Intergalactic Summit

This might be a long one, but it's very important.

I really enjoy speaking with all of you here in these general posts. Some of you have even done me the honor of speaking to me in private. I've had quite a few questions about the Amarr faith lately, but one of the comments stuck out at me. After quite a bit of explanation about the role of servitude, how we view the Empire's defeat at the hands of the Jovian, the breakaway of the Matari, and so on, my companion in this conversation asked me why I never quote any of the Scriptures. Apparently, he thought I didn't actually know any. In fact, I had a long education in Scriptural doctrine at school. The House of Baracca fields hundreds of high-ranking clergy. I learned Scripture from a very young age and still read and study it today. It forms the foundation of our religion and I would be a very different man without it.

It seems strange when compared to other religions that those of us who preach the Word very rarely start actively reciting Scripture. There are really only a handful of phrases in common lexicon, mostly quoted by people who don't know much about the tendons and bones of our religion. Since this is a fairly common question, I've decided to line up some answers. Maybe it will explain a bit more about us as a people.

So why don't I quote much Scripture in my ministry?

The first and most obvious answer is that the passages are nearly indecipherable without context. The Scriptures are, essentially, anything our Theology Council deems religiously significant from our history. There are millions (at my last count) pieces of Scripture in the Theology Council's many libraries. Some theologians will study for centuries and will only be able to claim that they are a specialist in some particular field. It is truly a religion that only an entire Empire can teach. It is a huge industry. Whole teams of archaeologists spend their entire lives reaching deep into ancient ruins to try to recover some piece of period pottery. Then another team of theorists and theologists will look over the pottery and translate the text or decipher the images on it. Then a team of historians will look at it all in context, to see if it relates to any of the other millions of pieces of Scripture they have. It will then be assigned a place in the library and will be officially sanctioned.

In essence, If you get a piece of lone Scripture, you really don't necessarily understand the context it is written in. The Book of Missions is actually a compendium of individual stories, compiled over almost a millenium. It is noteworthy because it was such a complete text from its time, giving us the complete versions of stories we only had pieces of before. However, there are references in them to events and documents of the time we have only fragments of, if we have them at all.

Essentially, if you quote a line or passage, you're talking about a bit of an entire story in an entire book from a completely different era of history. Whole passages have different meanings as you delve further into the history.

At the same time, the opposite is also true. If you need to know what the Scriptures say, there is such a thing as too much information. Imagine if your child asked you what "stealing" was, and you read aloud from your particular empire's legal codex on property. It isn't often necessary to know precisely where God says you should always work hard for slothfulness is sin, it's only important to know not to sit on your couch and let your servants do everything for you. It isn't necessary to read every single story that directly states or implies that particular piece of information.

On a similar note, the third reason is that part of the context is cultural. As an example, the line I'm most questioned on from the Scriptures by non-members is:

"Be Careful. Pure Thought is the Instigator of Sin." Book I, Code of Demeanor

The usual response to this is, "That doesn't make a bit of sense! How does 'pure' thought instigate sin?" And if I'd written it myself last week, you'd probably be right. To understand the wording here, you have to know some things about ancient Amarrian history, culture, and language.

Our people spoke a different language when the first books were written. They didn't have as many words; everything depended on context. There was one word, "reducus" which was an adjective that roughly meant, "a thing which is now alone but was not." So a calius reducus is the last cup left after all the others are gone and aquos reducos is pure water. Eventually, we did derive a word more contemporaneously associated with "pure". But because purity had been derived from solitude, not uniformity, the word "purity" is not necessarily looked on positively in early Scriptures.

Amarrian culture still does not think that thinking on your own and having your own ideas is a good thing. You need to bring them forward for peer review. Peer review is a huge part of our culture, and forms the basis for traditions like confession and scientific review. Believing in something you don't bring to others for their expertise is foolhardy and can lead you to develop wrong ideas that you never have corrected. Imagine if you thought that consuming butterflies aided digestion and never thought to listen to the opinions of doctors or gastric scientists.

All that because the word "pure" had a different connotation in ancient Amarrian.

Once you know that, it's fairly obvious and somewhat boring that the line is a warning against coming up with your own ideas without consulting anyone else. Whatever you think of that part of our culture, it is an important part of who we are and tends to iron out the people who think you can drink the soul through the eyes during a booster trip (usually). To get to know that, you need to do much more research.

(continued)

Well written and very informative! I'm not much of a believer, but I do enjoy reading your religion's scriptures as the overall teaching can be quite nice.

Though a question regarding peer review. Couldn't relying on "experts" to help you decide if your thinking is on the right track also cause stagnation? I'd imagine it would do a good job at making sure you don't make any steps backward, but I feel that it would be difficult to progress forward.

Sounds good to me, but this begs another question. What if peer review causes that one bright spot of light to be overlooked? An example of this can be seen in the Amarr's early refusal of pod technology. They clearly learned from that mistake but that just goes to show peer review has failed before. A lot of great ideas require a risk, things that nobody would possibly believe to work have wound up changing history before.

I suppose these experts don't make mistakes often, especially considering it's multiple people. Also, I guess you could argue that they are just as likely to accept a bad idea as they are to reject a good one making my argument rather moot, but food for thought I guess.

Father Baracca would you be interested in sharing a bit more of your insight with us? I am for the first time genuinely interested in learning a bit more about the good Book and the Amarrian ways.

Perhaps because your Scriptures are false?

Bent to the whims of the Theology Council to serve your government.


In any case you are no Archbishop.

That man at least had a gift for weaving a decent tale through his awful sermons.

"The filth and lies of the slavery cultists compiled over thousands of years will be scorched clean by the flame of L.O.V.E., evil is not religion, it is the opposite, enforced by fear, violence, drug addiction, and class barriers it seeks to continue it's indecipherable interplanetary industry of foul inequity cloaked in semantic claptrap ceremoniously propagated by robed pedophiles and prostitutes."

"They will speak of their history and point to their relics of antiquity with ignorant devotion, but those writings and artifacts are simply the grime of sin that has accumulated from their thousands of years of wallowing in the hate filled pits of injustice and lustful predation that defines their culture and has clutched their very souls. Fear not, even long lasting grime will not withstand the righteous fury of the faithful, it will be cleansed from existence, and will pass away like a foul odor blown by the winds of history. Oh humanity answer the call of dutiful devotion to the church of the one true God on this day reestablished to save the souls of New Eden, by spreading far and wide the force of L.O.V.E.."

Thus spoke the Emissary of the One True God.
Ray-Of Matar
Taken from the "Edge Of The Abyss" sermon at the opening celebration of the Church Of Victorious Eradication, C.O.V.E.

I'll have to admit that you're the first True Amarr I like, most of my conversations with other Amarr haven't ended so well usually. Down here, PIE Inc. has gained quite a significant presence when it comes to clone soldier representation, and more often than not they clash with other clone soldiers of usually Gallentean heritage, mostly about slavery and how it is wrong from their point of view.

I've been trying to defend these PIE Inc. officers too by refuting some of the most extreme prejudices there has been about slavery, but I can't say I'm an expert on the subject. So out of curiosity, and to help make the places I visit a little more civil, could you explain how slavery actually works within the Amarr Empire(or you can redirect me to a place where you have explained it already, I may have missed it and I apologize beforehand if I have)? It would be appreciated.

I accept you come from a long line of pompous windbaggery. Clearly in all your years of study the obvious fact that our "Scripture" is nothing more than political propaganda to put the face of "divine right" on the horrific history of conquest we have engaged in and continue to lust after.

Amarr "Scripture" is a political tool, designed from the start to distract and to fool, this is a fact easily learned by most thinking people in primary school.

The Theology Council is poorly named, our history of slavery is of what you are shamed, your miserable whimpering will not absolve you from being blamed.

Quote:

"Child of Amarr seek not warmth in our cold hearts,
we are the old serpent of New Eden and you must do your part,
revel in our viciousness,
we rule by venom and our strike is merciless,
wipe the tears from your face,
and learn the power of our coiled crushing embrace."

This is the "Scripture" taught to every child of Amarr, "scripture" Baracca is to afraid to quote because he cowers at the true nature of what he is a significant part of.

You dare mention my name? As if if it engenders ridicule on it's surface as a pretense of my origin?

Dear boy your every post speaks volumes to how eager you are to serve your masters, remove the mask of the Minmatar you wear so poorly, fall to your knees and be the good little pitiful Ammatar slave you long in your heart of hearts to be.

I appreciate your defense, Eran, but you are quite right. I highly doubt that arguing with him would be productive. He did not come to learn or ask questions. He came to speak, which is certainly his right. I simply don't think that a man who took that amount of time to insult me, you, the Empire, and the faith is here to honesty join the discussion on any level. It is better to allow him to vent whatever anger he feels towards us or to let his bait sit in the water until he grows bored.

Sometimes, the vitriol of a man's arguments will defend his targets without requiring us to say another word.