[Wilshire]

And cue Kellhus getting skewed in Momemn while the Ordeal dies at Dagliash.

That would be poetic at least. Much better than him sacrificing himself to somehow save the Ordeal at Dagliash, though if he did that then they would almost certainly fail at Golgotterath which would be deliciously ironic. Either way.

[Callan S.]

The god's can't see Mog?  Maybe they just can't believe in him.

There might be alot to it within the notion of what these god thingies can and can't believe themselves.

[locke]

I'm requoting this cause I think the Augustine and Aquinas should go together, no-god and god, if you will...

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/09/22/evils-shadowy-existence-realclearreligion-9-14/

Digging deeper than many reflections on the recent film about Hannah Arendt and her book Eichmann in Jerusalem, Fr. Robert Barron reminds us of Arendt’s debt to St. Augustine:

The young Hannah Arendt had written her doctoral dissertation under the great German philosopher Karl Jaspers, and the topic of her work was the concept of love in the writings of Saint Augustine. One of the most significant intellectual breakthroughs of Augustine’s life was the insight that evil is not something substantial, but rather a type of non-being, a lack of some perfection that ought to be present. Thus, a cancer is evil in the measure that it compromises the proper functioning of a bodily organ, and a sin is evil in the measure that it represents a distortion or twisting of a rightly functioning will. Accordingly, evil does not stand over and against the good as a kind of co-equal metaphysical force, as the Manichees would have it. Rather, it is invariably parasitic upon the good, existing only as a sort of shadow.

J.R.R. Tolkien gave visual expression to this Augustinian notion in his portrayal of the Nazgul in The Lord of the Rings. Those terrible and terrifying threats, flying through the air on fearsome beasts, are revealed, once their capes and hoods are pulled away, to be precisely nothing, emptiness. And this is exactly why, to return to Arendt’s description, evil can never be radical. It can never sink down into the roots of being; it can never stand on its own; it has no integrity, no real depth or substance. To be sure, it can be extreme and it can, as Arendt’s image suggests, spread far and wide, doing enormous damage. But it can never truly be.

Andrew sullivan strikes again, this was linked and quoted on his blog today:
http://www.realclearreligion.org/articles/2013/10/31/atheists_dont_get_god.html

[T]he new atheists hold that God is some being in the world, the maximum instance, if you want, of the category of “being.” But this is precisely what Aquinas and serious thinkers in all of the great theistic traditions hold that God is not. Thomas explicitly states that God is not in any genus, including that most generic genus of all, namely being. He is not one thing or individual — however supreme — among many. Rather, God is, in Aquinas’s pithy Latin phrase, esse ipsum subsistens, the sheer act of being itself.

It might be helpful here to distinguish God from the gods. For the ancient Greeks and Romans, for example, the gods were exalted, immortal, and especially powerful versions of ordinary human beings. They were, if you will, quantitatively but not qualitatively different from regular people. They were impressive denizens of the natural world, but they were not, strictly speaking, supernatural. But God is not a supreme item within the universe or alongside of it; rather, God is the sheer ocean of being from whose fullness the universe in its entirety exists.

It is absolutely right to say that the advance of the modern physical sciences has eliminated the gods. Having explored the depths of the oceans and the tops of the mountains and even the skies that surround the planet, we have not encountered any of these supreme beings. Furthermore, the myriad natural causes, uncovered by physics, chemistry, biology, etc. are more than sufficient to explain any of the phenomena within the natural realm. But the physical sciences, no matter how advanced they might become, can never eliminate God, for God is not a being within the natural order. Instead, he is the reason why there is that nexus of conditioned causes that we call nature — at all.

[Callan S.]

Does he explain much how something is outside the natural order, yet he knows so very much about it anyway?

[Royce]

Does he explain much how something is outside the natural order, yet he knows so very much about it anyway?

No need to explain, call it "god" and shut up. I guess that is what he is saying.

[Wic]

The God-of-the-Ever-Shrinking-Gap.  Not quite the cause, but the cause of cause.

Perfectly reasonable.

[Madness]

Lol - I like Ever-Receding-Gap for some reason...

Also, you're going to have a hard time explaining to me how Kellhus/Absolute/God of Gods/No-God could be the cause of causes. Pretty big deal philosophically, which I think you know - I look forward to your treatise .

[Triskele]

This is probably nothing, but I noticed that Inralatus is described a couple of times as being hunched over like an ape kind of like the description of the silhouette in the vision that Kellhus has.  And he talks about oblivion a bit...the No-God is elsewhere described as oblivion.  But like I said, probably nothing.

[Callan S.]

I wonder how the bit about the consult making themselves slaves to better take over the world - how that ties in to the no god? The consult worships the no god, enough to be beholden to it somehow? It doesn't exactly seem like it would enact any commands. Though I guess being under the control of something that exerts no control efforts is still being under it's control.

[Wilshire]

From that it kind of just sounds like they are creating a new Outside, where the No-God is the only God, where all of the hundred cannot get them.

[Garet Jax]

From that it kind of just sounds like they are creating a new Outside, where the No-God is the only God, where all of the hundred cannot get them.

This.

[Madness]

Wha ?

[Wilshire]

The idea came to me again when Callan mentioned that the inchoroi are themselves slaves. its the same basic thing that the Yater-cult said - that they are slaves to their God in life and in death. So, pretty much the Inchoroi are creating their own "god", turning the world into a huge topos, thus allow the outside to leak through, but since there is already a "god" who has dominion over it, the 100 will be shut out...
Most of these thoughts have been stated elsewhere. Maybe on that thread about the Void/Outside.

Was that your questions?

[Madness]

Yeap. Thank you.

[Wilshire]

Looking at the end of TTT, just before Cnaiur kills Moenghus.

"Nayu … You have returned to me ...."
...
“Just as I knew you would.”

This is Moenghus speaking. Sounds a lot like The Prophesy. Nayu sounds a lot like Celmomas' son's name.

Suddenly Cnaiür could feel it: the miles of earth heaped above them, the clawing inversion of ground. He had come too far. He had crawled too deep.

Italics from text.
Wonder why the italics. Again the emphasis on ground, and warning those that would dig too deep...

His eyes leaden with ardour, he murmured, “I wander trackless ground.” Moënghus gasped, jerked, and spasmed as Cnaiür rolled the Chorae across his cheek. White light flared from his gouged sockets. For an instant, Cnaiür thought, it seemed the God watched him through a man’s skull.
What do you see?
But then his lover fell away, burning as he must, such was the force of what had possessed them.

Italics from text.
Its basically quoting the No-God...

One last thought too many … See! See! He cackled with grief.

The anguished cries of a crazy man pushed too far, or the beginning stages of the No-God being born again?

Crackpot: The Consult have been grooming Cnaiur to become the next No-God, this was just one more cog in the wheel.