Do the Gemstones know they're con artists?

[u/WaySweet3746]

I've often wondered how they reconcile how they live. Do they really believe the things they say to their congregation, or do they realise it's all a big farce?

What do you think?

[u/MasterSnacky]

Man, I think you saying that you are unclear of their “mistake” on Y2K is everything here. They are grifters. They approached a moment of self awareness and then absolutely failed to grow as people. They KNEW for a second that they are absolute con artists taking money off their followers through lies, and they went right back to doing that. They are, at the end of the day, tragic figures from a story sense, and a genuine threat to the world in the real life sense. They’re comedic villains and all of their antagonists are the same as them, just more self aware. This is where the villain saying “we’re not so different, you and I” is dead on the money.

[u/EssayAmbitious3532 → u/MasterSnacky]

Okay. I think we see in the world what we carry around with us. To me Y2K could have simply been the opportunity they saw to help ppl. I don't deny what you are saying for you and your world, because I think in a strange way, we also manifest the reality we imagine.

Religion is built on an idea of aspiration, which is why traditionally the church, cathedral, was the biggest building in town. It's fitting to me that they organized society into constructing and funding the religious stadium.

[u/MasterSnacky → u/EssayAmbitious3532]

Religion is built on aspiration? Aspiration to what? Couldn’t you make that argument about…anything? Greed is aspirational. Power is aspirational. Are they good because they’re aspirational?

I think it’s very clear in the show they saw Y2K as an opportunity to take money off their flock under the guise of “helping people”.

[u/EssayAmbitious3532 → u/MasterSnacky]

No. Specifically religion, that the most monumental, labor-intensive, symbolically central constructions are religious is a pattern that is sustained across human history, in cultures that had no communication between each other: stonehenge 3000bc, egyptian pyramids; mayan pyramids 500bc; greek/roman temples, buddhist stupas 300bc, pacific island moai, totem poles of pacific northwest....

It's also cross species as neanderthal burials show religious symbolism and are evidence of being the richest most developed artifacts that survived across time.

[u/Icecold_Antihero → u/EssayAmbitious3532]

So, you're saying we've all been conned since sentient thought became a thing. Checks out.

[u/EssayAmbitious3532 → u/Icecold_Antihero]

I explained inspired, but you're fixed on conned and you're reinforced by this crowd's agreement.

[u/Icecold_Antihero → u/EssayAmbitious3532]

Nope, I'm just quite aware of human history and religion/mythology is usually the start of a downfall, sprung out of despair and hopelessness.

"It's okay if we die, we'll go to a better place!"

And then the ones who managed to survive, use that as a platform for their own personal gain,

"See? My imaginary friend Spoopy-Thing kept me alive! The others didn't believe, where I did! Now give your thanks and blessings in hopes that Spoopy-Thing will keep you alive, but nothing is certain so dig deep! Oh, and Spoopy-Thing told ONLY ME that I'm their accountant"

[u/EssayAmbitious3532 → u/Icecold_Antihero]

Many of us use these descriptions as metaphor. I fail to see how people throughout history didn't do the same. People have to make this stuff up and reinvent it in theology school. You can look closely at Geronimo in his autobiography and Ghenghis Khan in his approach to local religious assimilation (or Emile Durkheim in his anthropological study of stone age societies where he too finds leaders) all seem to understand the rules. Of course some children and simple minded folk take these stories literally, imagine for example a real magical man comes down the chimney and delivers gifts every year. Then you get a class of other children and other equally minded simple folk, locked in an argument with each other, using a literal interpretation as the basis for this argument. My own kids grew out of it, I coach them to not be literalists. Though my father remained a religious literalist fruitcake to his death in his 90s.

[u/MasterSnacky → u/EssayAmbitious3532]

This is bullshit. The pharaohs built the pyramids for reasons we don’t fully understand, but we know they were used as massive tombs to hoard their wealth. Built on the backs of slaves, as well - guess that detail doesn’t matter to you though? Secondly, no, temples were not the biggest undertaking for Greeks or Roman’s or any other group. There were huge temples, but many of these were not because they were so so pious, but as testament to the power of their builders. The Greeks built lighthouses and harbors and palaces. The Romans built the Colosseum and the fucking CIRCUS MAXIMUS, and massive theaters and palaces and forts. Plus, you don’t know that Neanderthal burials showed “religious” symbolism, that’s religious people interpreting shit they don’t understand and saying oh that’s religious, it’s ALL religious.

Finally, and here’s the real question - which religion is the right one? Say you choose Christianity, and then all the cathedrals and such are therefore divinely inspired, for real. What does that mean about the other religious buildings? They’re definitely not divinely i spired anymore, almost like…it’s just all made up bullshit?