Testing, testing. This is my first week with iJournal, which is a poor shadow of my favored xJournal, but as xJournal does not support DW, I have to try something else.

I FINALLY got a set of beads that I purchased from Etsy several weeks ago (okay, they were really actually pretty fast in shipping, but I wanted my new shiny objects NOW NOW NOW). They are lovely and I intend to make some very nice necklaces out of them with the help of a friend.

Everyone is named Adam.

So, reading and writing one last paper (and oh, internet, why does it seem like everyone else is already done with finals? Are you trying to make me sad?)

This paper is on Irenaeus, for whom one of the major things that Christ accomplished in the Incarnation is the recapitulation of all things, summing creation from beginning to end in one person, and perfecting it. This is particularly egregious in his thoughts on the role of Christ as that of a "second Adam," who was supposed to come and redeem the humanity by doing the opposite of the first Adam, e.g. being obedient to die on the cross (a tree) while Adam had been disobedient in regards to not eating the forbidden fruit from a tree.

You know how things come in threes? I'm reading about Christ as a Second Adam, and taking a break, I poke around tvtropes, and I find something that was already booted around in my brain- Mary Shelley called Frankenstein's monster (who is not named Frankenstein, unless you're in movie or a later work where he is named Frankenstein) Adam. As in, a second Adam.

So that's Second Adam number two. And it's a coincidence, but it makes me wonder, honestly, if she had known about Irenaeus' writings. It wouldn't be impossible- Against Heresies was in publication for centuries. More likely, given the story, she just borrowed it from Adam #1, who also had a rather famous falling out with his creator, and used that.

And then I'm popping around, trying to get my fix of Harry/Marcone before Yuletide opens and lets out the new crop (30 requests in The Dresden Files bookverse alone! Woohoo!), and I revisited The Dresden Omens, by shiplizard, which features a crossover between The Dresden Files and Good Omens.

The Antichrist was named Adam, too, in Good Omens.

Just let that sink in. Three Second Adams. Three. Really? Really? People, a meaningful name is a wonderful thing, but there are limits to all good things.

Actually, this kind of makes me want to write a paper on the use of religiously-themed names as a method of characterization/ literary heritage, but that would be kind of insane as I have yet to finish the first paper. But enough time wasting, back to work.