• 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I only ever really played through the very first 2 games, and it’s been years, but I don’t remember Ares even being a huge part. Which is weird considering it was Greek myth and had the name “God of War.” The Greek god of war should have been a big thing (or at least memorable).

      • CorvidCawder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s also been quite some time for me, but I have the impression that there was a plot reason for it, like the games being a war on the gods, which started with taking the place of Ares? Thus the title (but in a roundabout way)

      • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        The short of it is that Ares dies at the end of the first game.

        The game was originally supposed to be a one-off and was never intended to have a sequel, so Kratos kills Ares and becomes the new God of War at the end of the first game. The ending scene even has Kratos on Ares’ throne and talks about how he, as the new god of war, is responsible for all sorts of heinous acts throughout history while footage of modern wars like Vietnam flash by.

        But the game did so well that the studio execs demanded that they make a sequel, and then another, and another, and another, etc. They had to keep coming up with new gods to kill and ways to up the stakes by casting Kratos off of his throne, so by the third game, Kratos just murders the entire Greek Pantheon and causes the apocalypse. And then they had to figure out where to go from there. The “reboot” was probably one of the smartest things they could’ve done for the series. Don’t have to keep upping the stakes with gods to kill if Kratos just goes to therapy and deals with his issues.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        We need a Kratos religious movement. Those who believe in Kratos to slaughter the gods brining subjugation of the people upon us. It is against our beliefs to not be against people who follow God’s that subjugate the populace. Sometimes it may be ourselves, but that’s fine too.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I can’t say I like him much:

      Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

      John 3:18

      In other words, if you aren’t a Christian (which most people in history and alive today are not), you go straight to hell.

      The “Prince of Peace” was all about kindness because your sinful ass would get tortured forever, so you might as well have a few nice years here.

    • Leviathan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Never met him. Read his stories, can’t say I care for any of the servitude required, and his followers are the worst humans you’ll run into around here.

      No, thank you.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I hate him in the sense I hate any fictional character.

      Don’t think he was really fleshed out, didn’t see the point in the larger narrative, and he has the worst fanbase. Even Rick and Morty has a better behaved fandom.

      • normalexit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        True, it’s just a little too magical for my brain to process. To me he was a prophet and probably a good dude… but that’s probably about it.

        To worship a guy as a literal God because his mom had a tale to tell about why she was pregnant, was the beginning of the end of religion making sense for me.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            It doesn’t matter much if there was a “real” Jesus, because the Jesus Christians worship is not him. The Jesus Christians worship is a magical son of a god that defies death.

            • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              okay yeah that guy didn’t exist, but the George Washington Americans worship couldn’t tell a lie and did manual labor one time and was a good general and his teeth were stupid instead of nightmare fuel

              and we consider them the same guy.

        • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          To me he was a prophet and probably a good dude… but that’s probably about it.

          And you have stumbled upon the big difference between Jews, Christians, and Muslims.

          Jews already had a list of criteria for the messiah. Jesus didn’t check all of the boxes, so the Jews went “he’s not our messiah. We’ll keep waiting for the real one to show up.”

          Christians believe he is the messiah; Literally God given flesh, so He can experience mortality and die for their sins.

          Then the Muslims believe he was a prophet, but not the last prophet. They believe the last prophet was Muhammad. Jesus is featured pretty heavily in the Quran, because they do believe he was a prophet. But Muhammad said there would be no more prophets after himself, so anyone new claiming to be one is lying. (Worth noting that this “no new prophets” thing doesn’t negate Jesus’ second coming. Because Jesus wouldn’t be a new prophet, he would be a returning prophet.)

          • Dozzi92@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Muhammad out here gatekeeping prophets, it nice Muhammad. I think anyone can be whatever they want to, so long as they try hard.

            • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              I mean, the Bible also discusses an anti-Christ as well. Jesus preached that there would be false prophets.

              Almost as if starting a cult requires your followers to actively reject other belief systems.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          That’s not the only reason. Jesus claimed to be God, His followers worshipped Him, He performed miracles and ultimately died and rose again and was seen by many. Then ascended into heaven like a month later.

          • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            The truth is even better: the masses were too dumb for his educated metaphors, the priests got in a huff, the colonizers decided they could solve a problem for the local leaders.

            His followers got organized and staged an early death (crucifixion takes 20 hours not 3) with anaesthetic on a sponge, dude healed up for 3 days in a cave covered in myrrh etc and guarded by loyals, then showed up to his ragtag band of radicals and gave them the heads-up. Sends Thomas off to South India because he needs a challenge. Grabs peter paul and mary and off they go to Rome, incognito, to undermine the heart of the empire with some radical ideas.

            After a couple of decades building community in Rome, Issa retires to Kashmir, just in time for the big buddhist conclave. He injects compassion and the notion of a self sacrificing avatar into the venerable but vibrant philosophy. He and Mary settle down and enjoy the lovely isolated valley and he dies an old man, having made a difference.

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              For a start, He would have been hanging there for possibly longer than three hours as he was already dead. Still baking in the sun. Keep in mind He was really brutally whipped before going there which would be enough to kill somebody, as well as staying up for hours, sweating blood long before as well. Crucifixion would have very much killed someone in that state in three hours. Every breath He’d take would cause his back to scrape against the rough wood and cause excruciating (literally) pain. Lastly, His side was pierced and it showed His lungs had collapsed. Then He was buried in a tomb, and guarded by ROMANS, not loyals. In the state He was in, He would have very much died there in the course of three days if He was somehow still alive. Not recovered.

              Your last paragraph sounds AI generated lol

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              If you can get me several people who saw it and are willing to die for that fact, I’d believe you

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                The supposed water walking event wasn’t documented by anyone until 5 decades later. Paul never mentions it, all the other early writings don’t mention it, only in about 81AD or so did it appear. Where did Mark get it? We have no clue. Maybe he saw the optical illusion of people walking by water looking like they are walking on water, maybe local magicians were using the rocks underneath and he heard about, maybe it was symbolic that Cephus was involved and he wanted to talk more smack about the man (Mark really hated him), maybe there was a local play that had a god in it that did it. Point is the chain of evidence was broken.

                And the deaths of the apostles are even more poorly documented. There was a huge incentive to lie about everything. We don’t know how James died, we suspect he was very old when it happened, there is a possible reference to him being killed as an old man but for what crimes we don’t know. The idea that he was killed for his beliefs doesn’t show up until nearly two centuries later in text form.

                • Flax@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  There couldn’t have been rocks underneath as Peter began to sink. John was the one who talked smack about Peter.

                  For historical accounts from that time, 5 decades after is rather close. Most records we have about history from that point in time are written centuries later. Generally copies of copies, etc. When mark wrote it though, there’d be several other guys who would have been there who could have said “actually this didn’t happen”, by this point they were spreading all over the world, but they already accepted Mark’s gospel.

                  Also worth noting that the 5 decades date primarily comes from the presumption that Jesus couldn’t have told the future in the Olivet discourse. Which if Christianity is true, the account could very well have come earlier.

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Jesus claiming to be God:

              My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no-one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.’

              John 10:29‭-‬30

              ‘Very truly I tell you,’ Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’ (Exodus 3:14)

              John 8:58

              Jesus accepts worship:

              Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’ Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.’

              John 20:28‭-‬29

              Then those who were in the boat worshipped him, saying, ‘Truly you are the Son of God.’

              Matthew 14:33

              Suddenly Jesus met them. ‘Greetings,’ he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshipped him. Then Jesus said to them, ‘Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.’

              Matthew 28:9‭-10

              St Paul:

              while we wait for the blessed hope – the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ,

              Titus 2:13

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                You notice how not a single one of these passages just says what you want it to say? Each one of them there is wiggle room. And each one of them only comes to us after the Trinity was an accepted idea and centuries of monks “corrected it”.

                • Flax@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Any evidence that these manuscripts were tampered with after the Council of Nicea? (I assume that’s what you’re referring to as “Trinity” as an accepted idea, although the idea was accepted likely before these scriptures were even originally written)

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Literally is, at least according to trinitarian doctrine. Handy diagram:

      Which of course implies that “isness” is non-transitive which mathematically speaking is bonkers. I mean it’s not that you can’t have intransitive relations but calling them equivalences is going to raise eyebrows.

      • vithigar@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        “Isness” definitely doesn’t need to be transitive.

        It can be used to give properties to a subject. An apple is crisp, red, and 100g. Crisp isn’t red, red isn’t 100g, and 100g isn’t crisp.

        It can also be used to specify a general case. Honeycrisp is an apple. Golden Delicious is an apple. Fuji is an apple. All three of Honeycrisp, Fuji and Golden Delicious are distinct.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It is just one uppmanship. He didn’t start out being thought that way but people kept adding. Whole process took over two centuries

    • PiJiNWiNg@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      The only judgement day anyone on earth needs to be concerned with is a Will Smith movie. All others are a load of horseshit.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Hmm before or after he unleashes mass murder and torture on earth? This is an important thing for me. I try to tell people I like them before they slaughter humans, not after.

      Of course the best part never get mentioned:

      Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.

      And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

      Jesus turns a woman into a sex slave forced to make rape babies and watch said babies get murdered.

      Christianity everyone!

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Another day, another Atheist taking the Bible out of context.

        ‭‭Revelation 2:18-29 ESV‬

        “And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: ‘The words of the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like burnished bronze. “‘I know your works, your love and faith and service and patient endurance, and that your latter works exceed the first. But I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches will know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you according to your works. But to the rest of you in Thyatira, who do not hold this teaching, who have not learned what some call the deep things of Satan, to you I say, I do not lay on you any other burden. Only hold fast what you have until I come. The one who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron, as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received authority from my Father. And I will give him the morning star. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’

        If you actually read it in context and have an ounce of intelligence and honesty, it’s referring to someone who’s seducing men within the Church of Thyatira. But of course, if you read it in context, you won’t be able to make the weird conclusion you were trying to make. This is low, even for an Atheist argument.

        Atheist lies to make a stupid point

        Atheism, everyone!

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          There is no context that makes sex slavery and infanticide acceptable. It doesn’t matter what her supposed sins are. This is a new low even for Christian “thought”.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago
            1. Where does it mention sexual slavery?

            2. It sounds like you’re upset when God punishes sin. So you’re upset both when God does something and when God doesn’t do something? How can this be? Do you want God to just let us be evil without punishment?

            3. How come it’s wrong when The Creator of the universe takes a life He ordained, but it’s perfectly acceptable when a woman has an abortion? Her body her choice? What about His universe His choice? I see a double standard appearing.

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago
              1. The part where she is confined to her bed with her lovers and watching her babies get murdered

              2. Yes I am upset that anyone would believe sexual slavery and infanticide is an appropriate punishment. It makes me wonder about the people who think this is acceptable. Torture is bad, rape is bad, murder is bad.

              3. Now you are just throwing stuff at the wall.

              Anyway enjoy your block I can’t get into yet another argument with a xian who thinks rape is fine.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Do you really think He has turned a blind eye to that? Because He has not.

          ‭Matthew 7:21-23 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

          ‭Luke 17:2 It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble.

          • DrFuggles@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            so what you’re saying is he has turned a blind eye seeing as I’ve yet to see a bishop with a millstone, yeah?

            • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              yeah, I mean, if you have to reach back to an ancient book (that was written by man, and rewritten by man to suit the times and ideals numerous times there after) to find a case for"proof", then the proof is pretty much meanginless… unless the proof is to prove how condoned it is and how long they’ve been allowed to get away with it.

    • TimDave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I’d kick him right in the Jimmy for making that worm that burrows into children’s eyes in Africa, destroying their vision

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          I know we haven’t been formerly introduced but user TimDave seems like a much cooler, and real, person compared to your Jesus myth. As far as I know TimDave has never ordered that his enemies be murdered and cast at his feet.

          So why would he be upset about existing?

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            When did Jesus order that his enemies be murdered and cast at his feet?

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Luke 19:27

              He sets up an analogy of himself as king and then has the king say that. It’s a weasel way of saying stuff. On the level of me taking a hand puppet out and making it say mean things. “Don’t get upset it was Mr. Scruffy that said it not me”.

              • Flax@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                I love how you were like “look! I’m not taking it out of context!” And proceed to take it out of context. You may have supposedly placed the characters, but you haven’t placed the timing. It’s clearly referring to the future events (the final judgement) when Christ’s enemies will be thrown to the place prepared for Satan and his angels. The story is about future events. No matter how you want to frame it, there is no way that’s a command to kill people in the present. Even a plain reading shows you this.

                Luke 19:11 even shows that it is referring to the Kingdom of God, something which hasn’t come yet.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Luke 19:27

              But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’”

        • Squirrel@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Bud, you’re not doing any good here. Your approach assumes the other person believes that Jesus is real. That’s like arguing for human rights with a Republican – it’s fundamentally against their ideals.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            At least they’d never be able to say that they weren’t told about this.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yep. I’m going to be judged anyway for being an atheist and for being born one of those heathen Jews (I even had a bar mitzvah!), so why not?

      I’m going to hell either way. Might as well get my say in.