These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Bishops condemn marrying heretics to convert them
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Albizu Zateki
Doomheim
#81 - 2015-02-11 20:19:15 UTC
U'tah Arareb wrote:


I live for the day you stand before the Theology Council Inquisitory board, or more likely kneel... or just lay.


Getting back on topic,

That bishops are condemning the practice is nothing new... as I've said before this isn't Holy Law until edict by Theology Council and Our Blessed Empress.



Point of procedure,

I believe Nauplius is no longer answerable to the Theology Council.

I should also point out that the "news" report we're discussing is from a foreign news agency and not an actual edict from any bishop or representative of the Council. While it has sparked a lively debate on the definitions of love, marriage and heresy within the Empire, it is not something that should be believed by anyone loyal to the Faith.


"Bloody Omir's coming back. Monsters from the endless black. Wading through a crimson flood, Omir's come to drink your blood."
Lyn Farel
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#82 - 2015-02-11 20:34:47 UTC
Anabella Rella wrote:
Pilot Ikiryo it's been my experience that most Amarrian zealots in general and Pilot Mithra in particular love speaking in the condescending, paternalistic manner you (rightly) have found offensive.

Oh, well. I suppose that since their god has allegedly given them dominion over the universe and commanded them to shepherd us lesser humans that they're well within their rights to speak to us in any manner they see fit. Hell, their empress even calls us wayward children!

Roll


Can you spare us the broken tape record already ? It is highly unnerving.
Nicoletta Mithra
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#83 - 2015-02-11 22:38:25 UTC
Sera Kor-Azor wrote:
I would agree with this, well most of it.

I most certainly am not a follower of Sani Sabik. However, I should like to point out that the holy scriptures of the Amarrian faith are comprised of hundreds of thousands of volumes spanning over tens of thousands of years. Everything from animal drawn carts to hover cars are referenced within the sacred texts.

Blood is, for all of us, faithful, heathen, and heretic, human and animal, the very essence of life.

Blood is a powerful metaphor which relates not only to one's own heritage, as in 'Blood lines', but to our emotional state as well, such as 'Blood boiling'. To engage in the most holy act of War is to spill the blood of others, as well as to have our own blood spilled in the process.

Even amongst the most primitive of cultures, there is the understanding that blood is the essence of life itself.

How is it possible then that in the holy scriptures, which do indeed reference all possible life situations and answer all possible questions, that the word 'blood' is never mentioned even once?

Have you never cut your finger, Ms Mithra?

Certainly as a woman such as myself, you have experienced your 'special time of the month'. Are the hundreds of thousands of volumes of the holy scriptures spanning tens of thousands of years completely silent on such a thing?

As far as the difference between Doctrine and Dogma, perhaps you could help enlighten us.

Is it doctrine that the sacred flesh of the Empress should never be cloned, or is that dogma?


Now, did I ever say that blood doesn't play a role in the Scriptures? No, not at all. The claim is that the role blood plays in the Scriptures and the way it is to be interpreted by proper exegesis, is one that is quite different from how the Sani Sabik view blood. If we look into the Scriptures we find - in the especially popular parts - two episodes in which there is blood brought up. First, there is an episode in Saint Junip:

"Rejoice, o chosen of God"
For our blood fills this Valley of Death,
Proclaiming our sacrifice to God,
And he shall raise it up for all time"
- The Scriptures, Saint Junip 15:11

Here, clearly, blood is not a sign of power or purity, but, rather of sacrifice. The verses say so quite clearly themselves. Blood here is something that we give: Not something that we take, in stark contrast to Sani Sabik and especially Bloodraider practice. I think the implications are clear.

The other episode from Book II is even more clear on the distinction:

"Our Lord visited his flock and saw that all was not good.
Blasphemy and heresy ruled the land.
The Lord punished the sinners and drowned them in their own blood.
But the people of Amarr lived righteously and in fear of God.
Thus they were saved and became God's chosen."
- The Scriptures, Book II 2:1

The Amarr weren't chosen because of their blood, but because they lived righteously and in fear of God. The sinners on the other hand got drowned in their own blood. This, clearly, alludes to the dichotomy of lives that can be lived: At the one hand a life that aims at ennobling itself and which not only encompasses the physical, but also the ethical and spiritual dimensions of life, where the higher two inform the lower. And at the other hand the lowly life of raw physicality, which eventually devours the ones that stagnate on that state, the sinners that only aim at the base, physical level.

So, while the heretic view of the Sani Sabik and the view of the Amarr religion might superficially have similarities between one and the other, they are, if we take a differentiated look, quite different and not at all alike. blood, itself, is not the essence of life. It is the essence of the vegetative, animalistic life. It's at the base: And as everything base it needs to be cultivated by the levels above.

The Sani Sabik, time and again, invert the natural and true order of things in their ideology:
"Might makes right", they say, when in truth, Right makes Might.
"Blood is the essence of all life.", they say, when in truth, righteousness and fear in God are the highest aspects of life and the rightful rulers over the 'bloody' aspects of life.

Just alike it is with their savants: Amarr religion doesn't have a concept of savants as the Sani Sabik do. That can't be reiterated as often as it should be. Any kind of 'savant' one might identify in Amarr is the same only by name, not definition. For example, the case of HRM:

Amarr may have an immortal leader - though I'd argue with that, as capsuleers aren't truely immortal, contrary to what a freshling like Mr. Zateki might believe, let us assume this for the sake of argument. But the point is, the Empress didn't get elevated to that status for being immortal. Nor did they get into the position because she simply had the power to wrestle it away from others for herself. Rather, she was accepted into the position by the heirs and the Theology Council for the course of action she took, when the Minmatar Elders attacked the Empire. Her exceptionally righteous actions and fear of God wewre acknowledged in conveying the position of Empress to her: That she is allegedly immortal through allegedly being a capsuleer was a point weighing against, rather than for her.

So, it's not about whether bood gets mentioned in the Scripture or not. The question - as far as it pertains the ethical and spiritual parts of the Scriptures - the scientific parts of them aim obviously in another direction - is in what function does blood come to be mentioned in the scripture and what is the proper exegesis of those scriptural episodes? And that is where a stark contrast arises between the heresy of Sani Sabikism and Amarr orthodoxy as well as that which falls inside into heterodox streams comes to arise and make up an unbridgible gap.
Nicoletta Mithra
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#84 - 2015-02-11 22:39:53 UTC
This is further underscored by the undeniable fact, that the Sani Sabik took the rather central rituals that involve sacred waters and changed them to involve blood, thereby defiling them and their true meaning.

So, looking at it from the perspective of comaparative theology - and heresiology is a branch of comparative theology, especially dealing with heresies and what makes them fall outside of orthodoxy and heterodoxy - it is quite clear that Sani Sabikism is not at all dealing with the same things as Amarr religion. The superficial look at the two - the one Mr. Zateki is occupied with, apparently, next to 'participant obeservation', maybe - is maybe not able to reveal those differences. But that doesn't mean they're not there.

Now, as to the difference between dogma and doctrine: Dogmas are the core principles of the Amarr faith, accepted as incontrovertibly true. Doctrines are the codification of beliefs or a body of teachings or instructions, taught principles or positions. Dogmas, thus, are not subject to change, while doctrines possibly are. You will find the dogmas under the doctrines, as they are the most essential things to know, but you don't refer to them as 'doctrines' anyway, as they have a status of higher import than mere doctrines: Though they are teached, they are held to be, as I pointed out already, incontrovertibly true.

By the way, it doesn't matter that the Sani Sabik share some dogmas or doctrines with the Amarr faith. What is of central importance is that they share every and all dogmas and hold no doctrines that come into conflict with those: And that's already something the Sani Sabik fail to manage.

As to the status of the doctrine of sacred flesh: It is a common mistake to assume that the doctrine of sacred flesh teaches that the Empress - or in fact no member of a royal family - should be cloned. This is wrong. The doctrine of sacred flesh teaches that the flesh of the members of the royal families is sacred (just as the name implies. By the way the argument here is, that the righteous lives and the fear of God espoused by these families had a meliorating effect on the flesh - the idea of a causation in the other direction is ludicrous.). So, the idea that the Empress or a member of the royal family shouldn't be cloned is not part of the doctrine in itself, but rather argued widely to be a consequence of the doctrine, as it is not clear how the sacredness of felsh, that it acquired by being what physically enacted righteous lives, would be transferred in the cloning process to a body that has never been subjected to the forming influence of a noble soul. Also, there's the question of what happens to the soul in the cloning process. And the two combined eplain also why only a full clone is considered in this case.
Nauplius
Hoi Andrapodistai
#85 - 2015-02-11 23:23:14 UTC
Albizu Zateki wrote:
Nauplius wrote:
Not long ago I demonstrated that the liberal slave-lovers in the wayward Empire have been altering the Scriptures, changing references to blood sacrifice of slaves and enemies into self-sacrifice.



If I may be so bold,


I would very much like to examine the documents you've discovered. From my own research, I believe you may be correct in the translation of Saint Junip 15:11. I could also run tests through the University that should be able to determine the age and perhaps planet of origin. Anything from the Takmahl Empire would be a major archaeological find!




I returned the texts to the Church of the Crimson Savior after I published my findings.
Albizu Zateki
Doomheim
#86 - 2015-02-12 00:43:09 UTC
Nauplius wrote:


I returned the texts to the Church of the Crimson Savior after I published my findings.



Thank you for your reply.

"Bloody Omir's coming back. Monsters from the endless black. Wading through a crimson flood, Omir's come to drink your blood."
Anabella Rella
Gradient
Electus Matari
#87 - 2015-02-12 07:46:45 UTC
Lyn Farel wrote:


Can you spare us the broken tape record already ? It is highly unnerving.


I don't believe I was addressing you, Farel.

If you're looking to rekindle the feud we used to have you'll find yourself having a very one-sided conversation as I'm simply blocking you and moving on.

When the world is running down, you make the best of what's still around.
Celestia Via
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#88 - 2015-02-12 12:29:55 UTC

The fact alone, that you are all even discussing the so called "faith" of the blood-drinkers, arguing on marginal interpretations of scripture and giving them credibility instead of stomping them flat yourselves for the sheer shame they bring upon you, proves to me that you have lost your way. All of you.

Those of you that have willfully ignored the parts of your religion that teach mercy and virtue, and have fallen victim to all messages of religious hate, manufactured by rulers. Rulers that have claimed divine and sacred substance for themselves to suit their ends, like lead you to Reclaimings and atrocities, you have all lost your way.

I am confident that your own God has forsaken you a long time ago.

"We marched for days and nights, under sun, in the rain. Our minds and bodies ached for rest, but in our hearts there was nothing but the fight."
Lunarisse Aspenstar
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#89 - 2015-02-12 12:46:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Lunarisse Aspenstar
Celestia Via wrote:

The fact alone, that you are all even discussing the so called "faith" of the blood-drinkers, arguing on marginal interpretations of scripture and giving them credibility instead of stomping them flat yourselves for the sheer shame they bring upon you, proves to me that you have lost your way. All of you.



Many of the Faithful Capsuleers have been endeavouring to do so. Besides the Blood Raiders destroyed in the belts and on agent missions:

http://aurora-arcology.blogspot.com/2015/01/blood-winery-successfully-destroyed.html
http://aurora-arcology.blogspot.com/2015/01/capsuleers-deal-serious-blow-to-de.html
http://aurora-arcology.blogspot.com/2014/09/blood-raider-temple-taken-down.html

PIE has also had a long standing war declaration, and others have at various times.
Albizu Zateki
Doomheim
#90 - 2015-02-12 13:21:59 UTC
Celestia Via wrote:

The fact alone, that you are all even discussing the so called "faith" of the blood-drinkers, arguing on marginal interpretations of scripture and giving them credibility instead of stomping them flat yourselves for the sheer shame they bring upon you, proves to me that you have lost your way. All of you.

Those of you that have willfully ignored the parts of your religion that teach mercy and virtue, and have fallen victim to all messages of religious hate, manufactured by rulers. Rulers that have claimed divine and sacred substance for themselves to suit their ends, like lead you to Reclaimings and atrocities, you have all lost your way.

I am confident that your own God has forsaken you a long time ago.




In one paragraph you use a very big red brush to paint 2000-plus years of Sani Sabik history with no real knowledge of that history and only based on the actions of the extreme ends of that faith.

In the next you mention that there should be mercy and virtue attached to faith and then point out how the Amarr, through the Reclaiming have "fallen victim to all messages of religious hate, manufactured by rulers."

Perhaps you have fallen victim yourself? Where is your "mercy and virtue?" If I were to mention certain Minmatar terrorist organizations and base my opinion on the entirety of Matari culture by their actions, would I be right or wrong in my assessment?



"Bloody Omir's coming back. Monsters from the endless black. Wading through a crimson flood, Omir's come to drink your blood."
Samira Kernher
Cail Avetatu
#91 - 2015-02-12 13:41:18 UTC
Celestia Via wrote:
The fact alone, that you are all even discussing the so called "faith" of the blood-drinkers, arguing on marginal interpretations of scripture and giving them credibility instead of stomping them flat yourselves for the sheer shame they bring upon you, proves to me that you have lost your way. All of you.


Aptly put.

Quote:
Those of you that have willfully ignored the parts of your religion that teach mercy and virtue, and have fallen victim to all messages of religious hate, manufactured by rulers. Rulers that have claimed divine and sacred substance for themselves to suit their ends, like lead you to Reclaimings and atrocities, you have all lost your way.


This part of your post is less appropriate, however. In one paragraph you state that we are ignoring parts, and then state that we should ignore other parts. You don't get to pick and choose. Everything in Scripture is God's teachings for us, and we must respect all of it.

As for atrocities... there has been cases of people using the Scripture for evil, and this is a tragedy whenever it happens. But the Reclaiming isn't one of those. The Reclaiming is a mercy. It is God's greatest mercy for His fallen creations.
Celestia Via
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#92 - 2015-02-12 14:53:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Celestia Via
Albizu Zateki wrote:

In one paragraph you use a very big red brush to paint 2000-plus years of Sani Sabik history with no real knowledge of that history and only based on the actions of the extreme ends of that faith.


My ignorance of that history is deliberate, I have enough nightmares already. Academic curiosity finds its limits in me, there are things I want no knowledge of.

Albizu Zateki wrote:

In the next you mention that there should be mercy and virtue attached to faith and then point out how the Amarr, through the Reclaiming have "fallen victim to all messages of religious hate, manufactured by rulers."


There is mercy and virtue in the Amarrian faith, I have seen it, experienced it and have been taught it. My very existence is a testament to it, and no one can convince me otherwise. Especially not one who denies it to serve their own, or even worse, someone else's ends of expansionism and warmongery.


Albizu Zateki wrote:

Perhaps you have fallen victim yourself? Where is your "mercy and virtue?" If I were to mention certain Minmatar terrorist organizations and base my opinion on the entirety of Matari culture by their actions, would I be right or wrong in my assessment?


I do not represent anyone but myself, let alone a people so varied as the Matari. I also cannot be held accountable for their actions, although their actions can most of the time be attributed to justified hate. Reaping misery comes from sowing hate, it should come as no surprise, it is the fruit of your own labor.

Quote:
n one paragraph you state that we are ignoring parts, and then state that we should ignore other parts. You don't get to pick and choose. Everything in Scripture is God's teachings for us, and we must respect all of it.

As for atrocities... there has been cases of people using the Scripture for evil, and this is a tragedy whenever it happens. But the Reclaiming isn't one of those. The Reclaiming is a mercy. It is God's greatest mercy for His fallen creations.


Scripture origins are lost i time and one should have the wisdom to discern which parts of it are Gods work and which parts serve less divine and perhaps even blasphemous means. This is every faithful person's duty. Accepting all of it as a whole blindly does not make one faithful, only a victim to zealotry. Not that I expect any zealot to ever see or admit that fact.

As for the Reclaiming, don't you even dare raise such an argument outside your own indoctrination circles, especially where the Reclaimed can hear it. Those Reclaimed have seen the "mercy" you speak of to its full extent and wish for no more of it.

My message was specifically pointed towards "Those of you" that needed to hear it, and it seems that it served its purpose well.

"We marched for days and nights, under sun, in the rain. Our minds and bodies ached for rest, but in our hearts there was nothing but the fight."
Samira Kernher
Cail Avetatu
#93 - 2015-02-12 16:04:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Samira Kernher
Celestia Via wrote:
Scripture origins are lost i time and one should have the wisdom to discern which parts of it are Gods work and which parts serve less divine and perhaps even blasphemous means. This is every faithful person's duty. Accepting all of it as a whole blindly does not make one faithful, only a victim to zealotry. Not that I expect any zealot to ever see or admit that fact.


Every part of the Scriptures has been the work of God, as communicated to His servants. And as we as a species have developed, those lessons have needed to evolve and be added to. Determining when and where these changes are needed is the duty of the Imperial Throne and the Theology Council, not the common layman. It is our duty to be faithful to the Scriptures, to the wisdom of our betters, and to God.

Quote:
As for the Reclaiming, don't you even dare raise such an argument outside your own indoctrination circles, especially where the Reclaimed can hear it. Those Reclaimed have seen the "mercy" you speak of to its full extent and wish for no more of it.


Speaking as one of the Reclaimed, I beg to differ.

The ancestors of our peoples turned from God millenia ago, and we all bear the taint of their sin. The gates of paradise open one time only, and yet God has chosen to allow us fallen to earn salvation. That is a mercy. That is the greatest mercy.
Celestia Via
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#94 - 2015-02-12 16:45:14 UTC
Samira Kernher wrote:

Speaking as one of the Reclaimed, I beg to differ.


I already said how I am living testament to Amarrian mercy.
Its not a personal grudge I keep, for there is none to be kept.
Maybe you have a similar story, perhaps our lives events are not that different.

But its not about me, or you. History clearly shows how we both where exceptions. Exceptions to the general rule of genocide, unimaginable oppression and fiendish practices. All in the name of the Reclaiming. All in the name of Gods Mercy.
I call that a lie, and even blasphemy. I want to believe in a truly merciful God, not one who masks slavery and death as mercy.

But that's just me.

"We marched for days and nights, under sun, in the rain. Our minds and bodies ached for rest, but in our hearts there was nothing but the fight."
Anabella Rella
Gradient
Electus Matari
#95 - 2015-02-12 17:04:42 UTC
Gods and spirits, you imperials certainly have a peculiar definition of mercy. If I were foolish enough to accept your so-called "gift" I would:


  • be subjected to slavery (and all the atrocities that entails such as Vitoxin, shock collars, electric whips, etc.) for hundreds of years
  • have my own rich cultural and spiritual heritage wiped out to be replaced by yours
  • give up freedom and democracy for strict adherence to your feudalism, orthodoxy and theocracy

So that ultimately my distant descendants could become second-class citizens forever locked into a rigid caste system where they served their "betters", the so-called True Amarr, is that about it?

Merci mais, non, merci.

I prefer thinking, living and acting as I see fit, not as some priest, holder, prince, council or ruler commands. I also prefer to maintain my Gallentean and Matari heritage and spirituality. I don't wish to become another commoner cog in the vast imperial machine.

If you want to give me a Sacrilege or a Curse I'll gladly accept but, I think I'll pass on the other things you imperials have on offer. The price of acceptance is simply too high.

When the world is running down, you make the best of what's still around.
Samira Kernher
Cail Avetatu
#96 - 2015-02-12 17:05:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Samira Kernher
Celestia Via wrote:
Samira Kernher wrote:

Speaking as one of the Reclaimed, I beg to differ.


I already said how I am living testament to Amarrian mercy.
Its not a personal grudge I keep, for there is none to be kept.
Maybe you have a similar story, perhaps our lives events are not that different.

But its not about me, or you. History clearly shows how we both where exceptions. Exceptions to the general rule of genocide, unimaginable oppression and fiendish practices. All in the name of the Reclaiming. All in the name of Gods Mercy.
I call that a lie, and even blasphemy. I want to believe in a truly merciful God, not one who masks slavery and death as mercy.

But that's just me.


I do not consider myself an exception. Though because this is not a topic about slavery, I won't say anything else on this point.
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
#97 - 2015-02-13 11:59:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Sera Kor-Azor
Nicoletta Mithra wrote:
Now, did I ever say that blood doesn't play a role in the Scriptures? No, not at all. The claim is that the role blood plays in the Scriptures and the way it is to be interpreted by proper exegesis, is one that is quite different from how the Sani Sabik view blood. If we look into the Scriptures we find - in the especially popular parts - two episodes in which there is blood brought up. First, there is an episode in Saint Junip:

"Rejoice, o chosen of God"
For our blood fills this Valley of Death,
Proclaiming our sacrifice to God,
And he shall raise it up for all time"
- The Scriptures, Saint Junip 15:11


Thank you for answering my questions so thoroughly and thoughtfully. Clearly, you are a person who is highly developed in the fields of rhetoric and sophistry.

Certainly I did not mean to put words into your mouth, Ms Mithra. It is, as you say, a matter of proper exegesis. In this instance, at least in my interpretation, the reference to 'our blood' clearly refers to our lineage, our heritage, the Amarrian race which is the chosen among the one true God.

Shall I share some of my favorite scripture with you?

And the Lord spake, and said, Lo, my people,
Witness, for I have made the worlds of Heaven;
And these worlds I give to you, My Chosen,
So Amarr shall rule the worlds of the Heavens.

None shall stand higher than you save the Sefrim,
Who serve Me as others shall serve you,
For all things under Me serve one higher;
So Amarr shall rule the worlds of the Heavens.

As Garrulor rules the skies; as Frisceas rules the sea;
As Emperor rules Holder; as Holder rules Serf;
Yet all under Heaven serve Me;
So shall Amarr rule the worlds of the Heavens.
- The Scriptures, Book of Reclaiming 3.19 - 3.21

As a Holder myself, I particularly like the part about how the Holder rules over the serf. Surely, you have heard the name Kor-Azor before, haven't you? Isn't Uncle Aritcio the Imperial Chancellor now? I don't believe you are of noble lineage yourself are you Ms. Mithra? So I wonder why you address me, of the house Kor-Azor in such a casual and familiar, and some might say almost condescending manner?

In the first verse, it is quite clear that God has given us, the Amarrians, that the Universe and all the planets were created for the Amarrians to rule over. The other peoples of the Universe were clearly made to serve us, either as slaves or in the case of the Caldari, junior business partners.

Quote:
So, while the heretic view of the Sani Sabik and the view of the Amarr religion might superficially have similarities between one and the other, they are, if we take a differentiated look, quite different and not at all alike. blood, itself, is not the essence of life. It is the essence of the vegetative, animalistic life. It's at the base: And as everything base it needs to be cultivated by the levels above.


So, in addition to the other courses that Mr Zateki has suggested, it seems that a course in biology is in order. Blood is not the essence of life? What happens when an organism is drained of blood I wonder. Does it die? Just what exactly is 'vegetative, animalistic life'? If such a creature is to be found, it sounds like an ungodly abomination that must be killed with fire.

Quote:
Just alike it is with their savants: Amarr religion doesn't have a concept of savants as the Sani Sabik do. That can't be reiterated as often as it should be. Any kind of 'savant' one might identify in Amarr is the same only by name, not definition.


The Sani Sabik belief in savants is the true heresy, since it negates the superiority of the Holders which as I have shown you, is very clearly written within the holy scriptures of the book of Reclaiming. A commoner cannot ever rise about their station, at least not in this life.

Quote:
Rather, she was accepted into the position by the heirs and the Theology Council for the course of action she took, when the Minmatar Elders attacked the Empire. Her exceptionally righteous actions and fear of God were acknowledged in conveying the position of Empress to her: That she is allegedly immortal through allegedly being a capsuleer was a point weighing against, rather than for her.


It seems that in addition to rhetoric and sophistry, you also excel in the art of mental gymnastics. The sacred flesh of the Royal house shall not be cloned. That is Dogma. Jamyl Sarum did not complete the Succession trials, therefore, she is not the Empress. The Theology council is hopelessly corrupt. It must be disbanded and replaced with the Council of Apostles, as it was in the times before the moral reforms.

Are you thinking of saving your soul or your career in the defense of a false Empress, Ms. Mithra?

"A manu dei e tet rimon" - I am the devoted hand of the divine God.
Sera Kor-Azor
Amarrian Mission of the Sacred Word
#98 - 2015-02-13 12:19:02 UTC
Nicoletta Mithra wrote:
As to the status of the doctrine of sacred flesh: It is a common mistake to assume that the doctrine of sacred flesh teaches that the Empress - or in fact no member of a royal family - should be cloned. This is wrong. The doctrine of sacred flesh teaches that the flesh of the members of the royal families is sacred (just as the name implies. By the way the argument here is, that the righteous lives and the fear of God espoused by these families had a meliorating effect on the flesh - the idea of a causation in the other direction is ludicrous.). So, the idea that the Empress or a member of the royal family shouldn't be cloned is not part of the doctrine in itself, but rather argued widely to be a consequence of the doctrine, as it is not clear how the sacredness of felsh, that it acquired by being what physically enacted righteous lives, would be transferred in the cloning process to a body that has never been subjected to the forming influence of a noble soul. Also, there's the question of what happens to the soul in the cloning process. And the two combined eplain also why only a full clone is considered in this case.


Hmm...

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Amarr_Succession_%28Chronicle%29

"A manu dei e tet rimon" - I am the devoted hand of the divine God.
Albizu Zateki
Doomheim
#99 - 2015-02-13 12:21:47 UTC
Sera Kor-Azor wrote:

It seems that in addition to rhetoric and sophistry, you also excel in the art of mental gymnastics. The sacred flesh of the Royal house shall not be cloned. That is Dogma. Jamyl Sarum did not complete the Succession trials, therefore, she is not the Empress. The Theology council is hopelessly corrupt. It must be disbanded and replaced with the Council of Apostles, as it was in the times before the moral reforms.

Are you thinking of saving your soul or your career in the defense of a false Empress, Ms. Mithra?



That is a very interesting point.

Historically-speaking, we've also seen a succession that did not follow scripture with the actions of King Garkeh Khanid II.

I mention this only in passing, but neither succession would have been allowed to play out as they did under the original Sani Sabik orthodoxy movement. One could, if one wished, develop a viewpoint that the Sani Sabik (in its original inception) is closer to the true Amarr faith than the current state of affairs.

Of course, such a viewpoint would be considered heretical and get you talked about.


"Bloody Omir's coming back. Monsters from the endless black. Wading through a crimson flood, Omir's come to drink your blood."
Thea Isotalo
Doomheim
#100 - 2015-02-13 12:42:47 UTC
Albizu Zateki wrote:


Of course, such a viewpoint would be considered heretical and get you talked about.





On the way to getting burned at the stake?

BRCE: Mission Statement!