<“SOLA SCRIPTURA” IN SCRIPTURAM NON EST> is Latin for LUTHER IS WRONG
So do you wanna maybe explain how “scripture alone” makes Martin Luther wrong? Just because a common saying he used isn’t found in scripture, doesn’t make any of his teachings less valid. He specifically said that if you could prove him wrong with anything in scripture then he would not recant anything he said. You also can’t just isolate a part of his saying to try to discredit him, because it didn’t stop with just “sola scriptura”, it’s “sola fide, sola gratia, sola scriptural, solus Christus” or “faith alone, grace alone, scripture alone, Christ alone.” Luther never said it was JUST by scripture that we are saved. even then, if we look at just the argument you’re giving, It is stated many times in the Bible that faith (of which we have in Christ) comes from hearing the word of Christ. Which is scripture. (See Romans 10:17, 2 Timothy 3:16-17, John 20:30-31)
You may disagree with Luther on some of his ideas, but it doesn’t mean he’s wrong, especially since he left the Catholic Church because he believed them to be straying to far from what scripture said. You can read more on the disagreements that he and Philip Melanchthon had with the Catholic Church, supported by scripture, in the Augsburg Confession and it’s apology, which can be found here: http://bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php
And it’s shitty that I was considered mature and praised for those things, and all of those characteristics have translated into me being an immature, “bad adult.”
Now I
Have difficulty making a keeping friends
Can’t act without permission/am dependent on others for direction
Amterrible at communicating
Have no agency/personal compass
It’s a really difficult thing for people who were abused as children to grapple with. What made us good children make us bad adults.
People with the “I’m happy to struggle as long as someone else struggles more” attitude assume that everyone else feels the same way.
If a teacher is struggling to pay their bills despite having a college degree, you could help by demanding an increase in pay or cancellation of their student loan debt (or lowering education costs in the first place). That would actually help.
For those who are struggling and are not monsters, it’s no help to know that others are struggling more.
Raising the minimum wage would only make it easier for teachers to demand better pay, because then teachers could say “pay me more or I’ll quit and get a job at McDonald’s”.
There were many reasons why I stepped away from archaeology & academia just 16 months post-PhD but the one that still angers me most today has to be the ways in which the Institution™ categorizes folklore vs science when it comes to Indigenous people. Ancestral knowledge of the ‘Old World’ is seen as a form of early science—curiosity leading to rigorous study and eventual advancement—with their fairytales and folklore viewed as purposefully allegorical. The Indigenous people of Africa, Turtle Island, and the rest of the so-called Americas never got that same respect. Outside of a handful of tokenized and understudied societies, most Indigenous ancestral knowledge is viewed through the lens of folklore—and no grace is given to allegory or metaphor or philosophy, either. The assumption is that our people can only think in literal, concrete terms. And it’s fucking insulting. There’s this joke in academia that if archaeologists don’t know an artifact’s usage they’ll deem it as ‘ritualistic purposes’; and it’s funny or whatever but nine times out of ten those artifacts are from [insert literally any Turtle Island or Mesoamerican nation] and not from much-older Greek civilizations. But it’s not well-studied because we’re not well-respected, and therefore nobody bothered to ask our still-living people who are very much aware of what said artifact was meant for (spoiler alert: not ritualistic).
Early on in my first Master’s program I got into a huge fight with a white professor who wanted to use a widely misinterpreted SuPeRsTiTiOn from MY tribe as an example of a persistent folktale. The folktale being that: Chiricahua Apache women don’t take baths during pregnancy bc we think the water is evil. It is true that, after being moved onto the rez, birthing + postpartum women were becoming ill when they bathed. This isn’t some ancient happening stoked by mythology—this is 100 years ago to recent times; midwives saw it happening and acted by cautioning against bathing. My grandmother, an Indigenous midwife, saw it play out and is very hesitant to recommend bathing to birthing women on the rez today. This isn’t because she or any other Chiricahua thinks water is evil; it’s because water quality has been so horrific that it quite literally was infecting the womb at its most vulnerable time. Had this been a European society, this knowledge would be considered evidence-based but since we’re Indigenous, they slap some contrived faux folkways mythos onto it and call it superstitious.
This is just one example of what happens on a constant basis when it comes to communities who are being oppressed by the same systems that set the standards for what science, history, and art are.
It’s maddening and sickening to me to this day.
(Tangentially, the next time I see a non-ndn upload or reblog our artifacts and crafts and tag it as “primitive art”, I’m going to scalp you. You’ve been duly warned)
do men have resting bitch faces as well or do they not have negative characteristics ascribed to them for putting on a neutral rather than a deliriously happy facial expression
Yes, Black men in majority white spaces do. If I don’t smile every single second of the day my coworkers become in intimidated and start asking me what’s wrong, telling me to smile, make jokes about how I’m trying to be a thug/act hard, why am I angry, etc. And it’s not just white men at my job God FORBID I my large Black ass makes a white girl feel threaten because I’m sitting down with a neutral expression.
I’m not trying to take this post away from women and make it about Black men but I want to point out that wether it’s patriarchy or white supremacy; those who feel as if they have power over you HATE to see you not smile. They are so used to people like you smiling to gain their approval that when you don’t there’s a cognitive dissonance that makes them extremely uncomfortable.
That’s why “angry Black women” is a thing. They have to put on a smile for everyone (yes even feminist white women) or we all get uncomfortable.
“So when I would show my prosthetic leg in my YouTube videos, I began getting age restricted for potentially “disturbing imagery.” So i made a video talking about this, talking about how messed up and wrong that is, and the hardest thing to deal with has not been people being, like: “You do need to have a trigger warning on you.” “You’re gross.” Whatever. Uh, it’s the people who are like: “Dude, I totally get it. I’m on your side. I don’t think you’re disturbing, but–” Uh, like this one: “You kind of do deserve a PG rating in life, because you could be traumatizing to the children.” I just want you to pause for a moment, and think about that. You do realize that there are disabled KIDS out there. You do realize that there are kids with, uh, limb differences and amputations, who have to go to friggin’ school. Are you suggesting that the world and their other classmates need to be protected from the sight of them, because they could be traumatizing? “What if the kids don’t know how to deal with it?” Then they LEARN. That’s part of growing up. This is absolutely absurd. Comments like this make me so frustrated, because it’s like they’re coming at you like they’re an ally, and they just want to help, but what they’re saying is so messed up.”
I’m angered and frustrated by the newest crop of anti-trans, anti-queer, and anti-critical race theory laws in their own right, because they are unjust and detrimental to the whole of our society, even though I am cis and white.
But then, I get occasional reminders that there are people working at YouTube, and people in YouTube’s audience who think Iand other Disabled people, are also“Age-Inappropriate,” and I get a momentary twinge of fear, mixed in with that anger. How much longer until I cannot freely discuss Disability History, without fear of retribution or sanction (not that disability history is discussed at all, now, except within the Disability Community).
And I also realize that that twinge of fear is evidence of my own privilege, because it’s surprising when it comes, and it’s brief, until it comes back. And that reminds me of how I’ve been protected by White and Cis privilege, all the rest of my life.
I’m just so tired.
Oh, so we’re just bringing back the Ugly Laws and applying them to the internet. Cool. Cool cool cool. It’s not like that invariably leads to horrific human rights abuses or anything. OH WAIT.
If you aren’t queer then literally no one is talking about you when they say “queer people” or “the queer community”.
Queer people who are talking about other queer people are not talking about people who aren’t queer.
You’re not queer? You don’t want anyone to call you queer? Then congrats, you are not part of the queer community. That’s how this works.
“don’t talk about the queer community, I’m not one of you” then cool, we’re not talking about you. And no, we won’t stop talking about the queer community. It’s our community. You aren’t in it, you said it yourself.
Here’s a graph to make it even more clear:
[ID: A piegraph labeled, “people included in the queer community:”, with the key on the side listing “people who are queer” as purple at 100%, and “people who aren’t queer” as green at 0%. The pie graph is colored completely solid purple. End ID.]
if it’s not about you, then don’t make it about you. If you aren’t queer, then we aren’t talking about you when we talk about the queer community or queer people.
You are doing the equivalent of walking up to someone who’s talking about people whose favorite color is blue and, despite the fact that your favorite color is red, demanding that they stop talking about you, even though they literally aren’t.
If you’re thinking of tagging this as “q slur” then simply don’t reblog it at all!
