I am going to have to check with my copy editing desk to see how that slipped through the QC process. Rereading that entire paragraph culminating in the bit that had you confused I see the whole thing is dense enough that it could be unpacked into its own blog post. I don't usually talk religion here but I do consider myself to be a student of religion and history, and we are touching on some fascinating history here. I think it is relatively safe to point you to the Wikipedia page of the same name as the account of mine that you muted. Many gods of the other (from the Christian perspective), e.g. gods worshiped by anyone not of the Abrahamic lineage, became syncretized elements within the Abrahamic religions but were literally demonized - recast as devils and demons. This is no surprise of course as one of the primary tenants of the Abrahamic religions is that there is only one true God.
The interesting part to me is the lengths to which later Christian theologians during the middle ages and Renaissance elaborated an intricate mythology of hell, with a hierarchy of devil/demon princes serving under Satan all having particular fields of specialty. Most of the names of these devils and demons, of which my alternate account name is one, were originally derived from gods outside of the Abrahamic tradition. Some of this Christian mythology of devils and demons is passed on today in popular culture and even in some vestigial elements of the Roman Catholic Church. Hope none of this crosses a line, I find it terribly fascinating but without knowing exactly what triggered your reaction to my other account's name I may be treading on thin ground here.
Also a reaction to the link you shared - pretty interesting interview with the director, although I think he has a somewhat closed mind to the true possibilities of the internet in general and social media networks in particular. The closing section brought up by the interviewer resonated with me and is an interesting bit of synchronicity as well.
The final message in Lovestreams is, “You are not alone.”
A few weeks back I posted a Steemit Open Mic Entry of the same name - "You Are Not Alone" (video below but the post is worth reading)
@carlgnash - I am so happy that your sister is safe and that you're able to treasure and deepen your relationship with her even more intensely and more sensitively. God is truly merciful. Your original song, "You Are Not Alone," is haunting, and if you can send the written lyrics I would really appreciate that. But you have more on your plate than ten people, so if typing up the words will be yet another item on your "to do" list, don't worry about it. I'll type the words myself. My favorite part of the song is the chorus provided by your little one. (Girl or boy?) That reminds me of the two little empaths in the link below. They are so beautiful!
I won't even begin to answer your thoughts on Christianity right now. I'll be offline for a day or so and that theological conversation needs time and space. We'll be exploring that universe for a few hundred eternities. What I find particularly joyous in your sharing the song with me is the intimacy of your home atmosphere. It is a warm and peaceful and loving space that nurtures creativity and all good things. No wonder your little one is so happy there!
Here's the link to the two little empaths (Michelle adds their appearances at the end of her video), and I'll be back in a few days. God bless you, dear Carl.
I'm glad you enjoyed the song and I shared it to precisely to give you more of that warm intimate connection. The lyrics are in the post - I shared the link to the post above the video. The lyrics are towards the bottom of the post. Enjoy your time offline and I look forward to our next conversation. Much love - Carl
@carlgnash - Carl, I think that I might be back online for a bit. It's been very refreshing to listen to the silence of the Planet Lud. When I came back, I found this very interesting post by @berk whose writing reminds me of Dostoevsky and Gogol. So here's the link for your original works curation service. And here's a question. The original writing has not been edited. Do you want the writers to edit before you re-steem? How does that work? Love you.
https://steemit.com/life/@berk/my-trial-gaps-are-always-there#@berk/re-sarahspeaks144-re-berk-re-sarahspeaks144-re-berk-my-trial-gaps-are-always-there-20171015t192324196z
The nice thing about the internet is it will still be here if you step away for a bit :) I want to thank you for this referral, @berk is a really terrific writer! I love long form poetry.
RE resteeming in general - this particular post is too close to the payout to warrant a resteem in my opinion, but I used my dark account to resteem his more recent poem because I agree with you, he deserves more eyes on his writing.
RE editing - I wouldn't ever ask a post author to edit for grammar or any other reason - I tend to look past grammatical issues, particularly if English is the second language. In this particular case I wouldn't even agree that the post needs any editing. I knew instantly that I was reading a poem, and the author confirmed this was his intention by using the tag "poem". There are no rules in poetry, unless writing in a specific form which does have strictures. I am not sure that I would move or change a single word in that post, or at least, I wouldn't be sure that doing so might not weaken the structural integrity of the whole. You never know what even the smallest and most well intentioned "correction" might do to an edifice of this complexity.
Much love - Carl
@carlgnash - See, I knew there was a reason that we fell in 'like.' The highest compliment I ever received from one of my senior editors was his letter of referral commending my "sensitivity" in editing the work of other writers. But oh where is he now? @berk has asked me to read another post and respond. And suddenly I feel the little heart flutter that always reminded me that I was surrendering my literary labor to other eyes. That is an honor and an act of trust of which no writer ever feels worthy except your English professor. So pray for all of us, and keep Beelzebub away! (P.S. Haven't forgotten our theological discussion. That part of my brain is taking a nap at the moment. And, oh BTW, I hate to ask since it appears to be a sensitive topic, but what on earth is going on with @berniesanders and @jerrybanfield that every newbie should know? Still wandering about, I accidentally fell off a cliff into the dark forest and thought that little goblins had transported me back to the YouTube Troll Center. This fight was much worse than the broken-cup tea party of the Mad Hatter and the March Hare. I think I heard swear words! Please explain it all now lest I offend the wrong somebody.)
I have no idea what is going on between those two but I am not a fan of either of those individuals for reasons I won't go into here. But you should of course form your own opinions. I will say though that if you want to avoid squabbles, the aforementioned duo are pretty much constantly embroiled, separately, in one flap or another, and are usually (in my opinion) on the wrong end of the thing.
@carlgnash - Well then since I've made you my mentor, that settles it. I tried reading a few remarks to understand the critical issue, but it was impossible to get to either the bottom of it or the beginning of it. And I always avoid anything that might give me a headache. On the other hand, here is the unpleasant aspect of that conflict that ought to concern the Steemit community. A family member of the disputing parties posted her first blog with a reputation score of 12 and so many upvotes through "Trending" and "Hot Topics" that the only words ever spoken in a new account earned more dollars than my account can expect if I live until next year. I thought the blockchain algorithm had lost its mind. Everyone starts at Reputation 25. No one starts at 12. And no one at 12 earns enough to go shopping at Macy's. So not only is there an immediate appearance of imbalance or inequality, but there is a very real issue of prejudicial consequences with "damages." The ordinary impulse to welcome a new member with greetings and well wishes is checked by the threat of being flagged by association. If a Steemian is downvoting and flagging anyone who welcomes and upvotes a new account simply because the new account is associated with an "enemy account," the entire community is affected. The new account is not granted its own weight, character, and independence, and innocent bystanders are drawn into the fray merely by voting. What? How can that be? Now we need "Steem Court." Suddenly I've learned why a comment is made invisible and what it means to see a series of dots beside a flag. But the example is not the proper illustration of how censorship should work. How many other minnow voters would have welcomed and upvoted the new account but decided to ignore it, not for its own sake but simply to avoid trouble? I wonder if Steemit might not be an income source for whales and dolphins but an undisclosed social experiment for the minnow pond. Hmmmnn? Yet another item on my "ponder that" list.
(Unrelated question: IRL, this is the kind of private conversation that deserves . . . well . . . privacy. But there seems to be no mechanism in Steemit to accommodate that kind of privacy. YouTube has private messaging. Is there a corresponding Steemit tool? Is it the chat room? Take as much time as you need when replying because you are doing a great deal already and mentoring can be very time-consuming. In fact, there are very few who would even bother so I'm sincerely grateful.)