’s really going on.)

(I’ve always cringed at that suggestion…personally I’d feel betrayed if that were true! Like, all this isn’t REAL? COME ON!!! But I understand the argument, and it is… *gulp* interesting to think about.)

If reality is only our interpretation of it, than what is it when uninterpreted?

(Exactly!!) Does it not exist unless it is interpreted or something? How can something exist without existing outside of someone’s interpretation of it?

He must increase, but I must decrease.

[TheArcaneAxiom]

@felicity

(Ok I see what you mean. Curiosity seems more like a ‘wanting to know more’ for amusement, rather than a hunger or desire for deep knowledge. Although the former could just be because of a certain monkey I always think of whenever I hear the word curious. 😉 )

(Yep! You summed up what I was thinking pretty well there XD)

(I’ve always cringed at that suggestion…personally I’d feel betrayed if that were true! Like, all this isn’t REAL? COME ON!!! But I understand the argument, and it is… *gulp* interesting to think about.)

(Warning: existential rant incoming, only read if your comfortable with these harder subjects.)

(Yeah, honestly, I’m really not convinced of either side of things here yet. It must be recognized that our interpretation of reality is still only an interpretation no matter what, but how far does that go is the question. Like causality for example seems like such a fundamental thing within reality. It is the key base of literally everything we understand scientifically on any level. We observe some behavior, how and why is that behavior there is what we ask. We look closer, realize that the behavior arose from some other behavior, and another, and another, shrinking down to the most fundamental points of our understanding of our universe.)

Then one must ask, what caused reality itself?

(It really doesn’t matter if your an atheist or a theist, this question cannot be answered within our reality, unless perhaps God grants us that knowledge, but I don’t think that’s what this time is for.) We can say God caused it, but what caused God? Was God always there, independent of causality, but then why does He exist, and not pure nothingness at the most absolute degree? (Because of this, and because we already know that God does indeed exist, we prove that He is beyond all of our fundamental understanding. Our perception of reality is based off of causality, scientifically and theologically, but we have this black hole that shows that causality can’t be the only thing going on. The issue when I say that though, is that I’m referencing another cause, looping back to causality. It’s an unescapable trap we’re in unless we truly come to a knowledge of all things. Thus, our perception of reality must likely be very different from the real reality, but once again, where that line is, we may never know in this life. I still believe that causality, along with time and space, are fundamental concepts in some sense beyond our mere interpretation, but whether or not that is even meaningful to say at all is a difficult question in its own right.)

(I hope non of this brings discomfort. Personally, I feel this only increases my faith, and not because of a “God of gaps” argument. I know with a surety that God is all powerful, all knowing, and all loving already. This simply shows almost mathematically why we can’t yet fully understand Him in this life to me.)

Do you have any thoughts about this? (If you feel comfortable of course. This is a hard subject for many.)

Does this relate to perhaps things like the Incompleteness Theorem, stating that that an axiomatic system cannot prove everything within that system axiomatically?

 

 

He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.

[Felicity]

@thearcaneaxiom

(Warning: existential rant incoming, only read if your comfortable with these harder subjects.)

(Warning acknowledged.)

Then one must ask, what caused reality itself?

(The definition of reality I’m using here is “the state of existing”. Just to be clear.) Perhaps there are two kinds of realities: the reality that has always been, (God), and the reality that He created, (time and space)?  Did God create reality? Is God reality, since He has created everything and has always existed?

(Because of this, and because we already know that God does indeed exist, we prove that He is beyond all of our fundamental understanding. Our perception of reality is based off of causality, scientifically and theologically, but we have this black hole that shows that causality can’t be the only thing going on. The issue when I say that though, is that I’m referencing another cause, looping back to causality. It’s an inescapable trap we’re in unless we truly come to a knowledge of all things. Thus, our perception of reality must likely be very different from the real reality, but once again, where that line is, we may never know in this life. I still believe that causality, along with time and space, are fundamental concepts in some sense beyond our mere interpretation, but whether or not that is even meaningful to say at all is a difficult question in its own right.)

(Wow, that was so enlightening, even though the conclusion you came to is that we can’t understand completely what reality is in this life. I agree. So to the original question of whether or not reality is real or just our interpretation of it, I suppose we can explain it only as far as causality lets us (which is a continual circle which we can’t escape from with the brains/knowledge we have now.)) Am I understanding that right?

(I hope non of this brings discomfort. Personally, I feel this only increases my faith, and not because of a “God of gaps” argument. I know with a surety that God is all powerful, all knowing, and all loving already. This simply shows almost mathematically why we can’t yet fully understand Him in this life to me.) Do you have any thoughts about this? (If you feel comfortable of course. This is a hard subject for many.)

(Yes! The knowledge of God is beyond our comprehension, putting us in awe of who He is and how He has created us, mathematics and logic. There’s no getting away from the fact that He is a God of order. My family and I just listened to a message the other day on Psalms 19 and how one of the ways God reveals Himself is through nature. My dad was encouraging my siblings who are still in school to think about that while studying science, math, etc, and we were talking about how you can find God in everything he has created. Also, here’s a quote from G. K. Chesterton in reference to Romans 11:33 that I thought you might find interesting:

“Now, this (Rom. 11:33) is exactly the claim which I have since come to propound for Christianity. Not merely that it deduces logical truths, but that when it suddenly becomes illogical, it has found, so to speak, an illogical truth. It not only goes right about things, but it goes wrong (if one may say so) exactly where the things go wrong. Its plan suits the secret irregularities, and expects the unexpected. It is simple about the simple truth; but it is stubborn about the subtle truth.”)

Does this relate to perhaps things like the Incompleteness Theorem, stating that that an axiomatic system cannot prove everything within that system axiomatically?

(Very likely.)

 

 

He must increase, but I must decrease.

[TheArcaneAxiom]

@felicity

(The definition of reality I’m using here is “the state of existing”. Just to be clear.) Perhaps there are two kinds of realities: the reality that has always been, (God), and the reality that He created, (time and space)?  Did God create reality? Is God reality, since He has created everything and has always existed?

If reality is simply the state of existing, what specifically is existing? Is it everything within the universe? Is it everything that is self aware? If man is uniquely created in the image of God, does that not mean that God takes the image of a man, and therefore is distinguished from reality? Is that even meaningful to ask, are those perhaps secretly one in the same?

(Wow, that was so enlightening, even though the conclusion you came to is that we can’t understand completely what reality is in this life. I agree. So to the original question of whether or not reality is real or just our interpretation of it, I suppose we can explain it only as far as causality lets us (which is a continual circle which we can’t escape from with the brains/knowledge we have now.)) Am I understanding that right?

(Yep, you summed it up perfectly!) We can say that reality has a set beginning, but what set it off? We can say that the line of causality goes in a loop, where it somehow causes itself, but then, what caused that loop? we can say that it is an infinite line of causes forever, but what caused that line? We could even prove that there is a law of reality that states that God and/or reality must exist, and it can’t be otherwise, but then, what caused that law?

(Yes! The knowledge of God is beyond our comprehension, putting us in awe of who He is and how He has created us, mathematics and logic. There’s no getting away from the fact that He is a God of order. My family and I just listened to a message the other day on Psalms 19 and how one of the ways God reveals Himself is through nature. My dad was encouraging my siblings who are still in school to think about that while studying science, math, etc, and we were talking about how you can find God in everything he has created. Also, here’s a quote from G. K. Chesterton in reference to Romans 11:33 that I thought you might find interesting:

“Now, this (Rom. 11:33) is exactly the claim which I have since come to propound for Christianity. Not merely that it deduces logical truths, but that when it suddenly becomes illogical, it has found, so to speak, an illogical truth. It not only goes right about things, but it goes wrong (if one may say so) exactly where the things go wrong. Its plan suits the secret irregularities, and expects the unexpected. It is simple about the simple truth; but it is stubborn about the subtle truth.”)

(So true! If we were to only look, as the Israelites looking upon the Silver Serpent, we would see Him in all things. Thanks for the scripture reference and the quote! It’s an excellent point he makes concerning the nature of truth, that while we may not understand a truth, and that truth may appear illogical, it is true regardless. I don’t believe that any truth is really illogical though, though he probably doesn’t either, as he puts it as “so to speak”, referencing how we can’t perfectly word something so ineffable. As you say, I believe God is a God of law. No truth disobeys that law, it is simply a higher law with a higher degree of logic we can’t yet understand.)

Who relished relish so much that they decided to call it relish? Or is it the other way around?

He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.

[Felicity]

@thearcaneaxiom

If reality is simply the state of existing, what specifically is existing? Is it everything within the universe? Is it everything that is self aware? If man is uniquely created in the image of God, does that not mean that God takes the image of a man, and therefore is distinguished from reality? Is that even meaningful to ask, are those perhaps secretly one in the same?

Do you purpose a different definition of reality? Is existing the state of being real, and reality is something that is real/actual? (Wow I’m really confusing myself here. 😅  So I don’t think reality is everything that is self aware, at least, that’s not how I look at it. Self awareness is different. If I am unconscious, I am not self aware, but I still exist and am in reality.) (And also, I don’t think that because we’re made in the image of God means that God is in the image of a man. The word image in Gen. 1:27 doesn’t mean a literal “form” or “copy”, but that God made humans different than the animals. He gave us brains to think logically, a sense of creativity, etc. The Bible says that God is a Spirit, and has no physical form, (although He can manifest Himself in one, which He did through Jesus, who is God, (John 1) and took on the form of a man.))

We can say that reality has a set beginning, but what set it off? We can say that the line of causality goes in a loop, where it somehow causes itself, but then, what caused that loop? we can say that it is an infinite line of causes forever, but what caused that line? We could even prove that there is a law of reality that states that God and/or reality must exist, and it can’t be otherwise, but then, what caused that law?

(Ahh yes. I see. I’m assuming the questions are rhetorical to affirm the point.)

(So true! If we were to only look, as the Israelites looking upon the Silver Serpent, we would see Him in all things. Thanks for the scripture reference and the quote! It’s an excellent point he makes concerning the nature of truth, that while we may not understand a truth, and that truth may appear illogical, it is true regardless. I don’t believe that any truth is really illogical though, though he probably doesn’t either, as he puts it as “so to speak”, referencing how we can’t perfectly word something so ineffable. As you say, I believe God is a God of law. No truth disobeys that law, it is simply a higher law with a higher degree of logic we can’t yet understand.)

(Yep, great summary!)

Who relished relish so much that they decided to call it relish? Or is it the other way around?

They say the name may have derived from the French word reles meaning remainder or leftover, since relish was often made with leftover veggies, but who says they know what they’re talking about? And what if the verb/adj. relish existed before it was named? Does it not suspiciously point to the one who relished the dish, therefore naming it after the English word relish, like you point out?

He must increase, but I must decrease.

[TheArcaneAxiom]

@felicity

Do you purpose a different definition of reality? Is existing the state of being real, and reality is something that is real/actual? (Wow I’m really confusing myself here. 😅  So I don’t think reality is everything that is self aware, at least, that’s not how I look at it. Self awareness is different. If I am unconscious, I am not self aware, but I still exist and am in reality.) (And also, I don’t think that because we’re made in the image of God means that God is in the image of a man. The word image in Gen. 1:27 doesn’t mean a literal “form” or “copy”, but that God made humans different than the animals. He gave us brains to think logically, a sense of creativity, etc. The Bible says that God is a Spirit, and has no physical form, (although He can manifest Himself in one, which He did through Jesus, who is God, (John 1) and took on the form of a man.))

(This is actually a point where our theologies may differ, I knew that would be the case, so my fault for bringing it up😅 My Church actually teaches that God does indeed has a physical body, and I don’t think the Bible really contradicts that at all.) The Bible does say that He is a Spirit, but where does it say that he bares no physical form? (You may point out that Christ said that spirit is not of flesh and blood, which is true. However, I myself have and therefore am a spirit. A spirit is not flesh and blood, but can still be bonded with flesh and blood, as you suggested in the form of Christ, though I differ there also, believing God and Christ to be two distinct beings, though they do refer to themselves as one often. I actually bear a great respect for those who believe otherwise though, because it get’s into the beyondness that is God, which we can all agree on whole heartedly, albeit different angles of that. Thank you for baring with my weirdness😅)

(Ahh yes. I see. I’m assuming the questions are rhetorical to affirm the point.)

(Yeah😅)

They say the name may have derived from the French word reles meaning remainder or leftover, since relish was often made with leftover veggies, but who says they know what they’re talking about? And what if the verb/adj. relish existed before it was named? Does it not suspiciously point to the one who relished the dish, therefore naming it after the English word relish, like you point out?

Is there a secret relish cult that has scrubbed all records of the true etymology of the word relish🤔???

 

He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.

[Felicity]

@thearcaneaxiom

(This is actually a point where our theologies may differ, I knew that would be the case, so my fault for bringing it up😅)

(No problem. Honestly I knew we’d differ here, (so maybe it’s my fault) especially in the question of whether or not Jesus is God, which is really important to me. I’d love to have a friendly discussion about it if you’re comfortable. If you’d rather not, I respect that too!) (AHHH. I almost forgot to put parenthesis around that. 😅)

Is there a secret relish cult that has scrubbed all records of the true etymology of the word relish🤔???

Have we just discovered this mysterious relish cult which has been hid for centuries from all learned people? Are we on the brink of relish revolution?

Um…do you even like relish?? (I’ve never really relished it…though I do like pickles.)😂

What is your opinion on showing truth in your writing? Do you think being preachy is the way to go, or can more subtle themes do the job? (I’ve heard arguments for both, and lean towards the latter, but I’m curious what you think.)

He must increase, but I must decrease.

[TheArcaneAxiom]

@felicity

(No problem. Honestly I knew we’d differ here, (so maybe it’s my fault) especially in the question of whether or not Jesus is God, which is really important to me. I’d love to have a friendly discussion about it if you’re comfortable. If you’d rather not, I respect that too!) (AHHH. I almost forgot to put parenthesis around that. 😅)

(Yeah! I’d love to continue if we can be respectful about it, I just knew this to be a big point of contention for many. I would mention that while we believe that the Father and the Son to be two distinct beings, and we worship the Father through the Son, we still believe that they worked together in the creation of all things, more specifically, Christ created the Heavens and the Earth under direction of the Father. Going back again to Genesis 1:26: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness”, speaking in a plural form is one of a few points of scripture we look to about this (Unless you believe that this is more suggesting that God is not really male or female, but we strictly believe Him to be our Father. Also note we are not polytheistic, we only worship one true God). So when we distinguish them, we don’t believe we lessen Christ’s role as our Savior and member of the God-Head. I personally feel that this builds an even more personal and divine relationship with both of them that wouldn’t be the same otherwise.) How do you feel about that, believing that the Father and the Son aren’t only one in purpose, but also one in being, and how that increases your faith and relationship with Them?

Have we just discovered this mysterious relish cult which has been hid for centuries from all learned people? Are we on the brink of relish revolution?

Will they relish in their revolution? Or will the only thing that can be relished, is relish itself, and all else is lesser, and therefore can’t be relished?

Um…do you even like relish?? (I’ve never really relished it…though I do like pickles.)😂

Hmm, do I relish it? (I don’t think I relish it, but I like it on hotdogs occasionally, but I put everything on hotdogs, so….)

What is your opinion on showing truth in your writing? Do you think being preachy is the way to go, or can more subtle themes do the job? (I’ve heard arguments for both, and lean towards the latter, but I’m curious what you think.)

(For me this gets into the idea of allegorical writing vs little to no allegories. The classic C.S Lewis vs J.R.R Tolkien discussion. I definitely lean towards the latter as well, but I do appreciate the value of allegories. Some authors actually don’t even do a definitive statement as their theme, subtle or otherwise, but instead ask a question to their readers with an open ended discussion. I personally feel all over the board with this concerning different themes I get into. As I’ve talked about before, I like getting into deep fundamental and mathematical truths in my writing, which I think I like to either have characters consider directly, and they openly search for that, or it’s more of a background concept perhaps even taken for granted presented in the worldbuilding and/or theme somehow. As well as ask questions like what the truth even is, and whether or not it’s even meaningful to consider as having an answer. That was probably a poor answer, because I’m really all over, trying to multidimensional with my themes, but it can become chaotic.) What about you?

What’s the face you make when you see a bubbled eyed goldfish?

He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.

[Esther]

@thearcaneaxiom @anyone-else-on-here-I-just-didn’t-want-to-go-through-and-find-all-the-tags-XD

(I came up with a question 😏 [Which there may actually be an answer to… 🤔])

What shape is the universe?

Write what should not be forgotten. — Isabel Allende

[TheArcaneAxiom]

@esther-c

(I actually asked this question earlier to Historian in the deceptive form of): Do we live on a potato, a donut, or a pringle?

(This is kind of a joke in topology and physics describing Euclidean and non Euclidean geometries, though that’s not all of them. I could also describe it entirely in donut form for fun, like a donut hole, a donut, or a donut with more than one hole, but that’s beside the point. These are only 3d representations of higher dimensional concepts. If we live on a potato (or donut hole), then that’s in reference to spherical space. If we live in a spherical space, then that means more specifically that we live on the surface of a sphere, so space would be curve inwards, and there’s also the property of returning where you started when you move one direction for long enough, though this is not unique to this space. Then we could live on a donut, meaning the far more familiar Euclidean space, which might seem strange to some that a torus is what most accurately represents that, but the math behind it is quite intuitive if you want to look into it, and I’d also love to rant on it myself if your interested. Anyway, Euclidean space is perceivably flat, which means that space could go onwards forever, being truly infinite, or it could repeat itself on the surface of a hyper torus (donut) or it could even be on a klein bottle, where if you go straight and come back, you will suddenly become your mirror self. If we live on a pringle (or a 2+ hole donut, I know those don’t look the same, but they are correlated in a way I would love to get into if your interested) that’s in reference to hyperbolic space. This is a space that is negatively curved, and could either be infinite (like an infinite extension of a pringle) or it could be finite on a surface of a 2+ torus. I haven’t really properly explained these spaces individually in their true behavior and what they are, and I would love to go into more detail of your interested, but let’s keep going on your question for now. As for what the actual topological surface of the universe is, specialized modern space telescopes from studies like the ESA’s Planck mission report that the universe appears to truly be flat. If this is accepted, then we must accept a truly infinite universe, a hyper torus, a hyper klein bottle, or some other Euclidean surface. As to which one, we simply don’t know yet, and it may not even be possible for us to know, because of the fundamental limit of the observable universe, keeping us from seeing far enough to tell whether or not there’s a repeating pattern. Perhaps God will reveal it to us someday, or we may need to just wait till the next life to know.)

Any questions?

How would you feel if you found out that you lived on a donut?

 

He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.

[Esther]

@thearcaneaxiom

🤯

Any questions?

(I wouldn’t know what to ask. 😂)

How would you feel if you found out that you lived on a donut?

(Hm… 🤔 Then I’d ask):

Is the donut edible??

🤣

 

 

 

 

Write what should not be forgotten. — Isabel Allende

[TheArcaneAxiom]

@esther-c

(I wouldn’t know what to ask. 😂)

Sorry, did I make any sense, or did I sound like I was blabbering gibberish?🤣

Is the donut edible??

(Hmm, to ask if the donut is edible could actually be an interesting question. If it can be eaten, then that means that one must be able to exist outside of the fundamental domain, meaning the shape of the universe. We couldn’t escape the donut’s surface, unless we could become higher dimensional beings, but that enters another question of whether or not space is a meaningful concept beyond the fundamental domain. If it is, then we could exit it through some higher dimension, and then attempt to chow down on the surface, but for that to work, we must become beings that can’t pass through the fundamental domain, and therefore be able to interact with it.) If all works out, will we be able to have enough force to eat a piece of it? If we could, what would that look like within the fundamental domain? It would likely appear as a empty black sphere, like a black hole, unless light can pass through it, but could light radiation escape four dimensionally? If space is not a meaningful concept beyond the fundamental domain, then what is? (This is the realm of God most likely, so idk. This is actually leads to a relevant discussion I’ve been pondering for worldbuilding in my and Princess’s WIP, where there’s a type of material that removes space from some point, and can place it back down in some other location, causing very strange effects.)

…🤣

 

He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.

[Esther]

@thearcaneaxiom

Sorry, did I make any sense, or did I sound like I was blabbering gibberish?🤣

(I think it made as much sense as it could to my brain. 🤣)

 

(Woah… Ok then! 😄👍😂😂)

Write what should not be forgotten. — Isabel Allende

[Felicity]

@thearcaneaxiom

(No I didn’t forget about this, 🙂 I just had a busy week.)

(Yeah! I’d love to continue if we can be respectful about it, I just knew this to be a big point of contention for many.)

(Ok! Though we will differ, and I’m going to state what I believe and why, I will try to be as respectful as possible. You’re right. I can’t speak for everyone, but the reason why it’s such a big point to me is because its pretty much what my whole Christianity is based off of. To me, if Jesus isn’t God, than he’s just…another man. A good man, but just a man. And therefore my faith is in vain because there’s no way I could find forgiveness before God through a human’s sacrifice.)

(I would mention that while we believe that the Father and the Son to be two distinct beings, and we worship the Father through the Son, we still believe that they worked together in the creation of all things, more specifically, Christ created the Heavens and the Earth under direction of the Father. Going back again to Genesis 1:26: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness”, speaking in a plural form is one of a few points of scripture we look to about this.)

(I see. I also believe that the Father and the Son created this world, as seen in the verse you pointed out and also in John 1:3. But I would go farther with this and believe that these verses indicate that Jesus is God, since it’s clearly stated that both of them were responsibly for Creation. (Genesis also has a fascinating reference to the Trinity, since we know in 1:3 that the Spirit of God was also involved in Creation.))

(Unless you believe that this is more suggesting that God is not really male or female, but we strictly believe Him to be our Father. Also note we are not polytheistic, we only worship one true God)

(Right. I see how that point could be made. Honestly I’ve always believed that God doesn’t have a gender like humans, but that He did choose a masculine form to reveal Himself to us. I’ve never thought of the plural “us” in Gen. 1:27 as having to do with gender before though. Interesting point! (wait..I guess you were bringing it up as a counter-argument to your view…. Ok, I get where you were going.😄)

(So when we distinguish them, we don’t believe we lessen Christ’s role as our Savior and member of the God-Head. I personally feel that this builds an even more personal and divine relationship with both of them that wouldn’t be the same otherwise.)

What do you mean by God-Head? (I am familiar with this term in the doctrine of the Triune God-Head, which is One God who exists in three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.) Just wondering for the sake of clarity if you were using it in that way or something else?

How do you feel about that, believing that the Father and the Son aren’t only one in purpose, but also one in being, and how that increases your faith and relationship with Them?

(Great question! It truly is a mysterious thing, and I’m amazed and in awe of God and who He revealed Himself to be. It also gives me such a unique view of Jesus, and His life here on earth. He gave up the glories of Heaven to come down here, humble Himself, and take on human form. He sacrificed so much, including His own life. And to prove His deity to the whole world, He overcomes death and the grave and resurrects!)

(Thanks for being willing to share, by the way! I hope this conversation can be uplifting to both of us and not just a source of argument/contention. I, for one have been inspired to dig deeper into why I believe what I do, and search my heart for anything that is contrary to God’s Word.)

Will they relish in their revolution? Or will the only thing that can be relished, is relish itself, and all else is lesser, and therefore can’t be relished?

🤣🤣 (Hmm. Will have to do some relish research to find the answers to these relishing questions.)

Hmm, do I relish it? (I don’t think I relish it, but I like it on hotdogs occasionally, but I put everything on hotdogs, so….)

Everything? In what sense of the word? 😉

(For me this gets into the idea of allegorical writing vs little to no allegories. The classic C.S Lewis vs J.R.R Tolkien discussion. I definitely lean towards the latter as well, but I do appreciate the value of allegories. Some authors actually don’t even do a definitive statement as their theme, subtle or otherwise, but instead ask a question to their readers with an open ended discussion. I personally feel all over the board with this concerning different themes I get into.)

(I’ve never written an allegory, but do enjoy reading them when done correctly. By “preachy” I meant when the theme or truth is forced on you and stated as an overbearing fact, instead of being woven into the story through the characters choices and actions. It seems to me that the only people who’d read the “preachy” book are the ones who already agree on the truth the author is showing, and the ones who disagree will be annoyed and put it down. However when the truth is shown to be true subtly through the characters, which any reader can relate to, then it reaches more people and gives them something to chew on.

I’m glad you brought up the point of an open-ended question! I recently read The Kremlin Conspiracy by Joel Rosenburg, in which he purposed the question of whether or not it’s right to assassinate an evil ruler. I was intrigued by the way he explored both sides of the issue, but I was not sure at the end which he was trying to portray as correct. He did a wonderful job of leaving it up to me to come to a conclusion. [He also could have been trying to say that both answers were right depending on the circumstances, now that I’m thinking about it.] Anyway, the open-ended theme is one I haven’t tried to write myself, but I do find it to be a very viable option for a story.)

(As I’ve talked about before, I like getting into deep fundamental and mathematical truths in my writing, which I think I like to either have characters consider directly, and they openly search for that, or it’s more of a background concept perhaps even taken for granted presented in the worldbuilding and/or theme somehow. As well as ask questions like what the truth even is, and whether or not it’s even meaningful to consider as having an answer. That was probably a poor answer, because I’m really all over, trying to multidimensional with my themes, but it can become chaotic.) What about you?

(Wow so you’re tackling the big, fundamental stuff. 😂 Good for you. Also I like how you said you have truths woven into the worldbuilding. There’s nothing I like better than reading a story and realizing that something I thought was insignificant actually represented some truth in real life, or had a hidden meaning. So far in my writing I’ve tried dealing with themes through the characters journeys such as strong family relationships, godly femininity, true beauty, and appreciation for our ancestors, the past, and history in general.)

(Warning: extremely rare rant coming up.🤣Don’t feel obligated to read it)

(The reason I asked the theme question in the first place was because I was struggling with the thought that my writing wasn’t doing enough….kind of like, “how do I write about truth in such a way that it actually makes a difference in people’s lives instead of it being purely a fun/exciting story?” I don’t have a problem with stories that are simply exciting or whatever, but my passion is to change the world through my writing, and reach people for God, and I was a bit discouraged.) Anyway, I thought you might have some insight on it, since I knew you were also striving to do sort of the same thing…I think?

What’s the face you make when you see a bubbled eyed goldfish?

(I don’t remember seeing one before! Wait…let me change that.) Ok I looked up a pic and…I sort of grinned I guess? Is this a trick question? 🤔 *suspiciously re-reads it*

He must increase, but I must decrease.

[TheArcaneAxiom]

@felicity

(No I didn’t forget about this, 🙂 I just had a busy week.)

(No worries, I feel ya😆)

(Ok! Though we will differ, and I’m going to state what I believe and why, I will try to be as respectful as possible. You’re right. I can’t speak for everyone, but the reason why it’s such a big point to me is because its pretty much what my whole Christianity is based off of. To me, if Jesus isn’t God, than he’s just…another man. A good man, but just a man. And therefore my faith is in vain because there’s no way I could find forgiveness before God through a human’s sacrifice.)

(Honestly I totally agree. If Christ was just a man, He would not be able to take on all the sins of the world, He would not be able to live through all our pains, and He would not be able to love us still afterwards, and He certainty couldn’t live a perfect life no matter how good of a man He would be. What we stress is that He is the literal Son of God both in Body and in Spirit. God the Father did not just decide to give a random person to sacrifice, for He so loved the world that He gave His only Begotten Son. In a very very poor usage of words, you could say we think of Christ almost like a demi-god, that is specifically before and during His ministry, because afterwards when He returned to His Father, He became virtually indistinguishable from Him, being exalted to the highest extent. We believe that He is infinitely more than any mortal man or woman before and after Him, and He is also set apart as a member of the Godhead with the particular role to serve as our Savior (I’ll answer your question on that further down).)

(I see. I also believe that the Father and the Son created this world, as seen in the verse you pointed out and also in John 1:3. But I would go farther with this and believe that these verses indicate that Jesus is God, since it’s clearly stated that both of them were responsibly for Creation. (Genesis also has a fascinating reference to the Trinity, since we know in 1:3 that the Spirit of God was also involved in Creation.))

(What I find so funny about this is how we are really using the same point to create two different views. As you say, it is clearly stated that they were both responsible for Creation, which I totally agree with. You use this as a point to suggest that they are one being, and there are many many other scriptures in the Bible that you could also point to that also makes plain their unity, but there is also many many scriptures in the Bible that makes plain their distinction. You may look at those scriptures and say it is the unknowability of God, that He doesn’t need to conform to any one being, and I look at those scriptures and say that it is simply stressing their unity in purpose. We both point to certain scriptures to prove our point, and give a reason why the scriptures that seem to suggest the opposite is simply being misinterpreted. I’m really curious now what would happen if we did a deep dive in the Bible with the soul intent on finding every scripture related to this topic, and compiling them, and then discuss them all, that would take a lot of time, but it sounds fun.) Would you ever be interested in doing something like that?

(Right. I see how that point could be made. Honestly I’ve always believed that God doesn’t have a gender like humans, but that He did choose a masculine form to reveal Himself to us. I’ve never thought of the plural “us” in Gen. 1:27 as having to do with gender before though. Interesting point! (wait..I guess you were bringing it up as a counter-argument to your view…. Ok, I get where you were going.😄)

(Yep🤣 Yeah, coupling with our belief that He has a physical body, we affirm the belief that God is specifically a man, because we believe that gender is a divine, sacred, and fundamental quality not only in body, but in spirit.)

What do you mean by God-Head? (I am familiar with this term in the doctrine of the Triune God-Head, which is One God who exists in three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.) Just wondering for the sake of clarity if you were using it in that way or something else?

(Sorry, I knew that the term is used in Christianity as just another word for the Trinity. When your talking to anyone from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and they mention the God Head, they are talking about the Trinity, but in reference to Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost as three distinct beings. They are united in what we call the God Head, working together serving different roles for the Salvation of humanity. Here’s a summery on each of their unique roles given by my Churches website:

God
God is our loving Heavenly Father. He is the father of our spirits. We communicate with Him through prayer, as Jesus Christ Himself did. Heavenly Father always listens to our prayers. He authored the plan of salvation, a plan to help all of His children return to live with Him. As Latter-day Saints, we love and worship Him.

Jesus Christ
Jesus Christ is Heavenly Father’s Son. He is our Savior and Redeemer. He was God’s Only Begotten Son, born of Mary. He lived on earth and taught his Father’s gospel. He was rejected by the world and crucified on the cross. Because of His perfect, sinless life and ultimate sacrifice, we all have the hope of returning to live with Him and our Heavenly Father again. John 3:16 reads, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

The Holy Ghost
The Holy Ghost is the messenger and revealer of the Father and the Son. A personage of spirit, He helps us learn and recognize the truth of all things, including the gospel. It is through the Holy Ghost that God and Jesus Christ communicate their love, comfort, and peace to us.

I hope that helped clarify our beliefs on what the God Head is, as well as the unique roles of each of them.)

(Great question! It truly is a mysterious thing, and I’m amazed and in awe of God and who He revealed Himself to be. It also gives me such a unique view of Jesus, and His life here on earth. He gave up the glories of Heaven to come down here, humble Himself, and take on human form. He sacrificed so much, including His own life. And to prove His deity to the whole world, He overcomes death and the grave and resurrects!)

(Such beautiful truth you’ve spoken, I wouldn’t change a thing of what you’ve said! We may differ on what it looks like, but we ultimately agree that our God and our Savior gave everything for us with an infinite love and humility.)

(Thanks for being willing to share, by the way! I hope this conversation can be uplifting to both of us and not just a source of argument/contention. I, for one have been inspired to dig deeper into why I believe what I do, and search my heart for anything that is contrary to God’s Word.)

(Totally agree, challenging one’s faith is how one refines one’s faith. I love conversations like this because they promote that growth. Thanks for the edifying conversation!😃)

🤣🤣 (Hmm. Will have to do some relish research to find the answers to these relishing questions.)

Will we really relish in our relishing research on relish?🤣

Everything? In what sense of the word? 😉

If I truly meant everything, what degree of concept would that include?

(I’ve never written an allegory, but do enjoy reading them when done correctly. By “preachy” I meant when the theme or truth is forced on you and stated as an overbearing fact, instead of being woven into the story through the characters choices and actions. It seems to me that the only people who’d read the “preachy” book are the ones who already agree on the truth the author is showing, and the ones who disagree will be annoyed and put it down. However when the truth is shown to be true subtly through the characters, which any reader can relate to, then it reaches more people and gives them something to chew on.

(Ahh, I see, yeah I agree, even if a theme can be globally recognized as true, if a story is overbearing about it, it will come off as annoying to everyone in most cases. A semi-recent example that has been discussed in some circles is actually in the film industry. Raya and the Last Dragon was all things considered an ok movie, but the main theme and point of it completely flopped in quality. The theme was basically to trust blindly (a better theme would have been to build trust, but that’s not even the biggest problem). The dragon Sizu kept stating the theme of the need to trust over and over, even though throughout the film, she is proven wrong again and again because those she trusts betray her, but the movie acts like she is right the whole time. Even if it didn’t contradict its theme, it still assaults the viewers with constant blatant direct statements of how you need to trust, basically screaming: Do You Get IT??? It was essentially an extreme example of hand holding. In contrast, not long afterwards Encanto came out, which did a deep dive into themes of generational trauma and family relationships. Sure the theme was a little more mature, but that’s not what set it apart, but instead how silent it was the whole time about the subject, letting it simply be clearly seen by the viewers, letting them contemplate it for themselves. That was probably a rant you didn’t need, but I think it’s a good example on what your talking about😅)

I’m glad you brought up the point of an open-ended question! I recently read The Kremlin Conspiracy by Joel Rosenburg, in which he purposed the question of whether or not it’s right to assassinate an evil ruler. I was intrigued by the way he explored both sides of the issue, but I was not sure at the end which he was trying to portray as correct. He did a wonderful job of leaving it up to me to come to a conclusion. [He also could have been trying to say that both answers were right depending on the circumstances, now that I’m thinking about it.] Anyway, the open-ended theme is one I haven’t tried to write myself, but I do find it to be a very viable option for a story.)

(Sounds interesting, I’ll have to look into that one! Reminds me of Mistborn, where the Lord-Ruler was an evil tyrant, but after finally overthrowing and killing him, a thieving crew has to suddenly rebuild a nation, and upon taking up the responsibility, they have to ask if the Lord-Ruler was really doing more good than harm, holding everything together. Questioning if he was actually a good guy, simply forced into the position of leadership where he had to choose to be oppressive for the greater good. I don’t think Sanderson was definitively put in his opinion here either, instead letting the readers question for themselves.)

(Wow so you’re tackling the big, fundamental stuff. 😂 Good for you. Also I like how you said you have truths woven into the worldbuilding. There’s nothing I like better than reading a story and realizing that something I thought was insignificant actually represented some truth in real life, or had a hidden meaning. So far in my writing I’ve tried dealing with themes through the characters journeys such as strong family relationships, godly femininity, true beauty, and appreciation for our ancestors, the past, and history in general.)

(Thanks😅 Yeah, whenever I come across some abstract concept regarding life an reality, and I’ve judged to to be true, my first thought is how it applies to God’s greater Plan of Happiness, then my second thought is how I could turn this into some cool feature in my worldbuilding.😅 I think exploring themes through characters and their journeys is probably the best way to do it. We are all humans, and we are social creatures, built to understand and empathize with each other, seeing someone else experience pain and suffering gets us to feel things, and can have an impact on us. I try to do that to, but I’m still not great with my characters, other than coming up with cruel and unusual ways to torture them…)

(Warning: extremely rare rant coming up.🤣Don’t feel obligated to read it)

(I would be going against my very nature if I choose not to read this🤣)

(The reason I asked the theme question in the first place was because I was struggling with the thought that my writing wasn’t doing enough….kind of like, “how do I write about truth in such a way that it actually makes a difference in people’s lives instead of it being purely a fun/exciting story?” I don’t have a problem with stories that are simply exciting or whatever, but my passion is to change the world through my writing, and reach people for God, and I was a bit discouraged.) Anyway, I thought you might have some insight on it, since I knew you were also striving to do sort of the same thing…I think?

(Yeah, that’s a tough one. When you really want your writing to resonate with your reader, there must be elements tied deeply with the theme that are going to stick with them. As to what you do that sticks with them, that really depends on many many factors, and I don’t think there’s any right answer. It can be something tragic, hopeful, inspiring, horrifying, or even all of those, all tied to the same theme. I can’t claim that I know what will impact your readers the most. I’ve struggled with similar imposter syndrome thoughts in the past, with writing and otherwise. I would would say that if you really want to do this for God, ask Him about it sincerely. If this is what He wants for you, then He will provide you with the inspiration to write. Something I like to think about is letting Him become the author of our story, give our will to Him entirely. If your able to write with the Spirit, then your story will hold that, and you will have an impact. I hope that is at all helpful, I must say I relate in many ways.)

(I don’t remember seeing one before! Wait…let me change that.) Ok I looked up a pic and…I sort of grinned I guess? Is this a trick question? 🤔 *suspiciously re-reads it*

(I feel like when I look at one, it is hard not to mirror its face in response😅😂)

(In the same light of the relish question) If tomatoes are a fruit, is ketchup technically a smoothie?

(Happy Easter by the way! I hope this week has been one of contemplating our relationship with Him, what He did for us in the Garden and the Cross, and He’s resurrection on the third day!) How did we get from that to a bunny with colorful eggs?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.

[Author]

Posts