To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
• 
Some interesting stuff here! Can’t wait for the issue!
Looks great. I love Lee’s answer to Jude.
Here’s a link.
Well, that was interesting and entertaining.
It’s funny how the comments page for that Newsarama article already has way to many people taking it seriously. Some of them seem to think PAD is trying to start a real religious movement. It’s amazing how much trouble people have taking something as a story and an interesting idea.
Couldn’t…resist…link…
First of all, WOW. That’s the first fresh perspective on God I’ve heard in ages. Second, you’re dámņ right it’s going to pìšš øff a lot of people. Good! That’s always the benchmark of excellent writing – eliciting a strong reaction, one way or another.
I know you’re going to get a lot of personal attacks in your general direction, Peter, and I know you can handle them, but just for a little moral support – remember that all views and philosophies contained within this comic do not necessarily reflect the views of the writer. 😉 Liandra isn’t exactly going to be God’s #1 cheerleader, considering all that went down between them. I don’t even think she cares one way or another whether she’s forgiven, considering her reaction to the thought in #2. God is kind of like her jerk-ášš ex-boyfriend right at the moment, and never mind the fact that he was only doling out consequences for misbehavior.
Then again, maybe it’s just that Liandra isn’t ready to BE forgiven. *shrug* I suppose I’ll have to wait and see…
This really has the potential to piss people off. Shame DC deigned to not carry FA anymore. The resulting controversy is guarenteed to be an advertising godsend.
“Some of them seem to think PAD is trying to start a real religious movement.”
If that’s the case….sign me up. Think about it Peter…you can make millions off of poor gulible shmoes like me…
Well, that was pretty gøddámņ fantastic.
Hello my name is james chan and I writer for a small website, Blazedent.com. I read on the Midtown Comics website that you will be at the comic book store in April. I was wondering if I would be able to conduct a small interview with you during that time. It won’t take too long and it would really help out the website. Please get back to me and let me know what you think. Please email me at the address I put in or lblgproductions@gmail.com
Thank you for your time.
James chan
lblgproductions@gmail.com
jam6534@hotmail.com
Hmm. Interesting.
No, I am not pìššëd øff. Not even remotely angry. I definitely reject it as a viable answer in the real world, but you actually have me intrigued where you would go with it in the comic book universe of Fallen Angel. There are so many implications that would really matter if this theory was even remotely true. I wonder if you will truly follow through on them. If you do, this would be an interesting (but depressing) series.
It does bring up two issues: Man and worship.
Regarding man, sin, and the current state of the world, I frankly see redemption as God’s crowning achievement. The story is not yet done. Rather than things spinning out of control, I believe that things are coming together. The thing is theology is not as simple as a comic book world. When you do offer mankind the ability to make choices, then there are consequences. But taken from a truly eternal perspective, far more is going on then could ever be imagined in any fictional work.
In Christian theology, God is a triune person, and he has created us in his image. As a trinity, he himself is perpetual replationship. He does not need us. He does not need our love. But if he created us with true personhood in his own image, then it was impossible to create us without the potential that we would choose to do evil. He offers us the opportunity to join in relationship with him, but we have the freedom to reject it. Since God (as portrayed in the Bible) is the purest, most holy, most righteous, most just being in existence, to reject him is to turn to evil.
Regarding worship, you are right, God does not “need” our worship. But you are confusing “adoration” for recognition of supreme beauty. Assume, for a second, that there truly is someone / something that is truly the most beautiful, perfect, loving, good being in existence. To deliberately choose to reject its beauty is to cut yourself off from the best, purest source of beauty. Worship of God (in Christian theology) is not because he needs it, but because to do anything else is like drinking sea water rather than fresh spring water. It does not satisfy and is ultimately deadly.
Bottom line, there is a difference between the creator and the creation. We are not equal. We never can be. But that is why I am actually intrigued by this twist, because it would be interesting to see you attempt to bridge that gap. It would be interesting to see how you ground morality in something other than a being who is totally pure, just, righteous, good, etc. I suggest it cannot be done. Either you create a concept (like Plato did) that is the ultimate reality (which is different than the Christian concept where God who is a person is ultimate reality), or you end up saying there is no one absolute standard for truth, goodness, etc. There is no other option.
Iowa Jim
PAD,
regarding your comment over at Newsarama as to whether anyone has ever come up with this explanation before, I’ve not seen any, myself. The closest thing I can think of (and this is looking at the issue of God’s involvement in mortal affairs from a completely different perspective) is in the final book of Piers Anthony’s _Incarnations of Immortality_ series, called _And Eternity_. The other Incarnations decide that the Incarnation of Good (AKA God) has abandoned His office because He’s been contemplating His Almighty naval (figuratively speaking) for millennia. So they boot Him out and replace Him with someone new.
But as to the specific angle you’ve taken, with the specific reasons God gave (or reasons Lee _said_ God gave) I’m pretty sure you got there first. One question, though. If God didn’t want to be bothered with prayers and worship and all that, why the whole deal with the burning bush? Unless of course, in the Fallen Angel-verse, Moses made that up. Or, for that matter, why have guardian angels? Why would God involve himself in Human affairs, directly or indirectly, at all?
I have a feeling Jude’s probably asking those same questions in issue 5. Looking forward to seeing what answers, if any, are provided.
Rick
P.S. one other thing, a bit off topic, and I hope you’ll forgive my making this plug here. Tonight (Wednesday) at 7:30 my cousin, Zac, a recent graduate of NYU film school, is showing his short film, “Lucky Sevens” (he directed it) at the Leonard Nimoy Thalia at Broadway and 95th Streets. Here’s a link with more information:
http://www.symphonyspace.org/genres/eventPage.php?genreId=2&eventId=1622
God’s Debris much?
🙂
Wow. Nicely done! However, I can easily picture some of the flack that might be headed your way…
One time, a rather devout person was challenging my morality in a newsgroup simply because I wasn’t of his “Faith”. I explained to him that my view of religion was that it was more or less a “spiritual crutch”. If one hoped to grow spiritually, then just like learning how to live without your parents, you’d have to learn to accept responsibility for your own destiny and not chalk it up to the whims of the grand design of your “Creator of choice”.
You’d think I’d just walked into a PETA meeting holding a freshly-clubbed baby seal.
I don’t see how G-d wanting out – to rest – and wanting us to be masters of our own fates is necessarily depressing.
Maybe him wanting rest, and us not giving it to him, is depressing – for him.
But this theory doesn’t in my mind equate with the world spinning out of control…just that it isn’t under the control of G-d. (Or all the controls have been pre-set by G-d, and he should be able to relax now, but we’re not letting him.) Things can still be coming together, rather than apart.
In the words of the wonderful Arte Johnson, “verrry in-ter-esting”. (And judging from some of the Newsarama posters’ comments, they obviously have not been reading “Lucifer” from DC/Vertigo for the past couple of years, otherwise, Lee’s comments wouldn’t seem so, I don’t know, outrageous.) I’ve been reading Lee’s tale since day one, and am thrilled that it will continue at IDW past #5.
A bit off-topic, though (and probably incredibly presumptuous on my part), but I’d greatly appreciate it if you could pass along to Bill Mumy my sincerest thanks for being able to conclude his “Lost in Space: Voyage to the Bottom of the Soul” story. (Of course, Bill wasn’t alone in the effort, and his partners deserve a great deal of credit, but without Bill, the story would have been much less involving.) It had been just long enough since the story first appeared that the early chapters seemed slightly familiar but not enough to merely skim them, and I think I spent as much time reading the familiar first half of the trade as I did the “new” second half. (And his special tribute to Guy Williams was especially touching.)
Again, sorry for going off-topic, but thanks in advance for passing along this message to Mr Mumy.
If God called his end game Oblivion…. could PAD sue him for copyright infringement?
Well it is certainly interesting and the art is beautiful. And I’m not surprised that the rabbi told PAD “he was reasonably sure he hadn’t heard anyone else come up with it before.”
The thing is that anytime anyone ascribes human behavior to God, ie. he is tired and want to be left alone, that puts a limit on God which defies the definition of God. God has not limitations, human or otherwise so if he does he is not god. Don’t know who Lee is talking about but it’s not God.
Nevertheless, it is intriguing and I’m on board for the whole ride.
Every time Peter writes a comic, Baby Jesus cries.
#5’s revelations are great – I still prefer “St. Elsewhere”‘s take on it (when Howie “Fiscus” Mandel gets shot and ends up touring the afterlife) but Fallen Angel is a close second…
I was on the fence about continuing to buy this series but it looks ike I’ll stay with it to see how it all plays out.
PAD (or anyone else interested) should really hunt down a copy of “Second Coming” and see the same idea played out in reverse.
Also quite interesting as it gives you a bit of insight as to why Russel T. Davies picked Christopher Eccleston to play the lead in “Doctor Who” recently.
Strangely enough I owned a copy before news of the new series of “Doctor Who” came out but didn’t get around to watching it until after I had heard the details on casting, etc. While watching part one of “Second Coming” I kept thinking I just don’t see it. Then the cliffhanger hit and I experienced of those lovely “Doctor Who” type moments and in a flash I think I saw what RTD did.
Given that RTD wrote it certainly helped give it that flavor but CE was the one that nailed it (no pun intended for those that have seen the mini-series).
Every time Peter writes a comic, Baby Jesus cries.
Ok, that was funny. A preacher friend of mine used to always tell his kids that they made baby Jesus cry when they did something bad. Talk about a guilt complex!
Iowa Jim
Not to hijack the thread here but Newsarama is reporting that Marvel has announced Peter David is the writer of the Stephen King “Dark Tower” comic adaptations. Thus I wanna officially congratulate Peter.It’s very cool when you get to work with someone you admire (per your statement in the press release).
Congrats!
Michael
She is pulling the boys chain.
No way this is true
“Some of them seem to think PAD is trying to start a real religious movement.”
PAD is the next L. Ron Hubbard?
Jim, is there a brief explanation for this statement? “But if he created us with true personhood in his own image, then it was impossible to create us without the potential that we would choose to do evil.” I’m not understanding how the second clause relates to the first. Does “true personhood” refer to some form of autonomous sovereignty? And the “in his own image” part is really unrelated to any limitations that might have been imposed on us.
I guess what I’m saying is how do you get that something would have been impossible for God to do. Your statement suggests that, for some reason, it was impossible for God to create humanity without the potential for humanity to commit evil. Which doesn’t follow, because God is capable of all things, including a being that possesses free will, but will not commit acts of evil. I can’t comprehend how that’s possible, but then again, I’m not divine.
At the moment, Fallen Angel is definitely my favourite comic book. The artwork is wonderful and the story is very interesting and thought provoking indeed.
I just had a look at Newsarama: I can understand that point of view. Whenever I am involved in a discussion about “How can God allow something like that?” I am asking what the world, what humanity would be like if God would indeed prevent anything bad happening to people. We would literally be sheep.
God created us in his own image but I think it is obvious that humanity still has a lot to learn. That God might be impatient and getting fed up is not far fetched IMO. When I am watching the news, I definitely get frustrated and fed up sometimes.
Hopefully I will get that issue soon.
Read the preview and for me this explanation kind of works.I mean while still forming and dealing with my own ideas about God and morality at 35 years old this is fairly close to my belief of things.Not so much as God being tired but maybe he is doing other things and figures we are big enough and old enough to be on our own now.
As far as the needing and wanting our prayers,no God doesnt “need ” them but maybe that needs to be told to some of the people of faith I have met in my life ,they seem to feel everything is about
praising and worshipping like he needs his ego stroked constantly.I mean he/she/it is God ….pretty sure he knows who the boss is right?Sorry for the rant having a moment here.Unfortunately the local shop doesnt carry Fallen Angel,is there a subscription possible or do I need to go on a quest for a new shop???
“Some of them seem to think PAD is trying to start a real religious movement.”
PAD is the next L. Ron Hubbard?
No…L. Ron Hubbard really did begin a religious movement. Some people just think PAD is trying to start one. That makes PAD the next Victor Hugo (who was accused of this by some readers of Les Miserables).
PAD is the next L. Ron Hubbard?
PADism? I’m there. Who wouldn’t want to be known as a PADist?
1. I am so not going to debate theology with PAD, or anyone. But I always applaud anyone who tries to raise the issues involved and does so in a mature manner. And I would add that the Passover seder at the Davids must be very interesting.
2. I am reminded of the scene in Holy Grail where God tells King Arthur to stop grovelling.
Hey anybody see the document that is supposed to be on National Geographic Channel about Judas??It looks pretty interesting if it is for real.
Hm, I’m not sure why my previous post was deleted, but I am really curious so I’m going to try again with spoilers and different e-mail and see if this goes through…
I was also a bigger fan of the DC series (for many reasons, not the least of which was pacing and Lopez’s expressive art), but I’m really enjoying the new directions you’re taking this book with IDW. However, I still have two questions that probably will never really be addressed, so I’m going to ask them here:
**** DC-Series Spoilers ****
1) Whatever happened to Lee’s previous baby/pregnancy, the one that caused her to say “Oh, I really didn’t miss this part” as she hurled in the bathroom before the school blew up? Most of the other comments have been explained by Holly, but this one still doesn’t make sense…
2) Does Jude (or Juris, or anyone for that matter) notice that Lee hasn’t aged at all during the nighttime? Or is that eclipsed by the revelations that she’s a fallen angel and everything?
Thanks – looking forward to issue #5!
“Hm, I’m not sure why my previous post was deleted, but I am really curious so I’m going to try again with spoilers and different e-mail and see if this goes through…”
Was it? Okay, that might’ve been my fault. I’ve been deleting entire pages of spam, and it’s possible your comment got caught up in that.
1) Indeed, what DID happen to Lee’s previous pregnancy. Good question. It’s possible she has another child walking around. It’s possible she got pregnant but it never came to term. We’ll see.
2) Jude hasn’t seen her during the daytime. So he’s got no basis for comparison. He might think that she’s rather young looking to have a grown son; then again, since she’s a fallen angel, he might figure such beings are nevertheless immortal.
PAD
I’m not a reader of this series but because of all the buzz, I was gonna wait for the TPB – which I still am but now I’m REALLY interested.
Anyway, knowing nothing about this series beyond the very basics and then reading this preview, the one thing that jupmed to my mind was this:
She isn’t telling him this because she feels some alturistic need to enlighten him. She’s trying to manipulate him and I saw no reason to believe her; in fact, I find her comments immediately suspect. She doesn’t want him to take on the magistration, which he feels is what God wants for him, and is telling him what she thinks he needs to hear to not take it. Whether there is any truth to her comments is irrelevent if she can get what she wants.
Of course that doesn’t lower how interesting her comments are, even though I find the concept limiting. God knows all that is and ever will be and therefore he would know his flock would continue to worship him even if he didn’t want htem to. Plus, adverse condition actually increase people’s propensity to worship, not lessen it. But hey, it’s still whack – love it.
“Of course that doesn’t lower how interesting her comments are, even though I find the concept limiting. God knows all that is and ever will be”
Really. See, I find that philosophy interesting.
For instance (as I wrote in an issue of “Supergirl”), any parent in the world will tell you that if you tell a child specifically not to touch something…they’ll touch it. So if God was all knowing, why did he tell Adam and Eve not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge when any parent in the world would know that it would practically guarantee they would? If he didn’t want them to touch it, why not just wall it off? Or put a moat around it? Or just not have the dámņëd thing there at all? For that matter, if he truly knew everything, then he would have known they would eat of the fruit of knowledge…in which case, why punish them since they had no choice in the matter? Why punish the serpent if He knew that the serpent was going to do it no matter what? Because He had no choice either? He Himself was caught up in the inevitability of His own grand design? Then how does free will track if even God Himself has no free will? And why did he have to ask where Adam and Eve were when they were hiding and ashamed? He knows everything but sucks at hide-and-seek?
And that’s just one example at the beginning.
The mutual concepts of an all-seeing, all-knowing God, a master plan, free will, and punishing those who disobey him simply don’t all belong in the same work. And those who think about it a lot find the Bible dubious for that reason, and those who take religion on faith–which is really the only way one CAN take it–aren’t bothered by it, because faith is the antithesis of reason, so there you go.
PAD
(Re: the April 7th 2:33 PM post)
Wow, PAD – you really are a pretty insightful religious examiner.
Nice one, but it still doesn’t fly with me.
I counter your example by pointing out the obvious – God knew they would eat of it. Perhaps he wanted them to understand the extend of his wrath, to teach them consequences. There are many speculations I could make, all of them a possibility. Personally I’ve concluded every action that God takes is a lesson not entirely evident on its surface. The punishment of the serpent may be a lesson to those who read of his acts as much as it was to the serpent.
Duh, of course Adam and Eve are going to go eat off the tree even if God told them not too and he knew this. What were his motivation for this reverse-psychology, don’t know but why does everyone assume that God never wanted Adam and Eve to know the true nature of knowledge, or evil for that matter, or experience the consequences for those actions? I think it is because for some it is unfathomable that God could be deceitful or want us to experience pain. I rebuke this view by saying simply any and everything that is and was – including every emotion, desire, and motivation we have – comes from God. If you believe he can be loving and angry, he can deceive as well. If God can be vengeful, he can be spiteful. And it begs the question, why give us the capicity to feel regret and sorrow and pain if not to then allow us to experience it?
As with FA’s comments about God, I see her as being deceitful (even enticing the question to the surface so she can make her statements). To put a spin on it, perhaps her statements are God’s indirect way of saying it is time for this particular person to make a different choice in his lifepath as opposed to a generalized sentiment on all of mankind. Or maybe God really does want Man to stop worshipping him. But simply to be left alone so he can sleep the ultimate sleep. That just sounds so “do this cuz I say so”, which as a parent I’m sure you’ve said something simply to get your daughter to stop doing something as opposed to explaining in detail why she should stop doing something and the consequences of he optional actions.
Mind you, I’m not saying it isn’t an interesting viewpoint and it is afterall a comic book not a relgious text which, of course, you wrote. I understand that you need a God that will further the story you want to tell. To clarify, I am not religous, I think that, while and interesting and fulfilling contemplation, understanding God is beyond our comprehension, and I am in no way offended by the story.
I think one of the most interesting things to me was that Lee’s description of God being a tired of things the way they are, wanting oblivion, but continuing on doing things for some, etc., well, kinda reminded me of someone else, i.e. Lee herself.
Sort of a reflection of the boss in a lot of ways, isn’t she? That’s a lot to live up to. Lots of parallels to draw here, very nicely layered, as the better PAD books usually are.
Really enjoyed #4, btw.
In fact, there was something close to this in the James Blish novel “The Day After Judgment,” the sequel to his “Black Easter.” Essentially, the book has Satan occupying God’s throne, after God either died or disappeared. He tells the motley and pathetic humans (who loosened demons without any specific jobs, thus bringing around the Apocalypse) that he hates his new job.
To put it in vernacular (since Blish wrote it in elegant verse), God created the “job position” of God. When God vacated the Throne, even though Satan can be a very stern God to the decimated remains of the human race, he can’t vary too much from the job description or job purpose that God planned. He has to enforce the rules he rebelled against.
Satan concludes by saying that someday, humankind will have reached the wisdom and power to where they can assume the throne of God themselves. And Satan will gladly give up the job, saying basically, “Please take this cup from me!” and “Be careful what you wish for.”