Lonelygirl15

Ok, point made. Let's be nice to each other and keep things on topic!

Not everyone here can speak english well Taig. Chill out. Feel free to question and discuss any theory you want to and stay out of the ones your not interested in...that way you will get the best of both worlds.

sigh

Ralf the Dog wrote:"The unthinkable happened" was released on EID AL-ADHA., or the Festival of Sacrifice

In Islamic tradition, the Festival of Sacrifice. It is when they celebrate the faith of Abraham when he offered to sacrifice Isaac.

Bree is an only child.

Also note that Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac, however god stopped him at the last moment.

Good point. It's also worth noting that if they did add something from Islam in here, they probably did it the same way they did Thelemic references: very skewed and what you'd think if you did a five minute reading of texts...not if you actually researched the subject.

So, if they chose the date on purpose, it's likely that the info you posted is all the research they did on the subject.

nobackspacebutton wrote:

Beckers wrote:

Ralf the Dog wrote:I see the order as a group who will use anything that comes along. If something from Christianity or Islam is useful they will ad it in.

I don't think the top people at the order believe their own religion. I think they just see it as a tool to control there members. One more stepping stone to world domination.

If the religion of the order is a stepping stone for the leadership of the order, is Bree the orders untied shoelace?

All religion is a tool to control society

I couldn't agree with you more, Beckers.

Control what?
I mean... I think many time now leaders in the religion BELIEVE In the religion. They want to control what you do, but it also controls what they do (atleast outwardly).

But if you say the order doesn't even believe in the religion then that's different. WHAT do they have the religion for?

kwicherbichen wrote:Control what?
I mean... I think many time now leaders in the religion BELIEVE In the religion. They want to control what you do, but it also controls what they do (atleast outwardly).

But if you say the order doesn't even believe in the religion then that's different. WHAT do they have the religion for?

I have to agree there to some extent. Karl Marx's statement that "Religion is the opiate of the masses" is an unthinking man's slam at religion. It ignores much of religion's usefulness and function. I assume this is where the original poster got his "All religion is a tool to control society" stance from.

But, I think it's a very narrow view of religion. First, let's look at what Marx actually said:

Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Now, does "Religion is the opiate of the masses" adequately sum up what Karl Marx is saying? No. What he was saying is that religion allows the status quo to continue. By making people focus on the afterlife and God's plan for them, all sorts of atrocities can be allowed to happen. Since it is in this life and only seen as a temporary life, more attention is given to the unseen afterlife which is considered more permanent.

In this instance, it seems Karl Marx was concerned with the economics of religion. But, when we look closer at religion, does it hold up? No. Religion is often the cause of societal upheaval. For instance, look at the role of voudou in the Haitian revolution. Voudou banded the resistence together, gave them a common sense of purpose, and gave them hope for their fight. If it were not for voudou, Haiti would not have had the impetus to resist slavery the way it did.

Also, when we look at the poster's original statement "All religion is a tool to control society" then we have to ask "How did voudou help to control Haitian society?" The answer is: it didn't. It destroyed Haitian society as it was known. Religion can only control society if the religion is itself controlled by the authority that controls society. Only then can it be used as a tool.

When religion acts independent of society's authority, there is always the chance that religion will oppose the government. Look at the muslim riots in France recently. For that matter, look at the clashes between islam and hinduism in India.

Also, we have to look at cases where religions are independent of any central authority. For those we can look at most buddhist sects, wicca, thelema, etc. etc. In these cases, no one has the reigns to "control" anyone.

If we break it down further and say it's because the people are self-disciplined, then we have to include all norms in that equation...not just religious norms.

So, that's a really blanket statement that not at all reflects the diversity of religion, only concentrating on a small view in order to feel superior.

hehe!! Very funny Taig, but you might not want to be all superior about your english usage, since you misused the word "know" in your post. You should have used the word now, as in "I think the fact that the thread has been moved form "Plot Discussion" to the now somewhat obscure subject of "Her Religion" is indicative of that."

(sorry English minor)

Taig wrote:oh for god's sake..can we reel it in just a little bit?

Honestly - and no offense intended - it is hard enough trying to keep up with all the extraneous vids and theories w/out having to weed out this sort of thing.

Maybe it's just for fun and I am being a rain cloud - if so I am sorry (a little) but please let's ty to approach this thing in a rational way.

just my 2

1. I was not offended. It is very hard to offend me by presenting an idea, or attacking one of my ideas.

2. If this were any other series I would agree.

3. This type of theory fits in very well with the history of LG-15. Lots of obscure Egyptian symbols and dates that relate to events of the past, or dates with obscure (or not so obscure) religious meaning. This is the kind of twist that they would love to drop in.

PS. You tend to get a little paranoid when you know that some of the posters in this forum are in fact the Creators dropping random bits or bites of information.

Edited to s say:

Just look at the names of the two principal male characters. Jonas and Daniel.

Somehow I think that Bree's name will have meaning by the end. Perhaps Bree is short for Sabrina? I wonder if the series will end with Bree turning all of the order into toads?

Ok, that last bit was the new meds my doctor gave me for this flue. It has by brain spinning. I had better end this post before the giant white rabbit eats my eyeballs.

Well, if we're relying on the biblical natures of names, Jonas better stay far away from large sea mammals.

My problem with the Eid theory is that it would be very difficult to control the timing of this ceremony. Bree's Dad leaves a message, Bree could have found it right away, replied, and met days ago, or it could have taken her another week to figure it out and leave a message, putting the ceremony two weeks after the holiday. It is interesting, and there are some coincidences, but it seems too hard to control.

I am being civil...

Taig wrote:RE: If you dont want to "keep up with the extraneous vids and theories" then why come here. And if it bothers you then why even comment on it. ...If you have a problem with that then I am sorry, dont read the "extraneous...theories"

I did not come in here to start a fight. In fact I am trying very hard to be civil. If a comment I made offened you that's just tooo bad. It is a forum and by that it is a means of open dialogue. Your comments are contradictoy. I made a pointed out something that I felt was a poor subject for plot discussion and you bashed me for doing it.

For the record; I reviewed my post and I didn't see the word "stupid" in there at all - maybe you can point it out to me.

As for your kind reminder of the definition of extraneous. I checked the word before I used it because I felt certain someone would take issue with it. It is used correctly.

In any case you have to admit that this whole topic is quite a stretch. I think the fact that the thread has been moved form "Plot Discussion" to the know somewhat obscure subject of "Her Religion" is indicative of that.

So to quote : "If you have a problem with that then I am sorry, dont read [them]"

Now I suppose I am in for a variety of bitching and moaning becasue I have taken an unpopular or critical position.

Do me one favor. Please dispense with the dictionary qoutes, the "spell check" and other similar useless comments. Trust me, I know how to speak English.

cheers

In no sense did I intend to "bash you" and in your first response you did not go about presenting your ideas that this topic should be moved. You, in summary, said that it was a far fetched idea that you don't appreciate being a thread because you have to weed through a lot of crap. At least that is what I got from it. I think this theory is very relevant and a good one. And yes, I do realize you in fact did not say the word "stupid" but I didnt say you did. I said you "basically" did. Not literally did. I was in no means trying to bash you. I was just trying to point out a wrong before you go on erk-ing other people. Please dont act superior to me when you have misspelled words. I dont mind not spelling correctly but if you act like you are the perfect English speaker/writer, you will get corrected.

I am sorry if I am harsh and my response to you last night was a bit. I apologize.

Sorry BK, I will be good now.
On toppicc

Ralf the Dog wrote:I see the order as a group who will use anything that comes along. If something from Christianity or Islam is useful they will ad it in.

I don't think the top people at the order believe their own religion. I think they just see it as a tool to control there members. One more stepping stone to world domination.

If the religion of the order is a stepping stone for the leadership of the order, is Bree the orders untied shoelace?

I agree, I think the Order represents many many religions combined and it is very plausible that this could be included.
As one of the previous responses states though, I think it would be really hard to have the timing correct.