shadow-kat
of-cannibals-and-kings:

zemedelphos:

vagabondaesthetics:

thefemaletyrant:


generalbriefing:


So….I totally never thought about this. I’m sure very few of you have. I don’t know about you, but I’m a bit disturbed…


Wow. Food for thought. I’m sure there’s an answer though.


Their names were translated/Anglicized after going from Greek to English.
The names of the Apostles are of Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew origins. The Hebrew, Aramaic and “Greek” named Apostles were:  Shim’on = Simon (Hebrew origin).  Y’hochanan = John (Hebrew origin).  Mattithyahu = Matthew (Hebrew origin).  Ya’aqov = James (Hebrew origin meaning Jacob).  Bar-Tôlmay = Bartholomew (Aramaic, which is related to Hebrew).  Judah = Jude / Saint Jude (not to be confused with Judas Iscariot, Hebrew origin).  Yehuda = Judas Iscariot (Hebrew origin, Betrayed Yeshua/Yehosua the Messiah).  Cephas / Kephas = Peter (Hebrew / Aramaic origin meaning “Rock”).  Tau’ma = Thomas (Aramaic origin).  Andrew = Andrew (Greek origin. Is the brother of Cephas / Kephas).  Phillip = Phillip (Greek origin).  You will note that there are only 11 names, that is because there were 2 Apostles named Ya’aqov (James), which brings the total to 12 apostles.
Link 

To expand on this, Jesus’s name is Anglicized in this way as well. We get Jesus from the Latin form of the Greek “Ἰησοῦς”(Iēsous), which is derived from the Herbrew “ישוע”(Yeshu’a, which meant “YHWH is Salvaion”, YHWH, or Yahweh being the name of God). When another form of that name, ” יְהוֹשֻׁעַ”(Yeoshu’a) was allowed to Anglicize through a different set of corruptions, it entered the English Language through Reformist Protestants as the name “Joshua”.Yes. Jesus’s actual name is Joshua.

Josh Christ

of-cannibals-and-kings:

zemedelphos:

vagabondaesthetics:

thefemaletyrant:

generalbriefing:

So….I totally never thought about this. I’m sure very few of you have. I don’t know about you, but I’m a bit disturbed…

Wow. Food for thought. I’m sure there’s an answer though.

Their names were translated/Anglicized after going from Greek to English.

The names of the Apostles are of Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew origins. The Hebrew, Aramaic and “Greek” named Apostles were:

Shim’on = Simon (Hebrew origin).

Y’hochanan = John (Hebrew origin).

Mattithyahu = Matthew (Hebrew origin).

Ya’aqov = James (Hebrew origin meaning Jacob).

Bar-Tôlmay = Bartholomew (Aramaic, which is related to Hebrew).

Judah = Jude / Saint Jude (not to be confused with Judas Iscariot, Hebrew origin).

Yehuda = Judas Iscariot (Hebrew origin, Betrayed Yeshua/Yehosua the Messiah).

Cephas / Kephas = Peter (Hebrew / Aramaic origin meaning “Rock”).

Tau’ma = Thomas (Aramaic origin).

Andrew = Andrew (Greek origin. Is the brother of Cephas / Kephas).

Phillip = Phillip (Greek origin).

You will note that there are only 11 names, that is because there were 2 Apostles named Ya’aqov (James), which brings the total to 12 apostles.

Link 

To expand on this, Jesus’s name is Anglicized in this way as well. We get Jesus from the Latin form of the Greek “Ἰησοῦς”(Iēsous), which is derived from the Herbrew “ישוע”(Yeshu’a, which meant “YHWH is Salvaion”, YHWH, or Yahweh being the name of God). When another form of that name, ” יְהוֹשֻׁעַ”(Yeoshu’a) was allowed to Anglicize through a different set of corruptions, it entered the English Language through Reformist Protestants as the name “Joshua”.

Yes. Jesus’s actual name is Joshua.

Josh Christ

halforphanhalfblack

PSA

  • Things that exist: Bulgarian culture, Spanish culture, Canadian culture, Ukrainian culture, Swedish culture, Dutch culture, Basque culture, Austrian culture, French culture, Portuguese culture, Bosnian culture, Irish culture
  • Things that do not exist: "White culture"
  • Things that exist: Honduran culture, Indian culture, Japanese culture, Mongolian culture, Venezuelan culture, Moroccan culture, Egyptian culture, Iraqi culture, Cherokee culture, Jamaican culture, Korean culture, Bangladeshi culture, Shoshone culture
  • Things that do not exist: "PoC culture"
arayasun

Educating a Friend

  • Me: So, let's say that you're at school and you see a guy you know. I mean, you guys talk every once in a while and he's pretty cool, but you're not like friends or anything. You just talk to him every once in a while.
  • Guy Friend: What's his name?
  • Me: I don't know. Frank?
  • Guy Friend: No.
  • Me: Okay, fine. His name is Will. Okay?
  • Guy Friend: I don't think it really suits him, but okay.
  • Me: ...So anyway, you're at school during lunchtime and you see Will. So, you notice Will's not eating anything. That's when you realize that Will has no lunch, no money for lunch, and no way of getting either. He's just sitting there like he normally would. He's not acting any differently and he's not asking anyone for anything. Not money, not a fry, not even a salt packet, but you know he's gotta be hungry. So, what do you do?
  • Guy Friend: Do I have any money?
  • Me: Yeah. You have enough for you and another meal.
  • Guy Friend: Duh, I buy him lunch.
  • Me: Okay, cool. So, like you said, you buy him lunch. You buy your lunch and you buy his lunch and you go over and hand it to him. And, he says, "Wow. You know, that's really nice of you, but I wasn't gonna ask anyone for lunch. I was probably just gonna wait until I got home to eat." And, then you say--
  • Guy Friend: Nah, it's cool.
  • Me: Exactly. You say, "Nah, it's cool. I'm just being nice. It's a gift." And, Will says, "You know, that's awesome. You're really nice, bro." And, after that, you guys start hanging out. You guys are like really good buds. You are always hanging out and laughing and just having a good time. So, you guys are friends for a few months, and it's tons of fun. Then, one day, you go up to Will and you say, "Hey, Will, you know, I've been thinking, and I kinda want that five bucks."
  • Guy Friend: What five bucks?
  • Me: Hold on. I'm getting there. So, Will says, "What five bucks?" To which, you reply, "Well, we've been hanging out for a long time and it's been really fun, but like, I've done a lot of really nice things for you. Like, I'm always nice to you and I always listen and do things you wanna do, so I was thinking that because I've been so nice, you should pay me back that five bucks I spent to get your lunch right before we started really hanging out."
  • Guy Friend: What? Why would I--
  • Me: I'm not done yet. So, then Will looks kinda hurt and he says, "But I thought you were just being nice. I thought that was just a gift." So, you say, "Whether or not it was a gift, don't you think you kinda owe me that five bucks since I've been so nice to you?" And, Will says, "No. I don't think I owe you that!" And you get mad, so you say, "Well, I think that you do, so I think you're being really shitty and stuck up about this and I feel like I've been completely wronged."
  • Guy Friend: Oh, my God. That's so fucked up of me. I would never do that to Will. Will was nice. We were buds. That's way screwed.
  • Me: I know, right? Hey, just wondering, have you ever heard of this fictional place called "The Friendzone?"
  • Guy Friend: Well, yeah, but...
  • Guy Friend: ...
  • Guy Friend: ...
  • Guy Friend: oh
lesser-evils
justkillianthings:

anonymousnerdgirl:

phoenixwrites:

amandasmouth:

phoenixwrites:

amandasmouth:

phoenixwrites:

Yeeeeeep.

I completely disagree. Hook is beautifully written with a back story and good character development. He’s funny and brave. And he genuinely loves Emma and even little Henry.
People who don’t like Hook don’t dislike him because of him. They dislike him because the writers killed off Bae. And that’s sad. Bae dying sucked. A LOT. But to hate Hook for it is just immature.

Hook has had zero to no character development.  He went from locking Snow and Emma in an enchanted jail cell to rot, physically assaulting Belle, to suddenly being “a good guy” for absolutely no reason aside from an inexplicable feeling for Emma.  Which also had no lead-up.
He hasn’t known Emma long enough to really love her and considering he’s spent most of his life on a revenge quest for his former love—sorry, not buying that he’s suddenly “in love with Emma” within what, a week of knowing her?  Bullshit.  That’s rushed writing.  That’s bad writing.  And I guaranfuckingtee you, if he were played by an old, unattractive guy, Hook would not be thrust into a hastily rushed relationship with Emma nor would he be on a badly-written redemption arc.
People dislike Hook because he’s a shabbily written character, has had no resolution towards the terrible things he’s done, but is suddenly being thrust in the center light purely because he’s physically attractive and snarky and a shallow audience likes that.  .  

So going from being the asshole who locked up Snow and Emma and wanting to kill Rumple and really only being out for himself to a guy who is trying to be better (notice that he isn’t 100% just good yet because part of character development is developing) is not character development?
His back story about what went down with his brother in Neverland and the stuff with Rumple and Milah are not character development?
Character development, by definition, is “The process of creating a character’s background, physicality, appearance, and personality.” So please tell me how Hook does not have character development? Because I see a lot of it. Just because a character isn’t finished developing doesn’t mean they don’t have it.
And why is developing feelings for someone and wanting to make a change in yourself, for them, a bad thing? Love is often the thing that causes the change in people.
And no, he hasn’t known Emma very long, but that doesn’t mean he can’t feel love for her. The time span that he’s known her has been WAY longer than a week, just saying. And who are you to judge how quickly someone can fall in love? Some people don’t take much to fall in love. And whether its “love” or not, he is definitely fond of of the characters/people in Storybrooke.
I also wouldn’t say that its rushed. They may be already getting together at the end of the season 3 finale (that’s really not that rushed - rushed would’ve been her and Graham as an item), but that doesn’t mean there’s no more bumps in the road for them.Love stories that are mostly platonic save for hidden feelings all the way through and then end the moment they kiss for the first time suck. So, yeah. I’m happy they aren’t doing that.
Just because he’s fallen for someone new doesn’t mean he doesn’t still harbor feelings for Milah. Hell, those feelings might have been long gone to begin with and he didn’t realize that until he let go of his anger and need for revenge.
I’d like to point out that the love story is not the main plot of this show which usually means relationships don’t get very slow builds, Look at Snow and Charming, This is a world of fairytales. They don’t need a couple years to fall in love. That’s for shows like The Vampire Diaries where it is a love story more than anything else.
I would still love Hook even if he were older and not attractive. I like who he is. And beautifully written may be an exaggeration, but I think shabbily written is pretty harsh, given that the character is still in development.
Every time I see you post anything about OUAT, you’re saying something is horribly written. If that’s how you feel, why watch the show?

No, it’s not character development because doing a quick switch-over from being villainous for revenge’s sake to helping the good guys makes no narrative sense.  There was no leadup.  There was no reason for him to do so.  The Rumple and Milah backstory I buy—totally makes sense for a socipathic vengeance quest.  What I don’t buy is how quickly he abandoned it.
There is nothing wrong with developing feelings for someone.  But if you’re painting it as the only reason you’re becoming good and also providing no buildup for that romance aside from physical chemistry, that’s sloppy, poor writing.  It’s not been developed.  If they wanted to do a truly believable Hook and Emma romance, they should start off by giving him a decent redemption arc, actually own up to the people he’s hurt—say, BELLE for instance.  They should also provide him MORE reasons to be a redeemable character than just getting into Emma’s pants.  
It is rushed because what, two days have passed since Emma lost Neal?  And the writers are expecting me to buy that she happily foregoes her vast issues with vulnerability for a crooked pirate she barely knows?  Once again, no goddamn leadup, no development on part of the relationship.  For Emma to form a relationship with anyone, let alone a romantic relationship, it takes time.  It takes space.  You can’t just shove them together in one episode and call it a day and then call it believable writing.
Because on OUAT every relationship—even the ones that start off quickly—are given plenty of development.  Snowing started off quickly, but we got tons of development for the two of them, tons of conflict, moments and fitting characterization to back up their romance.  Same with Rumbelle.  Not so with Captain Swan—they’ve had physical attraction and that is it.  It’s bad writing and I expect better.  I stand by the criticism, it’s shabby writing, it’s rushed and sloppy, and I know A&E can do better than that.  
I also expect a better romance for the lead character than a hastily written Jack Sparrow rip-off (seriously, OUAT’s Hook is nothing like Peter Pan’s Hook, and that’s a damn shame because I could’ve gotten behind that) particularly with a character that’s physically assaulted and stalked innocent characters (Belle and Archie) as well as made inappropriate sexual remarks to multiple people.  Fuck that shit.
I don’t watch the show anymore.  But as a fanfic writer and an ardent Swanfire shipper, I still participate in the fandom.  I still discuss the nuances of the show and criticize the direction it goes in because I loved this show, it had excellent writing in the beginning, and I’m pissed that the writing has gone so sour.  

All of THIS^^^^

Reblogging for Phoenix’s commentary.

justkillianthings:

anonymousnerdgirl:

phoenixwrites:

amandasmouth:

phoenixwrites:

amandasmouth:

phoenixwrites:

Yeeeeeep.

I completely disagree. Hook is beautifully written with a back story and good character development. He’s funny and brave. And he genuinely loves Emma and even little Henry.

People who don’t like Hook don’t dislike him because of him. They dislike him because the writers killed off Bae. And that’s sad. Bae dying sucked. A LOT. But to hate Hook for it is just immature.

Hook has had zero to no character development.  He went from locking Snow and Emma in an enchanted jail cell to rot, physically assaulting Belle, to suddenly being “a good guy” for absolutely no reason aside from an inexplicable feeling for Emma.  Which also had no lead-up.

He hasn’t known Emma long enough to really love her and considering he’s spent most of his life on a revenge quest for his former love—sorry, not buying that he’s suddenly “in love with Emma” within what, a week of knowing her?  Bullshit.  That’s rushed writing.  That’s bad writing.  And I guaranfuckingtee you, if he were played by an old, unattractive guy, Hook would not be thrust into a hastily rushed relationship with Emma nor would he be on a badly-written redemption arc.

People dislike Hook because he’s a shabbily written character, has had no resolution towards the terrible things he’s done, but is suddenly being thrust in the center light purely because he’s physically attractive and snarky and a shallow audience likes that.  .  

So going from being the asshole who locked up Snow and Emma and wanting to kill Rumple and really only being out for himself to a guy who is trying to be better (notice that he isn’t 100% just good yet because part of character development is developing) is not character development?

His back story about what went down with his brother in Neverland and the stuff with Rumple and Milah are not character development?

Character development, by definition, is “The process of creating a character’s background, physicality, appearance, and personality.” So please tell me how Hook does not have character development? Because I see a lot of it. Just because a character isn’t finished developing doesn’t mean they don’t have it.

And why is developing feelings for someone and wanting to make a change in yourself, for them, a bad thing? Love is often the thing that causes the change in people.

And no, he hasn’t known Emma very long, but that doesn’t mean he can’t feel love for her. The time span that he’s known her has been WAY longer than a week, just saying. And who are you to judge how quickly someone can fall in love? Some people don’t take much to fall in love. And whether its “love” or not, he is definitely fond of of the characters/people in Storybrooke.

I also wouldn’t say that its rushed. They may be already getting together at the end of the season 3 finale (that’s really not that rushed - rushed would’ve been her and Graham as an item), but that doesn’t mean there’s no more bumps in the road for them.Love stories that are mostly platonic save for hidden feelings all the way through and then end the moment they kiss for the first time suck. So, yeah. I’m happy they aren’t doing that.

Just because he’s fallen for someone new doesn’t mean he doesn’t still harbor feelings for Milah. Hell, those feelings might have been long gone to begin with and he didn’t realize that until he let go of his anger and need for revenge.

I’d like to point out that the love story is not the main plot of this show which usually means relationships don’t get very slow builds, Look at Snow and Charming, This is a world of fairytales. They don’t need a couple years to fall in love. That’s for shows like The Vampire Diaries where it is a love story more than anything else.

I would still love Hook even if he were older and not attractive. I like who he is. And beautifully written may be an exaggeration, but I think shabbily written is pretty harsh, given that the character is still in development.

Every time I see you post anything about OUAT, you’re saying something is horribly written. If that’s how you feel, why watch the show?

No, it’s not character development because doing a quick switch-over from being villainous for revenge’s sake to helping the good guys makes no narrative sense.  There was no leadup.  There was no reason for him to do so.  The Rumple and Milah backstory I buy—totally makes sense for a socipathic vengeance quest.  What I don’t buy is how quickly he abandoned it.

There is nothing wrong with developing feelings for someone.  But if you’re painting it as the only reason you’re becoming good and also providing no buildup for that romance aside from physical chemistry, that’s sloppy, poor writing.  It’s not been developed.  If they wanted to do a truly believable Hook and Emma romance, they should start off by giving him a decent redemption arc, actually own up to the people he’s hurt—say, BELLE for instance.  They should also provide him MORE reasons to be a redeemable character than just getting into Emma’s pants.  

It is rushed because what, two days have passed since Emma lost Neal?  And the writers are expecting me to buy that she happily foregoes her vast issues with vulnerability for a crooked pirate she barely knows?  Once again, no goddamn leadup, no development on part of the relationship.  For Emma to form a relationship with anyone, let alone a romantic relationship, it takes time.  It takes space.  You can’t just shove them together in one episode and call it a day and then call it believable writing.

Because on OUAT every relationship—even the ones that start off quickly—are given plenty of development.  Snowing started off quickly, but we got tons of development for the two of them, tons of conflict, moments and fitting characterization to back up their romance.  Same with Rumbelle.  Not so with Captain Swan—they’ve had physical attraction and that is it.  It’s bad writing and I expect better.  I stand by the criticism, it’s shabby writing, it’s rushed and sloppy, and I know A&E can do better than that.  

I also expect a better romance for the lead character than a hastily written Jack Sparrow rip-off (seriously, OUAT’s Hook is nothing like Peter Pan’s Hook, and that’s a damn shame because I could’ve gotten behind that) particularly with a character that’s physically assaulted and stalked innocent characters (Belle and Archie) as well as made inappropriate sexual remarks to multiple people.  Fuck that shit.

I don’t watch the show anymore.  But as a fanfic writer and an ardent Swanfire shipper, I still participate in the fandom.  I still discuss the nuances of the show and criticize the direction it goes in because I loved this show, it had excellent writing in the beginning, and I’m pissed that the writing has gone so sour.  

All of THIS^^^^

Reblogging for Phoenix’s commentary.

324b21-clone

Orphan Black || Behind The Scenes
“Our lead character is a chameleon, and Tatiana is a chameleon. Tatiana doesn’t come to set as Tatiana, ever. She comes as the character. I mean she really is, i mean, not that she’s like all freaky deaky or weird you know, you can still have a very fun conversation with her but she comes with the energy of the character. And usually will even come with the voice of the character. It’s pretty mind blowing to watch her work.” - Graeme Manson