I always thought bonsai meant little tree. 10 feet tall isn’t little.
Edit: I looked it up.
Bonsai defined The word “Bon-sai” (often misspelled as bonzai or banzai) is a Japanese term which, literally translated, means “planted in a container”.
I’m not an expert in the topic, but it’s remarkable how this particular idea has really taken on life of its own. For anyone interested in apocalyptic literature or weird angels, here’s a high level explanation.
So a lot of apocalyptic imagery isn’t really meant to be taken literally. They represent ideas that were meant to be understood by the recipients.
So the faces of the four creatures represent the sum of all creation.
Covered in eyes implies that God (and his agents) are all seeing.
The wings imply they can move swiftly and be present wherever needed.
Taken together, these images tell us that God has authority over all creation, can see injustice and act swiftly when necessary.
These are just theorized examples, because we can’t be 100% sure what the original intent was. The point is that the audience almost certainly understood and received it as such.
This is also true for Revelation, a book rich in apocalyptic imagery, most of which we can make more accurate guesses. For instance, the beast referenced by 666 is most likely Nero Caesar. This theory is supported because there are alternative, ancient versions which use 616.
Here’s how the gematria (Hebrew numbering system) supports this theory:
Nero Caesar, in Hebrew, can be transliterated from Greek as נרון קסר (Neron Kesar). Hebrew, unlike English, does not have separate numerical digits, so each letter also serves as a number. Here’s how the calculation works:
If you start with Latin rather than the Greek, Nero’s name is transliterated as נרו קסר (Nero Kesar) in Hebrew, omitting the final ‘n’ (נ) found in “Neron”. The calculation would be as follows:
There you go. Apocalyptic imagery is really weird, but it is coded with intent. This can be difficult as it tends to appeal to the red-stringers in all of us. Good literature, like good science, should never seek to validate assumptions, but to follow the text and apply Occam’s Razor liberally.
Humans are so weird. how did this practice come about i wonder, did someone think ‘i want my child’s head to be long’ for reasons and did the cloth thing or did they go ‘I wonder what happens if i were to wrap this cloth around my baby’s head for years’
This is pretty fucking weird, but I can sort of see how a weird beauty ideal becomes the norm, and at least having a long skull isn’t automatically an impairment. Meanwhile the old Chinese bound the feet of their women, super painful and making them completely useless because they simply can’t walk or stand and have to be carried everywhere. Also a beauty ideal, but even more weird in my opinion because it’s straight up crippling
bewowed
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.