A God's Alignment: How is Zon-Kuthon "Lawful" Evil?


Lost Omens Campaign Setting General Discussion

101 to 142 of 142 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Wait, isn't God Chaotic Neutral?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:
Quite often in the bible, Satan appears to be working directly for God, as his (forgive the following terminology) devil's advocate. This is especially the case in the story of Job.

Yeah well... that's because in the old Testament Satan actually... is an angel of God whose role is to test the faith of His servants. It's with Christianity (and I dare say not early Christianity) that the figure of Satan changes to the personification of Evil.

As for Z-K I really see no problems with his Lawful allignment: as said before there are many good reasons to consider him lawful and the only chaotic vibe he may give comes from the misconception he was driven mad by chaotic beings from the outher realms (which is not stated as canon and even if it was implies said chaotic entities actions could not have driven Z-K to "lawful madness"... chaos being chaos everything is possible, especially contraddictory results).


Kthulhu wrote:
Quite often in the bible, Satan appears to be working directly for God, as his (forgive the following terminology) devil's advocate. This is especially the case in the story of Job.

In the story of Job Satan was not working directly for God

In the story of Job Satan was challenging god

The word Satan means "the adversary" or "to obstruct"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rogar Valertis wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Quite often in the bible, Satan appears to be working directly for God, as his (forgive the following terminology) devil's advocate. This is especially the case in the story of Job.

Yeah well... that's because in the old Testament Satan actually... is an angel of God whose role is to test the faith of His servants. It's with Christianity (and I dare say not early Christianity) that the figure of Satan changes to the personification of Evil.

As for Z-K I really see no problems with his Lawful allignment: as said before there are many good reasons to consider him lawful and the only chaotic vibe he may give comes from the misconception he was driven mad by chaotic beings from the outher realms (which is not stated as canon and even if it was implies said chaotic entities actions could not have driven Z-K to "lawful madness"... chaos being chaos everything is possible, especially contraddictory results).

In the old Testament Satan was not angel of God. it was not even an angel. In the old Testament the word Satan is a Title for anyone or anything that opposed god or god's worshipers it is not a name.As the word Satan means "the adversary"/"to obstruct, oppose".

In Christianity the reason ("the Devil""Lucifer") is called Satan is because he is the adversary

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thank you, Xavier, took the words right out of my mouth.


NAZIS


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Gaberlunzie wrote:


Likewise, while most clerics in the church of Asmodeus would be lawful evil, lawful neutral clerics would be fully accepted; they can follow the rules and adhere to the all-important hierarchy. Neutral evil clerics however, would be seen as heretics by the larger church, as they don't show proper respect and heck, might as well ally with demons and slips!

"You're a loose ballista, Johnson. Turn in your mace and holy symbol. I'm taking you off this case."

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
default wrote:
Gaberlunzie wrote:


Likewise, while most clerics in the church of Asmodeus would be lawful evil, lawful neutral clerics would be fully accepted; they can follow the rules and adhere to the all-important hierarchy. Neutral evil clerics however, would be seen as heretics by the larger church, as they don't show proper respect and heck, might as well ally with demons and slips!

"You're a loose ballista, Johnson. Turn in your mace and holy symbol. I'm taking you off this case."

"Here's your five-pointed suppository..."

"What did you say to me?"
"I said stick it up your @$$!"


xavier c wrote:

The book of job was about having faith in god even when everything is going bad.In the book of job god hope that job would love him and have faith in him no matter what.It was more of a lesion to the faithful that no matter what Satan does to you love and have faith in god because he will look for you in the end.

After all in the end god restored every thing job had plus more

Well, not really. His children were still dead. Yes, he had many new children afterwards, but does that make up for the dead ones?

Also, it kinda sucks for the dead children themselves.


allenw wrote:
xavier c wrote:

The book of job was about having faith in god even when everything is going bad.In the book of job god hope that job would love him and have faith in him no matter what.It was more of a lesion to the faithful that no matter what Satan does to you love and have faith in god because he will look for you in the end.

After all in the end god restored every thing job had plus more

Well, not really. His children were still dead. Yes, he had many new children afterwards, but does that make up for the dead ones?

Also, it kinda sucks for the dead children themselves.

Why would it suck for the dead children?

If your talking about Christianity they would have eternal life in an eternal paradise or something.

Grand Lodge

Xavier's right, it's a pretty important detail when looking at the whole thing.


Job was old testament. So about as Christian as the prophet Daniel killing dragons, but more Christian than rapture belief.

Also making sweeping judgments as to the afterlife of people according toe Christianity is rather difficult given that requirements for entering the afterlife are some of the most common reasons for Christian sects splitting. So for Catholics or Anglicans one could assume the children most likely when on to paradise as it's difficult for children to knowingly sin. Though there would be argument as to whether or not they first went to Seoul until after the death of Christ. For more faith-centric sects like Baptists the only determiner is how much they believed in Jesus and given that he wasn't alive yet their fate is entirely determined by what sort of Protestant apologetics you ascribe to. Some include Christ conquering Hell and thus liberating Jewish souls from before his life and others operate on a "too bad" principle for people unable to physically know about Jesus.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alex Smith 908 wrote:

Job was old testament. So about as Christian as the prophet Daniel killing dragons, but more Christian than rapture belief.

Also making sweeping judgments as to the afterlife of people according toe Christianity is rather difficult given that requirements for entering the afterlife are some of the most common reasons for Christian sects splitting. So for Catholics or Anglicans one could assume the children most likely when on to paradise as it's difficult for children to knowingly sin. Though there would be argument as to whether or not they first went to Seoul until after the death of Christ. For more faith-centric sects like Baptists the only determiner is how much they believed in Jesus and given that he wasn't alive yet their fate is entirely determined by what sort of Protestant apologetics you ascribe to. Some include Christ conquering Hell and thus liberating Jewish souls from before his life and others operate on a "too bad" principle for people unable to physically know about Jesus.

As a piece of literature, the Old Testament read with foreknowledge of the New Testament takes on a substantive amount of dramatic irony. The audience knows something that the characters do not: Jesus would conquer death across time, bridging the gap that had been created between man and God. Job does not know such a thing through the events of the New Testament, but even so he eventually made his way through his despair. Without the "insider's knowledge" of the New Testament, the Old Testament is dark, as it describes a fallen people and a fallen world that is just vaguely aware of everything its lost in comparison to what it had and could have, but that's why a lot of the surviving Christian sects take both books into account. It becomes more informative, and certain details of the Old Testament gain a bit more notice in light of its blockbuster sequel.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:


What does the CN church of Lamashtu look like? Could they have some freakish uneasy alliance with Sarenrite redeemers, savagely protecting humanoid children with deformities or mental disabilities from cultures that would discard or shun them?

A NE cult of Pharasma, sending holy assassins to cull those who have, according to their teachings, defied the sacred cycle of life and death (either by being created, instead of born, like androids, or by cheating death by seeking immortality)?

A CG temple to Gorum, teaching those in war-ravaged lands to fight in their own defense, making sure that anyone...

I would say out of all of these only the NE church of Pharasma is likely to exist. Lamashtu's influence is simply too strong to make her CN worshipers anything more than rare outriders, not nearly enough to be a church or cult of their own.

Seeking immortality is not the problem, it's actually attaining and holding on to it which sets the inevitables on you.. the NE's are more likely to be singular individuals who go back to far. Actually the best example of a NE Pharasman is the antagonist of Death's Heretic. His followers however remained properly neutral.

The CG of Gorum is probably the hardest to stomach. it would be like a planet full of Klingons who ere actually nice... trying to visualise that is making my head explode.

Worship and dedication to a god strongly pulls people to the gods actual alignment, the ones who are "one step away" are closer to what we call in our world... Sunday Christians. They're not really with the program.


Ms. Pleiades wrote:


As a piece of literature, the Old Testament read with foreknowledge of the New Testament takes on a substantive amount of dramatic irony. The audience knows something that the characters do not: Jesus would conquer death across time, bridging the gap that had been created between man and God. Job does not know such a thing through the events of the New Testament, but even so he eventually made his way through his despair. Without the "insider's knowledge" of the New Testament, the Old Testament is dark, as it describes a fallen people and a fallen world that is just vaguely aware of everything its lost in comparison to what it had and could have, but that's why a lot of the surviving Christian sects take both books into account. It becomes more informative, and certain details of the Old Testament gain a bit more notice in light of its blockbuster sequel.

Oh yeah not saying that the old testament is unimportant to Christian belief, just that taken as a single story Job predates Christianity. As such examining it with the foreknowledge and assumption of Christ as the Messiah is reading it through a cultural lens, rather than the original context.

Grand Lodge

LazarX wrote:


The CG of Gorum is probably the hardest to stomach. it would be like a planet full of Klingons who ere actually nice... trying to visualise that is making my head explode.

I find CN Lamashtu worshippers harder to visualize than CG Gorum worshippers. I see them as "For the glory and conquest in battle, let our power and mettle be proven against worthy (read, evil) foes!"


Wouldn't it be rather hard for satan to challenge God, seeing as God is omniscient? God allowed satan to work on job because he already knew job would stay faithful. He already knew he'd win the bet.


It depends on the particular interpretation on to the omniscience or lack there of of God.


Does omniscience refer to knowing everything ever? or merely to everything that is known?

In which case, does God hope?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
default wrote:

Does omniscience refer to knowing everything ever? or merely to everything that is known?

In which case, does God hope?

In the strict Calvinistic view of omniscience, no, because not only does he know exactly and totally how the Future is going to pan out, it's all in his Plan, anyway. Think Dr. Manhattan, squared.


See, that's what I've never really understood. If God knows everything that was, is, and will ever be, there just seems to be no pattern, no reason to His "Plan." He talks to us for a few hundred years, wipes away sin with Christ, then just decides he's going to take a few millennia off and relax why we kill each other for no reason.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ydoccian wrote:
See, that's what I've never really understood.

Yup. And that's how you can infer you're not omniscient.

Quote:


If God knows everything that was, is, and will ever be, there just seems to be no pattern, no reason to His "Plan."

A seeming lack is not the same as an actual lack.

This is, like, catechism 101, guy. A well-written novel isn't necessarily supposed to have an ending you can predict from the middle chapter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you doubt Zon Kuthon is Lawful Evil, just sit down and read Nightglass.

Living in Nidal is like living in a gothic horror shadowplane version of 1984, by George Orwell.

Silver Crusade

Ms. Pleiades wrote:
LazarX wrote:


The CG of Gorum is probably the hardest to stomach. it would be like a planet full of Klingons who ere actually nice... trying to visualise that is making my head explode.
I find CN Lamashtu worshippers harder to visualize than CG Gorum worshippers. I see them as "For the glory and conquest in battle, let our power and mettle be proven against worthy (read, evil) foes!"

Gorum DOES reside in Elysium, some sort of bargain or something.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ydoccian wrote:
See, that's what I've never really understood. If God knows everything that was, is, and will ever be, there just seems to be no pattern, no reason to His "Plan." He talks to us for a few hundred years, wipes away sin with Christ, then just decides he's going to take a few millennia off and relax why we kill each other for no reason.

And those people who go to hell were already damned to go to hell by God an infinity before their birth.

Deterministic God is an a*$#@~~.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
Ydoccian wrote:
See, that's what I've never really understood. If God knows everything that was, is, and will ever be, there just seems to be no pattern, no reason to His "Plan." He talks to us for a few hundred years, wipes away sin with Christ, then just decides he's going to take a few millennia off and relax why we kill each other for no reason.

And those people who go to hell were already damned to go to hell by God an infinity before their birth.

Deterministic God is an a&!!#*$.

Omniscient isn't necessarily deterministic. If you have free will, but God is smart enough to predict how you will choose, that doesn't make it less free.


you said " Crazy is defined by chemical imbalances of the brain outside of a given range of societal norms. We can demonstrably see that mentally ill people's brains operate differently and have different chemicals at play. Thus they are "crazy"."

you don't have any idea what you are talking about. there is zero evidence for the failed chemical imbalance theory. it's pseudoscientific garbage designed to legitimize eugenics against "undesirables". no scientific test has ever measured the contents of a synapse of a living human, "crazy" or not because the gap between neurons is microscopic and inside your skull. the alleged benefits of psycoactive drugs similary can't be accurately measured because you have to rely on the self reporting of people you have already labeled as needing treatment for being mentally ill. often times they are locked up with a bunch of "crazy" people and pretending the treatment works is the only way to get out. it's certainly not demonstrable as you claim and it's not observable even by medical professionals. the diagnostic and statistic manual is what really defines "crazy" and the "disorders" it vaguely describes are designed to be all inclusive catch-alls. you are spreading offensive misinformation which has a negative impact on reality and you should be ashamed of yourself.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
.seth wrote:
the alleged benefits of psycoactive drugs similary can't be accurately measured because you have to rely on the self reporting of people you have already labeled as needing treatment for being mentally ill. often times they are locked up with a bunch of "crazy" people and pretending the treatment works is the only way to get out.

Uhm I don't know about the first part of the paragraph about chemical imbalances, but yeah you can clearly measure the effect of psychoactive drugs via blinded studies. Of course there's a placebo effect - there's a placebo effect on most medicines, the question is about if there's anything apart from the placebo. And via a double blinded study, this can easily be shown. You give a bunch of depressed people Medicine X and another bunch of depressed people sugar pills. Then they self-report. If medicine X is just placebo, it should have about the same improvement rate as the sugar pills. If it has notably better results, then that means the pill works to that extent.

Also, I don't know what country you are living in, but at least here in Sweden it's very, very rare to get "locked up". Basically the only circumstance you can get locked up if you are considered a danger to yourself or your surroundings, and it's a pretty high threshold. Not to say everything's great here - there are big issues with how hospitalized people are treated - but saying that people "often get locked up" is just plain wrong. I've only been hospitalized once, that was of my own free will, and I've tried but failed twice more to get that aid.

That said, I have issues with labeling people "crazy" because they may need psychoactive drugs.

Quote:
the diagnostic and statistic manual is what really defines "crazy" and the "disorders" it vaguely describes are designed to be all inclusive catch-alls.

The DSM doesn't contain the word "crazy", afaik. In general it is also quite precise in it's descriptions. Here is for example the diagnostics criteria for major depressive disorder.

Quote:
you are spreading offensive misinformation which has a negative impact on reality and you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'd like to say the same back to you.


.seth are you seriously arguing that mental illness doesn't exist?


xavier c wrote:
allenw wrote:
xavier c wrote:

The book of job was about having faith in god even when everything is going bad.In the book of job god hope that job would love him and have faith in him no matter what.It was more of a lesion to the faithful that no matter what Satan does to you love and have faith in god because he will look for you in the end.

After all in the end god restored every thing job had plus more

Well, not really. His children were still dead. Yes, he had many new children afterwards, but does that make up for the dead ones?

Also, it kinda sucks for the dead children themselves.

Why would it suck for the dead children?

If your talking about Christianity they would have eternal life in an eternal paradise or something.

As others have mentioned, neither Job, nor the faithful that his story was a lesson for, were Christian. I'm not qualified to speculate on the afterlife-beliefs of any of those involved; but Job's children all or mostly seem to have been adults, and not nearly as devout as their father, so I'm dubious that readers of the time would assume they were all happily in heaven. If that was the case, it seems odd that no-one mentions the possibility in the story.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I'm not disastrously wrong about classical Judaism they would have gone to Sheol a place of waiting for both the righteous and the unrighteous similar to the Greek Underworld. One was only able to enter the World to Come after the current world comes to an end.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Man. The irony on this thread is thick.

Gaius Dinnereater starts it, tries to stop it, and he ends up seeing nazis, arguments about real world religions, if we could find a way to include complaints about rogues we'd well...

<Pinhead> We have such sights to show you. </pinhead>

ZK's likely Lawful Evil because you don't need to be a guy who rearranges his sock drawer to be LE. He believes in order, control and domination. The pain aspect ironically enough to me, might represent his interaction with various forces of the universe or a rejection of things he's concluded to not be real. IE: Pain is objectively in some way /true/. And he wishes to inflict his truth on everything.

You can be a drab and banal CE, and you can be a vibrantly evil LE.

I'm resisting the urge of my minor degree in theology to get involved in the rest of the discussion on here. Too many paladin arguments. O_O


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alex Smith 908 wrote:
.seth are you seriously arguing that mental illness doesn't exist?

Seth appears to be arguing, correctly, that "crazy is defined by chemical imbalances of the brain outside of a given range of societal norms" is incorrect. There are a lot of causes for crazy, some of which are structural, some of which are chemical imbalances, and some of which are simple learned behavior.

He then adds a lot of blatantly incorrect anti-science mumbo-jumbo that is up there with Dr. Strangelove's "preservation of our precious bodily fluids" in terms of lunacy and scientific accuracy.


At that point in time, Job's wife and children would have gone to paradise, where pretty much everyone went until Jesus pulled everyone out there, IIRC. I don't think they ever say if his children were Christian or not, but with a dad as faithful as Job, I'd think so.


Orfamay Quest wrote:

Seth appears to be arguing, correctly, that "crazy is defined by chemical imbalances of the brain outside of a given range of societal norms" is incorrect. There are a lot of causes for crazy, some of which are structural, some of which are chemical imbalances, and some of which are simple learned behavior.

He then adds a lot of blatantly incorrect anti-science mumbo-jumbo that is up there with Dr. Strangelove's "preservation of our precious bodily fluids" in terms of lunacy and scientific accuracy.

Okay. Well I can admit to misspeaking there. It was mainly just trying to point out that Sissy'ss thing about everyone thinking the same was wron.


Ydoccian wrote:
At that point in time, Job's wife and children would have gone to paradise, where pretty much everyone went until Jesus pulled everyone out there, IIRC. I don't think they ever say if his children were Christian or not, but with a dad as faithful as Job, I'd think so.

I doubt anyone was Christian before Christ.


Well, not Christian per say. I'm not sure what to call it. I suppose we would just say Faithful or Loyal to God?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ydoccian wrote:
Well, not Christian per say. I'm not sure what to call it. I suppose we would just say Faithful or Loyal to God?

Followers of YHWH, persons of judeo-christian religious origins, Hebrew, children of Israel (the Biblical person, rather than the name of the modern country).

YHWH is a pretty niche title though, and not one to be used lightly in Jewish tradition regardless of context.


Victor Zajic wrote:
boring7 wrote:

Devil's advocate: Zon-Kuthon's "conversion" (and his Hellraiser roots) are heavy shades of Lovecraft, possessed and twisted and driven mad by horrors from beyond space and time. Those horrors are almost always listed as Chaotic (usually evil, though Azathoth is straight-up chaotic neutral because it doesn't HAVE a will) in Pathfinder's material.

Actually, the developers have very explicitly said ZK's conversion was not at the hands of the Lovecraftian Elder/Outer Gods.

It has been recently implied that his conversion is more related to the Dominion of the Black, which is more inspired by the Borg or the Reapers from Mass Effect than from Lovecraft. Both of which are textbook lawful.

I don't have a problem with LN worshipers of ZK. As at least one other person also stated, such faithful tend to internalize the suffering part of his dogma, inflicting pain upon themselves instead of others. Unless the other want the pain inflicted on them, which is not uncommon in ZK's faith. They just don't take pleasure in inflicting pain on others, but will do so if ordered to do so. That's how I play my LN Kuthite. He's much more "M" than "S" in terms of "S&M"

But Zon Kuthon wants to cover the world in flayed flesh. And torturing others is an art form. It just doesn't seem very LE, more CE. In my game world he's CE.


Aviel wrote:


But Zon Kuthon wants to cover the world in flayed flesh. And torturing others is an art form. It just doesn't seem very LE, more CE. In my game world he's CE.

I don't see how either of those two things are at all related to the law/chaos scale? Evil, sure, but they seem neither chaotic nor lawful.


Honestly if I were to have a functional society defined by Zon Kuthon worship it'd probably resemble the Cardasians from Star Trek a lot.

Shadow Lodge

Aviel wrote:
But Zon Kuthon wants to cover the world in flayed flesh. And torturing others is an art form. It just doesn't seem very LE, more CE. In my game world he's CE.

Art isn't chaotic; see Shelyn, the goddess of artistic endeavors (NG).

101 to 142 of 142 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / General Discussion / A God's Alignment: How is Zon-Kuthon "Lawful" Evil? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion