Upcoming new bunny comics i.e. Minna’s next work

[thorny]

lwise, that explanation does seem to make sense; or nearly (how is the returning lamb any different than the first one?).

And -- not sure how to put this -- but maybe Minna thinks her individual experience is so universal that it'll automatically make sense to readers?

[lwise]

lwise, that explanation does seem to make sense; or nearly (how is the returning lamb any different than the first one?).

Its clothes(?) are more elaborate.

And -- not sure how to put this -- but maybe Minna thinks her individual experience is so universal that it'll automatically make sense to readers?

Could be.  Or the comic is really just for herself in a way that ARTD and SSSS were not.

[Dilandu]

And -- not sure how to put this -- but maybe Minna thinks her individual experience is so universal that it'll automatically make sense to readers?

Considering the infamous postscriptum to the bunny comics, I'm afraid, it might be.

[BirchTree]

Iwise, that's a very good interpretation too I think. It seems fitting to her experiences, and I do think she has a tendency to see her own experiences as somewhat universal like when she presented her nihilism in her testimony comic as the 'truth' and being genuinely kind/open as naive with the whole seals vs sharks (I think it was sharks) comparison.

Also, yeah you're right Dilandu, the thin wolf is more tempting the animals than the lamb. Who knows, I might be completely off, that was just what made the most sense to me based on what little we have!

Hopefully it'll become a little clearer when more pages are out. I don't really expect that this comic will end up being a perfect metaphor/presentation for anything biblical, both because that's a fairly tall order for a book that has as many versions as it does interpretations, and because I don't think Minna is well versed enough in her faith to pull that off. But she is at least a decent storyteller, so I hope that it'll at least be broadly consistent as a story with enough touching points to its source material to get what she's trying to say. 

[Dilandu]

Yay, we have a new pages of Lamb-on-Wolves ultraviolence. Well, what did we have here?

* Considering how inept and incompetent Lamb already proves to be, animals are reluctant to follow him (they may also be worried about his tendency to decapitate those he don't like with apparently monomolecular blades). So they decide to follow the gravity, which is actually not so bad idea.

* Lamb, being as weird as usual, went into mountains by itself, create a meadow on the mountain top (generally not a good idea) and started to conspire with talking caterpillar about bringing animals to them. Why did I have a nasty suspicion that the Lamb ultimate goal is to feed his animal followers to caterpillar monsters?

* Then lamb started to send a massive amount of incomprehensible signals by placing pointers on the sky, placing clouds on the West, and creating massive floods. He apparently wanted to signal for animals to follow him to carnivorous caterpillars. Animals quite logically came to opposite conclusion: if the Lamb is capable of such things, but left them to suffer, then it's best to be as far from this werido as possible.

* After failing everyting, Lamb made an clumsy excuse that "well, they just a wrong animals!" and send a swarm of mind controlling pigeons to brainwash the animals.

P.S. Also, I was right, it was a legend. That fox/wolf/dog is telling the bunnies to explain why they are going upstream.

[Jitter]

For crying out loud, it just doesn’t… it doesn’t. I have to wonder about the theology behind the choice to make the lamb decapitate the dissident wolf.

[Dilandu]

For crying out loud, it just doesn’t… it doesn’t. I have to wonder about the theology behind the choice to make the lamb decapitate the dissident wolf.

Well, apparently that "might make right", and that God is always on the side that have technological advantage) So if apes would came with grenade launchers and blow Lamb to smithereenes, they apparently would be doing a very godly thing)

[thorny]

Yeah. My reaction was, whyever would you follow somebody who's reaction to dissension is decapitation? -- Well, maybe out of terror; but even if I did, I'd be plotting to escape first chance I got.

And I wouldn't have taken any of those assorted "signs" as invitations, either. Sun rises over there? OK, so we're going west. Why would it mean we should go east instead? And downhill / downstream usually makes more sense than upstream, if you're lost; or for that matter if you'd like to find a nice lake or ocean beach to live near.

And caterpillars are animals.

And if the lamb is both able to and going to magically change everybody's minds/hearts now, why not just make them the way it wanted them in the first place?

[Jitter]

Thorny, I guess your last question lies in the heart of much questioning of faith. Apparently here agqin the answer is basically Because I wanted to.

We see here that the prologue is a story or legend like suggested earlier. So perhaps we can give the lamb some leeway on the basis of this being a rough cut version. Still, the message fails to fill me with desire to follow the lamb.

[JoB]

I have to wonder about the theology behind the choice to make the lamb decapitate the dissident wolf.

Well, apparently that "might make right"

... I'll have to read up one of those weekends, won't I? :-/

In terms of Christian scripture, "might makes right" sounds downright old-testamentarian, as much as that flies into the face of the supposed allusion to Jesus ...

[Dilandu]

Thorny, I guess your last question lies in the heart of much questioning of faith. Apparently here agqin the answer is basically Because I wanted to.

We see here that the prologue is a story or legend like suggested earlier. So perhaps we can give the lamb some leeway on the basis of this being a rough cut version. Still, the message fails to fill me with desire to follow the lamb.

Just thought about a truly devious plot twist - that Lamb actually symbolize the Devil, who tempted animals with easy path to false salvation, and Wolf actually symbolized Jesus, who died trying to ensure they stay on hard and tedious but right path) THAT would be really interesting)

[Róisín]

As far as I can see, fundamentalist Christian churches, which tend to be run by the same class of rich old conservative white men as are fundamentalist right-wing political parties, tend to be very old testament oriented. The old testament is very focused on ‘power over’, unlike the new testament, which is more about what the Christ actually said in his message to humanity. All that stuff about goodness, mercy, honest dealing, charity to the poor, respect for those who deserve it, and care for those who need it.

Possibly it might be good to read what Jesus actually said, and act on it? Mind you, I am speaking from the perspective of someone who is not a Christian, but who has studied their faith so as to better understand Christians who have married into my family, such as my late stepmother, as well as my present husband, who is an Anglican Christian. My impression is that the new testament was an attempt to mitigate the harshness of the old testament into something that might actually work for humans.

[Dilandu]

Possibly it might be good to read what Jesus actually said, and act on it?

Problem is, evolving as highly specialized tool users, humans are incredibly adept in interpreting anything anyone said to serve their needs. So unless someone follow Jesus words literally (which would be kinda awkward), it would still be open to interpretations.

[Róisín]

Sadly true. Which is why I stick to being a Pagan, which requires me to act in accordance with my conscience, and to take responsibility for the consequences of my actions. Somewhere in the development of fundamentalism the concept of individual free will seems to have become lost.

[Jitter]

Problem is, evolving as highly specialized tool users, humans are incredibly adept in interpreting anything anyone said to serve their needs. So unless someone follow Jesus words literally (which would be kinda awkward), it would still be open to interpretations.

The matter is not made easier by the fact that the Bible actively and directly contradicts itself… Or well, it is easier for the self-serving interpreter.