(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] maeve-rigan.livejournal.com at 03:21am on 06/08/2006
Maybe!

You wrote:
I find this proposed distinction between Jossian demons (defined along the lines of "demons happen!", one might say) and the demons associated with much popular Christian theology (more like, "if demons happen, you must've opened the door for them somehow") really fascinating.

As a former Presbyterian, now Episcopalian, I'm not sure I'd posit the distinction in exactly that either/or. More of a both/and--in the sense the the really horrible monstrous things which we experience appear metaphorically in the Buffyverse as "demons in a real sense"--physical demons and monsters, even vampires (generic ones, anyway), that can be killed or "dusted"--as in real life our trials must be fought and overcome. There are also demons one "opens the door for"--spiritual beings--the First Evil was the closest to such to appear on BtVS.

For the record, I don't believe there's a necessary one-to-one correlation between behavior and consequences, good or bad, because anyone can see that's not so. On the other hand, some actions are just asking for trouble, like inviting vampires in.
[parent entry] [link] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] revdorothyl.livejournal.com at 11:19pm on 06/08/2006
Good point. Sometimes I get so excited about distinctions that I forget to include the "both/and" option. I definitely think the real world, Christian theology (at its best), and the Buffyverse give us both kinds of evil (the kind you invite, and the kind that just happens).

On the other hand, what I come up against most often is how reluctant many of us are to acknowledge that evil things happen to good people, and that "being good" and "doing as you're told" are not a gilt-edged guarantee of health, wealth, and happiness. I particularly find that in some of my more sheltered introductory bible students, who've been taught a comforting theology of "immunity guaranteed". From my perspective, that has the potential to cause all sorts of trouble in their lives, and in the lives of others, if they decide they can't resist the urge to be "Job's Comforters".

Does that make things any clearer?
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] maeve-rigan.livejournal.com at 02:21am on 07/08/2006
Clearer! I think we're basically in agreement.
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] appomattoxco.livejournal.com at 04:04am on 07/08/2006
Being raised Pentacostal I have to chime in because we are often said to have this kind of theology. All things working together for the good. Isn't anywhere near the same as all things are hugs and puppies. It's not a guarantee of immunity IMHO it's a receipt for lemonade. A joy independant of circumstance that's incredibly hard sometimes.

If I take the liberty of using the fight against demons as a metaphor for a life of faith. Early Buffy had this, her life didn't just suck because life was that way. It sucked *extra* because of her calling but she made the choice to live joyfully anyway even when she wasn't happy.

I'm not sure Riley had this skill because he seemed to be so sheltered. His happiness and his strength depended more on the outside world. What people thought of him and where he fit in world. It might not be a fair assessment as we saw Buffy tested again and again but Riley only once.

By the time season six came around Buffy was making lemonade the way she made it parent teacher night, without sweetener but that's another post.

[link] [parent] [reply]

October

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
1
 
 2
 
 3
 
 4
 
 5
 
 6
 
 7
 
8
 
 9
 
 10
 
 11
 
 12
 
 13
 
 14
 
15
 
 16
 
 17
1
 18
 
 19
 
 20
 
 21
 
22
 
 23
 
 24
 
 25
 
 26
 
 27
 
 28
 
29
 
 30
 
 31