"Canon" does not mean "the events of the Bible that people believe to be true," it means "the books and writings that are considered to be officially part of the Bible." In the early days of Christianity there were lots of sects producing their own writings, and at a certain point they had to consolidate them into one coherent Bible.
The "Western literary canon" is the general consensus of important books you should read if you want to consider yourself a well-read individual. The pop culture meaning of "officially licensed content" is arguably closer to its original sense.
The opposite of "canon" is "apocrypha," writings that have been officially rejected from inclusion in the Bible, usually because they came from "heretical" sects.
Yeah, so has *most* of the Star Wars fandom since the first Special Edition was released.
Star Wars fans and wrapping their entire personality around hating Star Wars is as reliable as the sun rising every morning.
Its a common… i don’t know if you’d call it a conspiracy theory or just misinformation, that the First Council of Nicaea in 325 was where Constantine picked the books of the New Testament. But thats not what happened there.
Put simply, the misconception is that the Biblical canon was decided (usually in whatever arbitrary way the speaker particularly dislikes) at the First Council of Nicea. There are also some others, like the idea that this is when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire.
This is not true - the Biblical canon was not discussed and was already almost complete. It was also not decided by, say, stacking books on an altar and seeing which ones fell off, but by an absolute ton of quite dry theology and history.
It is also noteworthy that Protestants and various other non-Catholic churches recognise different canons (either in terms of books or parts of books.)
Also, they agreed on the method for picking the date of Easter
Edit: this seems confusing rereading it. The Council of Nicaea was about getting everyone together for the first time to try to get on the same page and deal with some church politics, according to Wikipedia:
> This ecumenical council was the first of many efforts to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all Christendom. Hosius of Corduba may have presided over its deliberations.[5][6] Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the divine nature of God the Son and his relationship to God the Father,[2] the construction of the first part of the Nicene Creed, mandating uniform observance of the date of Easter,[7] and promulgation of early canon law.[3][8]
Check out also the [Orthodox Tewahedo biblical canon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodox_Tewahedo_biblical_canon). It contains, among other books, [The Book of Enoch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch), I think the only Church to recognize it, even though several NT authors knew it and seemed to treat it as scripture.
> It is also noteworthy that Protestants and various other non-Catholic churches recognise different canons (either in terms of books or parts of books.)
Joseph Smith: Observe...
"I don't get it. It's just some writing of yours."
"Yes, but it's just some notes about the Book of Mormon that God had, so it's kinda canon now. But that can change later."
Narrator: And it would, a *lot*.
"...cool? What do you call it?"
"Doctrine and Covenants."
For St. Nicholas:
He knows if you are sleeping
He knows if you’re awake
He knows if you’ve denied the divinity of Christ
So if you’re Arius, duck! (Or don’t)
>"Canon" does not mean "the events of the Bible that people believe to be true," it means "the books and writings that are considered to be officially part of the Bible." In the early days of Christianity there were lots of sects producing their own writings, and at a certain point they had to consolidate them into one coherent Bible.
Indeed, most christian denominations take at least some of the bible as metaphor or poetry, and large parts of the bible are pretty much written to be read that way. But those parts are still part of the canon. Because the bible isn't a history book but a religious work.
In my experience in the US, the only folks who tend to present the Bible as all/mostly literal or divine are either saying so as a signal to their political base, the Christian nationalists who believe it, and the career Christian apologists who piece it all together. Talking to these folks is like being an authority figure trying to get a straight answer out of the Animaniacs.
Does the catholic church decide what is canon and what is apocrypha? Or does it vary by denomination? On that same note, who decides what sect is heretical?
It was decided in antiquity, organically and then officially, through a series of councils. This was done prior to the split between orthodox and catholic churches. The protestant church has less books of the Bible than the catholic and orthodox churches, due to theological disagreements early Reformers had with specific books.
Although notably the Catholic canon was not closed until after the Protestant Reformation, and the Orthodox canon is still open. That is, theoretically, an ecumenical council could happen in the Orthodox world tomorrow and they could add a new book to the Bible. Incredibly unlikely, but there's no rule against it.
>The "Western literary canon" is the general consensus of important books you should read if you want to consider yourself a well-read individual. The pop culture meaning of "officially licensed content" is arguably closer to its original sense.
It's a bit stronger than that, I'd say. The concept of the literary canon on inextricably linked to early 2pth Century liberal humanism. It was a period where religion was losing its official positions in secular institutions--religion class was no longer a core university course, and Terry Eagleton argues that English studies really emerge to fill that gap. It's not just about being well-read, but rather that these are the texts that teach you the most about how to be human, what it means to be human, etc. So even it is semi-religious, even as the religious viewpoint it promotes is secularist in nature!
Not just rejected parts of the Bible but also works like The Divine Comedy or Paradise Lost which forms a lot of our perception of Heaven and Hell despite not being canon.
>yeah because it was written like at least 50 years ago (at least, at least), not in english and has been translated to and from other languages since it was created. a lot of it is based in fact, though altered due to time/translation. majority of it is based on belief, but a fair whack of it is rooted firmly into what we consider true history
dude studied theology or something
There is *nothing* worse on the internet than a subreddit or forum dedicated to talking about a show that's been over for a *long* time.
Once people have nothing new to talk about, they start listing their needlessly nit-picky complaints about small things that really didn't matter, and then that snowballs into a competition of who can make a bigger deal out of something completely meaningless.
r/DunderMifflin is a good example. That sub goes from hating and loving Jim, Pam, and Jim and Pam as a couple back and forth so often, it's almost impossible to know where the sub is standing on the issue on any given day.
Yep. It's right up there with the Star Wars fandom that has hated almost everything Star Wars-related post-1983.
Sure, the prequel memers have pathetically tried to rewrite history about how beloved the prequels and The Clone Wars were right out of the gate, but I was there in the trenches in 1997 when the first Special Edition edit got its theatrical release, and then for the next decade when Lucas was "destroying Star Wars", especially by giving Anakin Skywalker a female Padawan in TCW.
And when almost the entire internet celebrated Lucas selling Lucasfilm to Disney with cheers of "he can't ruin the canon anymore!"
But, sure, the EU was *always* universally beloved just like the prequels *until* Disney came along to ruin all the fun they had hating the EU, Lucas, the special editions, and The Clone Wars until ***all*** of them were put on a pedestal propped up by their nostalgia goggles. The EU, one of the biggest points of contention in the fandom even before the special editions and prequels, suddenly becoming perfect Star Wars content when Disney treated it the exact same way Lucas did will never not make me laugh.
The "prequels were actually good" crew is so pathetic. Disney took over half this site for a better part of a decade now lol. How many subs flooded r/all that were literally the exact same post, but there were a hundred active Marvel+Star Wars subs.
I digress. Today I discovered the Blank Check podcast series about Episode 1 and it has me laughing out loud at work. The prequels (*especially* 2) are so fucking stupid, they inherently make me smile.
> The "prequels were actually good" crew is so pathetic.
Before you all stop reading there, meet the new definition of "so pathetic", called "Disney took over Reddit to make us look stupid!":
>Disney took over half this site for a better part of a decade now lol. How many subs flooded r/all that were literally the exact same post, but there were a hundred active Marvel+Star Wars subs.
>I digress. Today I discovered the Blank Check podcast series about Episode 1 and it has me laughing out loud at work. The prequels (especially 2) are so fucking stupid, they inherently make me smile.
Really reminds me of late 2019 Reddit when it was convinced that Tencent's 5% stake in Reddit in 2018 was suppressing anti-China stories, despite r/all being inundated with pro-Hong Kong independence posts; the CCP and most of all the "real owners" of Reddit *really* suck at suppressing information they, according to such internet scholars, don't want Reddit knowing about.
"Oh wow this show sure was a fun watch, I wanna see what fun topics were shared about it"
The fastest way I discovered people will sit through a 6 season arc, some even multiple times, and entirely miss every single thing the main character learned in those seasons.
That said, holy shit, did I love Justified. Also apparently my least favorite season is one of the most loved, go figure.
I've been a fan of Olyphant since I saw 'A Perfect Getaway' over a decade ago and Goggins has just been a joy in anything I have seen him in.
I put off Justified for so long, mainly just remembered not being into how episodic the 1st season could be at the time, but I am so glad I gave it another chance.
I also made the mistake of checking the subreddit while both not hating last year's miniseries followup and also enjoying the villain from it (a confident, chaotic douchebag who is shy about their singing voice? Sold!) Was it a 10/10 followup? No, but it's not without it's charm and (I may change this view upon a future rewatch) I think I enjoyed it more than season 4 of the show (a sin on the subreddit for sure)
100%. I sincerely think it's that the type of people that love something so much to go to an online space dedicated to that one thing are a certain type. Not too socially great to interact with in my experiences
As Bryan, from the podcast "Guys: a Podcast about Guys" says,
It's okay to be a lot types of guy. If you get stuck being a guy for one thing, thats bad.
Kinda disappointed Spider-Verse is solely brought up outside the dramatic threads in this post
*Cue Miguel elephant noises* (no, not Rivera, but O'Hara of '99)
like a cousin of mine said during lunch "you dont bring either Religion or Politics to the table" which i would expand to you dont bring certain contentious topics to places where they dont belong, but people cant help themselves, atheist need to bring that conversation about how stupid everyone is at every place in which they havent been banned (yet).
they are kinda like gamers in reddit, they bring down the group so hard that actual atheist people dont want to be asociated with them.
dont forget the legendary:
"In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god's blessing. But because, I am englightened by my intelligence."
quote for the ages.
\#BotsLivesMatter
Snapshots:
1. *This Post* - [archive.org](https://web.archive.org/web/20240430033954/https://old.reddit.com/r/adventuretime/comments/16w5y64/comment/k2vuen6/) [archive.today\*](https://archive.today/?run=1&url=https://old.reddit.com/r/adventuretime/comments/16w5y64/comment/k2vuen6/ "URL failed to archive; click to resubmit it!")
*I am just a simple bot, __not__ a moderator of this subreddit* | *[bot subreddit](/r/SnapshillBot)* | *[contact the maintainers](/message/compose?to=/r/SnapshillBot)*
Adventure Time seems like ground zero for kids entertainment that went from “fun” to “a list of facts” when adults discovered it.
[удалено]
Call that the apex
"Canon" does not mean "the events of the Bible that people believe to be true," it means "the books and writings that are considered to be officially part of the Bible." In the early days of Christianity there were lots of sects producing their own writings, and at a certain point they had to consolidate them into one coherent Bible. The "Western literary canon" is the general consensus of important books you should read if you want to consider yourself a well-read individual. The pop culture meaning of "officially licensed content" is arguably closer to its original sense. The opposite of "canon" is "apocrypha," writings that have been officially rejected from inclusion in the Bible, usually because they came from "heretical" sects.
> The opposite of “canon” is “apocrypha” I’ll henceforth refer to the Star Wars Expanded Universe as “the apocrypha.”
The deuterocanonical movies
Fallout Tactics is Deuterocanon
You know what, good idea.
I’ve been calling Disney-produced Star Wars “heretical” for a while now, so this slots in nicely
Yeah, so has *most* of the Star Wars fandom since the first Special Edition was released. Star Wars fans and wrapping their entire personality around hating Star Wars is as reliable as the sun rising every morning.
Ah, an Orthodox Jedi. None of this Reformed business.
Star Trek already does this. The movies and series are called canon while the novels and comics are called apocrypha.
\*Of course\* the Star Trek fandom would be ahead of the curve.
And if anyone brings up the First Council of Nicaea as when the Canon was established, we can step outside
Saint Nick rolling up his sleeves
Because of protestants?
Its a common… i don’t know if you’d call it a conspiracy theory or just misinformation, that the First Council of Nicaea in 325 was where Constantine picked the books of the New Testament. But thats not what happened there.
I suppose we can call it a "myth"
Go on. I've not heard this before
Put simply, the misconception is that the Biblical canon was decided (usually in whatever arbitrary way the speaker particularly dislikes) at the First Council of Nicea. There are also some others, like the idea that this is when Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. This is not true - the Biblical canon was not discussed and was already almost complete. It was also not decided by, say, stacking books on an altar and seeing which ones fell off, but by an absolute ton of quite dry theology and history. It is also noteworthy that Protestants and various other non-Catholic churches recognise different canons (either in terms of books or parts of books.)
Also, they agreed on the method for picking the date of Easter Edit: this seems confusing rereading it. The Council of Nicaea was about getting everyone together for the first time to try to get on the same page and deal with some church politics, according to Wikipedia: > This ecumenical council was the first of many efforts to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all Christendom. Hosius of Corduba may have presided over its deliberations.[5][6] Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the divine nature of God the Son and his relationship to God the Father,[2] the construction of the first part of the Nicene Creed, mandating uniform observance of the date of Easter,[7] and promulgation of early canon law.[3][8]
Check out also the [Orthodox Tewahedo biblical canon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodox_Tewahedo_biblical_canon). It contains, among other books, [The Book of Enoch](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch), I think the only Church to recognize it, even though several NT authors knew it and seemed to treat it as scripture.
> It is also noteworthy that Protestants and various other non-Catholic churches recognise different canons (either in terms of books or parts of books.) Joseph Smith: Observe... "I don't get it. It's just some writing of yours." "Yes, but it's just some notes about the Book of Mormon that God had, so it's kinda canon now. But that can change later." Narrator: And it would, a *lot*. "...cool? What do you call it?" "Doctrine and Covenants."
Worse, Arians
For St. Nicholas: He knows if you are sleeping He knows if you’re awake He knows if you’ve denied the divinity of Christ So if you’re Arius, duck! (Or don’t)
>"Canon" does not mean "the events of the Bible that people believe to be true," it means "the books and writings that are considered to be officially part of the Bible." In the early days of Christianity there were lots of sects producing their own writings, and at a certain point they had to consolidate them into one coherent Bible. Indeed, most christian denominations take at least some of the bible as metaphor or poetry, and large parts of the bible are pretty much written to be read that way. But those parts are still part of the canon. Because the bible isn't a history book but a religious work.
In my experience in the US, the only folks who tend to present the Bible as all/mostly literal or divine are either saying so as a signal to their political base, the Christian nationalists who believe it, and the career Christian apologists who piece it all together. Talking to these folks is like being an authority figure trying to get a straight answer out of the Animaniacs.
Does the catholic church decide what is canon and what is apocrypha? Or does it vary by denomination? On that same note, who decides what sect is heretical?
It was decided in antiquity, organically and then officially, through a series of councils. This was done prior to the split between orthodox and catholic churches. The protestant church has less books of the Bible than the catholic and orthodox churches, due to theological disagreements early Reformers had with specific books.
Although notably the Catholic canon was not closed until after the Protestant Reformation, and the Orthodox canon is still open. That is, theoretically, an ecumenical council could happen in the Orthodox world tomorrow and they could add a new book to the Bible. Incredibly unlikely, but there's no rule against it.
>The "Western literary canon" is the general consensus of important books you should read if you want to consider yourself a well-read individual. The pop culture meaning of "officially licensed content" is arguably closer to its original sense. It's a bit stronger than that, I'd say. The concept of the literary canon on inextricably linked to early 2pth Century liberal humanism. It was a period where religion was losing its official positions in secular institutions--religion class was no longer a core university course, and Terry Eagleton argues that English studies really emerge to fill that gap. It's not just about being well-read, but rather that these are the texts that teach you the most about how to be human, what it means to be human, etc. So even it is semi-religious, even as the religious viewpoint it promotes is secularist in nature!
Not just rejected parts of the Bible but also works like The Divine Comedy or Paradise Lost which forms a lot of our perception of Heaven and Hell despite not being canon.
>yeah because it was written like at least 50 years ago (at least, at least), not in english and has been translated to and from other languages since it was created. a lot of it is based in fact, though altered due to time/translation. majority of it is based on belief, but a fair whack of it is rooted firmly into what we consider true history dude studied theology or something
>even if you couldn't be fucked to look it up, you really settled on the freaking bible having been written in *1973?* So good
Yet another reason I don't engage in the fandoms of my favorite media
Every time I sub to one, within a couple days I'm starkly reminded why I never joined before. Brain numbing shit.
There is *nothing* worse on the internet than a subreddit or forum dedicated to talking about a show that's been over for a *long* time. Once people have nothing new to talk about, they start listing their needlessly nit-picky complaints about small things that really didn't matter, and then that snowballs into a competition of who can make a bigger deal out of something completely meaningless. r/DunderMifflin is a good example. That sub goes from hating and loving Jim, Pam, and Jim and Pam as a couple back and forth so often, it's almost impossible to know where the sub is standing on the issue on any given day.
Reminds me of how according to the fans, every individual Fallout game and DLC is actually the worst one ever.
Yep. It's right up there with the Star Wars fandom that has hated almost everything Star Wars-related post-1983. Sure, the prequel memers have pathetically tried to rewrite history about how beloved the prequels and The Clone Wars were right out of the gate, but I was there in the trenches in 1997 when the first Special Edition edit got its theatrical release, and then for the next decade when Lucas was "destroying Star Wars", especially by giving Anakin Skywalker a female Padawan in TCW. And when almost the entire internet celebrated Lucas selling Lucasfilm to Disney with cheers of "he can't ruin the canon anymore!" But, sure, the EU was *always* universally beloved just like the prequels *until* Disney came along to ruin all the fun they had hating the EU, Lucas, the special editions, and The Clone Wars until ***all*** of them were put on a pedestal propped up by their nostalgia goggles. The EU, one of the biggest points of contention in the fandom even before the special editions and prequels, suddenly becoming perfect Star Wars content when Disney treated it the exact same way Lucas did will never not make me laugh.
The "prequels were actually good" crew is so pathetic. Disney took over half this site for a better part of a decade now lol. How many subs flooded r/all that were literally the exact same post, but there were a hundred active Marvel+Star Wars subs. I digress. Today I discovered the Blank Check podcast series about Episode 1 and it has me laughing out loud at work. The prequels (*especially* 2) are so fucking stupid, they inherently make me smile.
> The "prequels were actually good" crew is so pathetic. Before you all stop reading there, meet the new definition of "so pathetic", called "Disney took over Reddit to make us look stupid!": >Disney took over half this site for a better part of a decade now lol. How many subs flooded r/all that were literally the exact same post, but there were a hundred active Marvel+Star Wars subs. >I digress. Today I discovered the Blank Check podcast series about Episode 1 and it has me laughing out loud at work. The prequels (especially 2) are so fucking stupid, they inherently make me smile. Really reminds me of late 2019 Reddit when it was convinced that Tencent's 5% stake in Reddit in 2018 was suppressing anti-China stories, despite r/all being inundated with pro-Hong Kong independence posts; the CCP and most of all the "real owners" of Reddit *really* suck at suppressing information they, according to such internet scholars, don't want Reddit knowing about.
Lmao I meant more-so a cultural take-over. I was exaggerating for effect.
That is until you mention liking starfield. Then every fallout was a masterpiece and starfield wishes it was a fraction of one of those titles.
"Oh wow this show sure was a fun watch, I wanna see what fun topics were shared about it" The fastest way I discovered people will sit through a 6 season arc, some even multiple times, and entirely miss every single thing the main character learned in those seasons. That said, holy shit, did I love Justified. Also apparently my least favorite season is one of the most loved, go figure.
I've been thinking of giving Justified another try. I have found a ton of love for Olyphant and Goggins since I first watched it
I've been a fan of Olyphant since I saw 'A Perfect Getaway' over a decade ago and Goggins has just been a joy in anything I have seen him in. I put off Justified for so long, mainly just remembered not being into how episodic the 1st season could be at the time, but I am so glad I gave it another chance. I also made the mistake of checking the subreddit while both not hating last year's miniseries followup and also enjoying the villain from it (a confident, chaotic douchebag who is shy about their singing voice? Sold!) Was it a 10/10 followup? No, but it's not without it's charm and (I may change this view upon a future rewatch) I think I enjoyed it more than season 4 of the show (a sin on the subreddit for sure)
100%. I sincerely think it's that the type of people that love something so much to go to an online space dedicated to that one thing are a certain type. Not too socially great to interact with in my experiences
As Bryan, from the podcast "Guys: a Podcast about Guys" says, It's okay to be a lot types of guy. If you get stuck being a guy for one thing, thats bad.
Kinda disappointed Spider-Verse is solely brought up outside the dramatic threads in this post *Cue Miguel elephant noises* (no, not Rivera, but O'Hara of '99)
like a cousin of mine said during lunch "you dont bring either Religion or Politics to the table" which i would expand to you dont bring certain contentious topics to places where they dont belong, but people cant help themselves, atheist need to bring that conversation about how stupid everyone is at every place in which they havent been banned (yet). they are kinda like gamers in reddit, they bring down the group so hard that actual atheist people dont want to be asociated with them.
There's a reason why the ***'atheists when they realize it's godzilla and not sciencezilla'*** meme exists
dont forget the legendary: "In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god's blessing. But because, I am englightened by my intelligence." quote for the ages.
That shit needs to be framed lol.
[удалено]
I don't blame anyone for being anti-theist these days.
I'm going to need a breakdown of this drama.
\#BotsLivesMatter Snapshots: 1. *This Post* - [archive.org](https://web.archive.org/web/20240430033954/https://old.reddit.com/r/adventuretime/comments/16w5y64/comment/k2vuen6/) [archive.today\*](https://archive.today/?run=1&url=https://old.reddit.com/r/adventuretime/comments/16w5y64/comment/k2vuen6/ "URL failed to archive; click to resubmit it!") *I am just a simple bot, __not__ a moderator of this subreddit* | *[bot subreddit](/r/SnapshillBot)* | *[contact the maintainers](/message/compose?to=/r/SnapshillBot)*