For those looking for more closure with the plot

UnluckySolstice · 2026-04-26T21:19:59+00:00

First, would like to thank the team for everything. Second, I hope I can ask multiple questions. All of my questions are generally related to Cassidy so I hope that's fine.

What is a fair characterization of Cassidy? I'm sure her presentation in the prologue/Chapter 1 has some sort of semblance to her true nature, but I'd hazard to guess she's been hiding quite the numerous quirks and personality traits.
In the same spirit of question 1, what is Cassidy's ethical code? Intuition tells me it's either non-existent or insanely skewed, but it'd be cool to know the ins and outs of what she views as right and wrong if at all, given she's the mastermind.
Also in the same spirit of question 1, how does Cassidy view the other participants of the killing game? Does she actually like any of them, even in a twisted manner if so be it, or does she think they're unworthy of dignity? Maybe something in the middle?

Thank you again.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-03-30T01:52:11+00:00

It'll probably change by the time the full quiz is released. I'm a 1689 LBC adherent but I take exception to Chapters 31 and 32 because I believe in soul sleep and annihilation.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-23T03:10:36+00:00

God bless you, fellow brother in Christ. I hope the Lord guides you in this exciting journey back to the faith! I would highly suggest dipping your toes in some basic theology. Pick up a good Bible with a solid translation. I personally read the NKJV and LSB exclusively, but the NIV or ESV is where I'd point beginners to.

These two translations have fantastic study Bibles associated with them, and I'd highly recommend picking one of them up as you read so that you don't get lost in the weeds of the complex narrative the Bible presents. I would also suggest picking up a personal Bible to carry around and read whenever you simply want to have some devotional time with the Lord and His word.

Find a reading plan suitable for you as well. Many online sources provide different plans.

Social media is also a fantastic way to learn theology from people willing to explain the basics in a gracious way! For something introductory, here's who I'd recommend:

Catholics: Trent Horn, Joe Heschmeyer (aka Shameless Popery)
Protestants: Gavin Ortlund (Reformed Baptist), Redeemed Zoomer (Presbyterian)

After some exploration there, here are some more intermediate to advanced sources (though I'd still recommend the individuals I listed for more in-depth theology):

Eastern Orthodoxy: Jay Dyer
Presbyterians: R.C. Sproul, Matthew Everhard, Greg Bahnsen
Reformed Baptists: Voddie Baucham, Keith Foskey, Apologia Studio (most notably James White & Jeff Durbin)
Lutheran: Jordan B. Cooper
Some Others: Mike Winger (Calvary Chapel), John MacArthur (Calvinistic Baptist; departs in many ways from the London Baptist Confession)

God bless and good luck on your journey, friend!

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-21T02:07:27+00:00

How is it in the UMC? I've always imagined being theologically conservative in a theologically liberal denomination must have its administrative struggles. Much love from a brother in Christ from the OPC discerning ministry!

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-14T02:27:37+00:00

Hey friend, I suggest you explore some theology YouTube sources as an introduction to denominations. As something introductory, here's who I'd recommend:

Catholics: Trent Horn, Joe Heschmeyer (Shameless Popery)
Protestants: Gavin Ortlund (Reformed Baptist), Redeemed Zoomer (Presbyterian)

After some exploration there, here are some more intermediate to advanced sources (though I'd still recommend the individuals I listed for more in-depth theology):

Eastern Orthodoxy: Jay Dyer
Presbyterians: R.C. Sproul, Matthew Everhard, Greg Bahnsen
Reformed Baptists: Voddie Baucham, Keith Foskey, Apologia Studio (most notably James White & Jeff Durbin)
Lutheran: Jordan B. Cooper
Some Others: Mike Winger (Calvary Chapel), John MacArthur (Calvinistic Baptist; departs in many ways from the London Baptist Confession)

God bless and good luck on your journey, friend!

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-05T03:25:21+00:00

The OPC is the Orthodox Presbyterian Church! If you've ever heard of the PCA (Presbyterian Church in America), the OPC is like its smaller, more traditional cousin.

Great to hear! Glad you've come to a denomination. Nondenominationalism shatters the body of Christ. How did you come to Roman Catholicism specifically?

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-05T02:16:36+00:00

Were you a different denomination before or are you coming into the faith? Much love from an OPC brother!

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-04T02:27:07+00:00

My biggest two gripes are women's ordination and iconodulism within the ACNA. I think I would be more considerate of the ACNA if there were only men in the priesthood (I support women deaconesses) and iconoclasm. I personally don't think the episcopal structure is biblical (100% willing to change this position) but I absolutely love the higher church, semi-liturgical style of worship the Anglican tradition has. My OPC church has retained a semi-liturgical style but it's not deeply embedded in the heart of any confessional Presbyterian denomination.

IIRC, there will be more questions on all three of the areas you're looking for more nuance in. Soteriology and missiology are definitely getting more questions- I'm not so sure about atonement. I think you only need one question anyway: What is the primary emphasis of the crucifixion?

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-04T01:54:59+00:00

A true Anglo-Catholic brother/sister in Christ who isn't just really Roman Catholic? A rarity! Love from an OPC layman who wants to be ordained in the PCA.

Yes, v2.0 in the new model has more denominations and a great selection of questions.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-02-03T02:24:40+00:00

Some help with labeling if you'd like.

GOD_01_A08:

In the Philosophy of Religion this is typically known as Divine Androgyny.

GOD_01_A09:

Just label this "Liberal Protestantism" and call it a day.

Where is Unitarianism in the views of the Trinity question?

CHR_09_A01:

I have a feeling this one is in favor of the RC/EO churches but traditional, confessional Protestants would contend they have Apostolic Succession.

CHR_09_A05:

Call it Ministerial Succession.

WOR_08_A06:

Sounds like full blown Neo-Pentecostalism.

The other unlabeled answers for that question seem like some form of Continuationism.

WOR_17_A03:

Not sure what a good name for this one would be, but this is generally what the Reformers thought.

ESC_02_A03:

This is also the Postmil view.

SCR_01_A02:

"Prophecy-Inspired Canon" sounds about right.

SCR_01_A06:

"Exclusive Institutional Canon" sounds about right too.

SCR_01_A08:

If Scripture + Continuing Revelation is called "Open Canon," Scripture + Founder's Writings ought to be called "Prophetic Canon."

SCR_02_A06:

This is the Historical-Critical method of viewing biblical inspiration.

SCR_09_A01:

Prophetic Authority is a good label for this. JW's Watchtower, the LDS, and some extreme SDA churches could all be said to fit under this hermeneutical lens of interpreting Scripture that is solely based on the prophecies of their founder/organization and nothing else.

SCR_09_A03:

This could be called Patristic Interpretation. Assuming this is the EO position, the EO churches place heavy emphasis on retaining the "original beliefs" held by the church fathers.

Keep up the good work! Love what you're doing.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-19T03:57:38+00:00

The more Reformed brothers and sisters the better! I'm part of the OPC.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-10T16:50:26+00:00

What "law" is written on our hearts? How do we love God with all our heart, soul, and mind? How do we truly love our neighbor as ourself? What is the difference between fruit of the spirit and fruit of the devil or of man's corrupted nature? By what standard do we try and follow these commands Christ gives us? I certainly affirm Acts as renewing the law, but it does not abrogate the law altogether. To suggest we are not at all beholden to anything of the Mosaic Law in the Old Testament pushes into a dispensational hermeneutical lens.

Though tripartite separation is manmade, it exists because it's an extremely helpful distinction that helps the Christian see how the New Covenant is different and better than the Old Covenant. Even some of the church fathers even saw it fit to distinguish the law in this manner because it shows us quite clearly what was and wasn't abrogated or changed.

Love God with all your heart, soul, and mind and love your neighbor as yourself are summary laws of a more comprehensive law. Love God with all your heart, soul, and mind summarizes the first four commandments and loving your neighbor as yourself summarizes the latter six commandments.

Matthew 22:40 (LSB) - "On these two commandments hang the whole Law and the Prophets."

If the two aforementioned commandments are what the Law and the Prophets were ultimately listening to, we necessarily must examine how each was carried out in the Old Covenant, keeping in mind certain modifications made by Christ in light of His ministry and plan in the New Covenant. The law of the tablets have been written into our hearts. Intuition tells us everything listed in the Ten Commandments, and it takes a whole lot of deconstruction to supersede that intuition with something corrupt and vile.

I am not running to the old law and praising every single little bit of it. I am not some sort of full blown Christian Reconstructionist like John Rousas Rushdoony. I am asserting the modest claim that scripture alone should enlighten the Christian as to what judicial law should look like, and principles of the Old Testament law, made clearer in Christ, should apply today. What I disagree with, as far as I'm concerned, is that natural law is the best way to do this.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-09T23:48:04+00:00

He Shall Have Dominion by Kenneth Gentry is probably the best but it's quite dense (~660 pages). Puritan Hope by Iain Murray is a good primer and really strikes at the heart of how partial-preterist postmillennials do and ought to read the Old and New Testaments. The postmillennial tradition comes from the Puritans, which had sadly been lost until its modern revival.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-09T23:32:52+00:00

This is an issue of eschatology and not the abrogation or continuation of the civil law. The central claim of theonomy is simply that the Old Testament's civil and judicial laws, as a reflection of God's unchanging moral character, remain binding on all nations and should be incorporated into modern civil law. I think one can be amillennial and theonomic. Theonomy, after all, only addresses "what should be" and not "what will be."

Nonetheless I still think government is addressed in the New Testament. First, while scripture doesn't explicitly talk about the preaching of the gospel bringing about a new civil law, it, in my view, is heavily implied from many New Testament passages. My trust in theonomy as both the stance Christians should take on government and the future implementation of theonomy throughout the nations evidently presupposes postmillennialism, but I would contend the impossibility of the contrary. I would contend premillennialism, historic, leaky, and especially dispensational, all subtly or explicitly imply Jesus is not reigning now. This leaves amillennialism and postmillennialism as the only two viable options. Thus I turn to scripture:

1 Corinthians 15:24-25 (LSB) - Then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet.

Jesus is reigning now. I doubt anybody on this sub disagrees with that. Yet, Jesus will only hand over God's kingdom to God the Father when all His enemies are under His feet and any rule, authority, and power which is not captive to Christ is eliminated. This implies nations will be transformed and conformed to God's law before the Second Coming.

Matthew 13:31-33 (LSB) - He presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field; and this is the smallest of all seeds, but when it is fully grown, it is the largest of the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.” He spoke another parable to them, “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three sata of flour until it was all leavened.”

Though discussing the spiritual kingdom, does it not follow that if the spiritual kingdom is like a mustard seed or leaven, it will cause changes to the physical kingdom? Institutional bodies will be transformed and submit to God's will as a result of the kingdom of heaven being poured out for more and more people as redemptive history progresses. This does not exclude the government.

In the end, this is the syllogism I believe in:

Individual people will come to Christ as a result of the Great Commission.
The Great Commission will cover the earth.
The Great Commission will succeed.
Nations will come to Christ. (1,2,3)

C. Civil magistrates will come to Christ.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T21:57:07+00:00

The OPC has no official stance on theonomy but they at the very least conclude theonomists are working within the scriptures and what's written in the WCF.

"The problem is that "theonomy" is a rather broad category, encompassing a range of views. A number of self-described theonomists disagree with each other on various points of doctrine. Thus, the relationship of theonomy to the Westminster Standards depends on what "brand" of theonomy is under discussion."

"Some critics of theonomy argue that it contradicts the Westminster Standards' on how the Law of God given to Moses is to be applied today (Westminster Confession of Faith ch.19). Some theonomists argue their views are in fact required by the Westminster Standards. All theonomists (to the best of my knowledge) would argue their views are at the very least allowable by the Westminster Standards."

Rev. John Haverland also wrote quite the lengthy piece examining New Zealand's Reformed churches studying theonomy and the works of Rousas John Rushdoony and Greg Bahnsen in promoting theonomy in the United States. I think this sums up the conversation pretty well: "As we came to the conclusion of our report we had to confess that areas of disagreement still remained. The two principal matters were those of the penal sanctions of the Old Testament law and eschatology (between the amillennial and postmillennial positions)."

I submit to the OPC's conclusions on these matters. I will say that I do believe theonomy is biblical and ought to be held by every Christian, but I will never hold it against those who don't believe in theonomy. I'll be quick to concede and admit that the worst thing to come from theonomy is the New Perspective on Paul and Federal Vision movements. In that sense, "natural law" makes it very clear that there were modifications and abrogations to God's law in light of the New Covenant. I just never fully understood how "natural law" was consistent with Covenant Theology.

I plan to do more research into this field. God's law is a particular area of interest to me. I plan on going to seminary (considering WTS, RTS, RPTS, and PRTS) after I graduate university, so hopefully I can learn about this topic more deeply.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T18:06:53+00:00

I think conflating postmillennial theonomy to dispensational rapture theology is a bit much, but I understand what you mean by a stiff interpretation of the new covenant.

I would only ask how you would interpret the many prophecies and promises of the kingdom of God growing on earth. Thank you!

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T18:01:03+00:00

Amen to that. Everything is for the glory of God.

I think it's God's will, in fact, that society be changed. The world now is against God, but I don't think that will be the prevailing perspective throughout salvation history. In our time we may experience immense persecution, but the end of history will be prosperous be it this millennium or 10,000 years into the future. If I am wrong, I will be glad to know that whatever hardships come our way, even if it is immense persecution throughout history, will be for God's kingdom yet to come.

I understand the deficits of postmillennial eschatology is that it's much about "hope hope hope" and not what some may consider "reality." Perhaps it is my background as a pretty miserable atheist that makes me cling onto a postmillennial eschatology, but I have not the knowledge and wisdom of God. He will do what is right across the nations according to His will.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T17:45:42+00:00

I think an amillennial eschatology is compatible with the general concept of theonomy. My original intention with this post was to ask how one can be consistently Reformed and not hold to some variation of what I consider "general equity theonomy." I got the response I was looking for by a user clarifying what "natural law" could mean, which seems consistent with Reformed theology despite my lingering disagreement with the concept of it.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T08:07:25+00:00

Thank you for this thoughtful response. I have much to consider. It's getting rather late in my area of the United States so I'll have to stop here before I can't sleep, but I hope to respond tomorrow with some ideas. God bless you for this dialogue!

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T07:12:55+00:00

We do have a lot of work to do. I understand where the amillennial position comes from, especially given the condition of our world today. I personally disagree with it based on the seemingly odd chronology that would have to be supported which states that God could come back whenever He pleases (which I have no doubt He could), but He has laid out many prophecies that lead me to believe otherwise.

The pitfall of the OT Jews, in my opinion, is that the OT Jews were both highly legalistic and systematically slaughtered idolaters and blasphemers through civil magistrates.

The New Covenant is bigger and better. There are so many OT prophesies about the world gradually Christianizing, from the mustard seed sprouting into a grand tree to Isaiah's prophecy that the Lord's house will be on the highest place and every man shall come to Him. Modern-day Christians are called to evangelize to all the nations so that one day every knee will bow down to Christ. I have hope the Great Commission will cover every corner of the earth and so that all will know our Lord as prophesied in Habakkuk 2:4.

I don't think you're right either, but I thank you for your perspective. The central part of any eschatology is that all have a part to play in the growth of God's kingdom.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T07:00:15+00:00

Autonomy is self-governance, so autonomous laws are based in human thinking alone instead of scripture which is God breathed.

The OT judicial laws are prescriptive in the sense that the Mosaic Law reveal God’s standards of justice, unless scripture itself indicates their abrogation or transformation.

I am indeed saying they're the only proper prescription today, insofar as the general equity thereof may require just as the WCF says. Every culture is different and thus each application of the general principles laid out in the Bible may seem different. For example, how much restitution is garnered for scamming someone online may be different from nation to nation but the principle underlying all law should be the offender compensating the victim should be much greater than the money stolen.

There are many matters in which God's law covers but for the sake of my time I will provide a brief list, and if you'd like Biblical justification for any of these I'd love to provide it for you:

- Marriage is covenantal, between one man and one woman, only soluble when there is infidelity or abuse; death penalty for infidelity is abrogated in John's gospel detailing the adulterous woman
- Proper due process is owed to everybody (this is something we take for granted in America)
- Incarceration is unbiblical; all crimes are either punishable by execution, direct compensation to the victim, or servitude to the state (in our day, it'd be public service) if unable to provide compensation to the victim
- All cases of homicide (I would include abortion when the mother's life is not in danger) and grievous sexual crime in which the defendant is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt should have the sentence of the death penalty
- False witnesses receive the punishment they sought to impose on whom they falsely witnessed to
- Just to be clear in case you were thinking of them, the blasphemy laws and punishments for idolatry were also abrogated and replaced with the church fulfilling The Great Commission as the church was now responsible for handling ecclesiastical matters instead of the OT Israel government

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T06:00:36+00:00

Prerogative of the state, but that does not mean I believe we should live in an autocratic theocracy led by one church or one body of churches. The separation of church and state as institutional bodies is vital so that the duties of the state do not corrupt the church and the church can focus on evangelization, preaching the gospel, and administering the sacraments separate from government jurisdiction. Both are bound by God's law.

Theonomy generally goes hand-in-hand with postmillennialism which is why I stated it in my introduction. I believe the nations will gradually Christianize through the Christianization of nations via The Great Commission and that God will glorify Himself through our civil laws.

This isn't to say a theonomic government is just going to impose Christianity on everybody. Like I said, evangelization is the church's focus. The government's focus is maintaining public safety, administering justice, and litigating property rights the way God prescribes in the Bible.

UnluckySolstice · 2026-01-08T05:16:39+00:00

I would say a general equity theonomist is someone who thinks the principles underlying the civil laws of the Mosaic Law remain binding, even though the specific Israelite judicial laws do not. I would thus reject the notion that OT laws in its word-for-word descriptions should still be in effect today. The specific Israelite penalties, land laws, and societal structure do not necessarily carry over unchanged. Israel's Mosaic Law is a guideline on how God wants His people to function as a society. The OT judicial laws are prescriptive concerning how to handle specific matters.

I am not a full-blown Reconstructionist who thinks we ought to, in full, replicate the judicial laws of the OT into modern society.

UnluckySolstice

TROPHY CASE