Intergalactic Summit

Then why hasn't He? Why do we still apply the label of True to descendants of the original Chosen but have never applied it to any other peoples, even those who have ascended to righteous and true faith before God?

God chose. Once. He has not Chosen again since. That is why even 4000 years later, only the True Amarr are True, and that being True Amarr is defined today by ethnicity instead of what it is supposed to be defined by: righteousness. Those who can trace the original Chosen in their lineages continue to cling to the title, using it as a shield even when they themselves don't act righteously and in fear of God.

It does not matter how righteous I act. I will never be True by any deed I can accomplish in this mortal life. The only possible way to get that title, to be declared True today, is to marry into a line that already has it and obtain it for your children. Because God Chose once and not again, and we as a society have decided that that choice is passed down by blood instead of deed.

Huh?

Society doesn't chose that. If it were true that it's a matter of ethnicity, ethnical Amarr coudn't be stricken from the book of records, or turned into slaves. The Scriptures as well tell us that we must continuously make his gift deserving. The label of 'True Amarr' for the ethnical Amarr was established by people thinking similar to the Purists and those too lazy to look at what people's character is because it's much more difficult than to simply differentiate by ethnicity or 'race'. We don't 'still' apply this label. As I said, I looked long and hard and there's no place in Scripture where 'Amarr' indicates race or ethnicity: Even before being chosen.

God isn't bound to abide by what titles are awarded by people. If you think it does not matter how righteous you act or whether you live in fear of God, then you put more stake into what fallible humans expect of you than into what God desires of people.


This is what is barrs you from attaining anything True.

If I may, and please grant me some latitude as a layperson, to attempt another analogy?

You have a scientist specializing in astrophyisics, and another specializing in molecular biology, experts in their specific field all belonging to the greater field of 'science'. Together they may form Theories to explain some phenominon, and distill this knowledge down to something that can be understood or useful to a layperson.

Imperial Theologians are likewise specialized and likewise come together to present a facet of the Word to the populace.

I believe I have this basically correct, if Ms Kernher or Ms Mithra have more to add or corrections, they are welcome.

That is untrue. Through great self sacrifice and service the Kameiras too have earned the title of "choosen." That bond is not passed down in blood but in deed as you say.

It is still a matter of fortunate/chanced birth but someday the Empress may declare those slaves who returned to the Empire after Emancipation deserve the title.

Oh, gods and spirits.

Ms. Mithra, Ms. Arrendis-- I'm so tired of watching you two talking past each other. Both of you have useful things to say if you could just hold back on the barbs.

Ms. Arrendis, Ms. Mithra's understanding of Amarr is one of the more interesting I've run into and it really is worth withholding judgment until you have a firm grasp on what she's actually talking about.

Ms. Mithra, Ms. Arrendis (like many who encounter the Amarr, but especially Matari) has excellent reason to expect things from believers that will strike her as very dark. There's nothing disingenuous about expecting the same from you, and your tendency to talk down to people isn't helping.

It's easy for us, for people, to reach an understanding of things that satisfies ourselves, and just to stop there. If either of you actually care to see what the other side has to say instead of just scoring points, maybe listening to each other and not fogging up the air with snippy little insults would be an idea?

Gods.

You're ship captain's, all of you, and yet none of you is dipping into your own experience here for understanding.

Arrendis, you KNOW that the precise meaning of words is fungible. I know that you know this, because I know that you have sprung a surprise readiness inspection on your ship crews and listened to a crew chief justify why the state of his unready deck is actually totally excusable, according to regulation.

Amarrians - if Scripture is so huge and beyond human understanding, why haven't you created an Artificial Intelligence that can parse it in its entirety? You could feed in your situation and it could dig up the relevant verses. Just saying.

Oh, duh. I suppose that this is precisely the role of the Theology Council.

Actually, Aria, I'm pretty sure I know exactly what she's talking about. She started off by deciding to get condescending at someone for taking Blake's use of 'lesser races' as a racist statement, and got on her high horse so she could talk down to her intended victim about how that obviously wasn't what that term meant. Then, literally in the very same post, she turned around and said 'of course, I wouldn't have said that, because it's racist', which means the guy she was lecturing was right, and she just wanted the opportunity to expound at length about how much smarter she is than everyone else, before turning around and directly contradicting herself in order to show how she's not just smarter, she's also totally a better person.

When called on it, she took umbrage and decided to attempt to use obfuscation and misdirection to reframe the issue in a way that she could claim to be right, without ever actually addressing the basic problem that she was trying to redefine words to not mean what they mean. Unfortunately, she's very bad at obfuscation and misdirection.

Then she tried to use a scripture verse to make a point, but forgot to include all of the context and supporting evidence that would have actually made that verse make that point. And she got called on that, too, so she again decided to try to turn it into an opportunity to lecture the poor, ignorant anyone-who-isn't-her, by bringing exegesis into the discussion. The only problem is, the point she was trying to argue against wasn't about the exegesis of the verse, but about how she presented her argument in the first place. You can't say 'this, so that', if there's a bunch of intermediate steps that are necessary to your process.

Proving things is, after all, where 'show your work' comes from. You cannot begin a proof with one set of data, and midway through enter a whole new set of 'Given:' statements that weren't part of the original proof, and claim that the process has any integrity, or that your conclusions are at all valid. It'd be like taking a stick and a round board with a hole in the center, and claiming 'see? I invented spaceflight', because after you used the stick as an axle, you also managed to develop nuclear fusion, rocketry, and computerized control systems.

Maybe you did develop those things. Maybe you did invent spaceflight. But when all you've shown is the makings for The Wheel, you can't make that claim. You have to get all the other stuff presented before you make that claim. And that's kind of, you know, basic stuff. Like, on a level with beginning 'solve for X' algebra here. Introductory logic proofs-type stuff.

So no, she's not particularly 'dark'. She's self-aggrandizing and posturing in an ever more desperate attempt to escape the fact that she screwed up by... wait for it... self-aggrandizing and posturing. Anyone with a normal proportion of intelligence to ego would be capable of saying 'ok, you know what? That's not what I meant. Oops.'

Don't get me wrong here (and I say that with a full measure of amused irony at what's to come), I'd love to be wrong on this one. I like finding out I'm wrong. I means I've learned something. Ask Sami, when I'm wrong, I cop to it. But I'm not this time.

I know people try to justify things by twisting words. I also know that there's certain amount of wiggle room in certain constructions. This wasn't one of them. And for the record, if I had someone on my crew try to give me an excuse like that, I'd dock that chief and Marr a week's pay. We do our jobs or people die. He's my XO, his job is to make sure the crew do theirs.