Zodiark's Codex entry what do we think about it?

[Cleretic]

Sorry for using that 'perfect angel' speech--I know that's loaded language, I just ultimately don't have any other way to describe it; Emet was indeed glossing over the flaws of Amaurot to make them seem more flawless. As I said, their story doesn't get less tragic because they weren't flawless (And I would argue they become more believable in doing so), but that was what he was doing; he only presented what he saw as the positives.

What Emet-Selch categorically lied about:
- ???

Here's the thing: he doesn't lie. He doesn't just straight-up say things that aren't true. (Well, not to us; there was that time he lived for most of a century stealing a Garleans' identity for the purposes of making a totalitarian empire.) I have never said he lies, what I've said is we have to recognize he's selective and manipulative about the truth.

A quick, few-minutes-of-thought shortlist of the things he's dodged that I'd say are actually pretty important:

• The actual nature of Ancient life and society; that whole 'they weren't perfect no-problems angels' thing.
• The fact Zodiark was sacrificed to more than once. (We learned that form Fake Hythlodaeus, who's sort of a rogue agent)
• The nature of said sacrifices RE: how voluntary they were and all that.
• Any mention of any dissent to the Zodiark plan beyond 'and suddenly Hydaelyn happened'. (His description of what Hydaelyn was angling for doesn't seem quite right either, but I'll chalk that up to him not actually knowing.)
• ...in fact, anything at all about the period between Zodiark and Hydaelyn's summonings.
• Just any information whatsoever about how they landed on the Rejoinings as a strategy.
• The Thirteenth, and how they plan to do that.
• How many sacrifices to Zodiark will be made over the course of/following the Rejoining plan.
• The part where we don't get to survive any of those Rejoinings.
• The part where they made primals actively temper, which... y'know, colors things, but I admit isn't as close to the subjects he talks about as the rest.

Again, he doesn't lie about any of this, I think you'll agree; what he does is basically drive the conversation and divulging of information such that he never has to acknowledge the truths that go against the argument and narrative he's building.

And remember: this is even something the characters in the story recognize: the reason we go to Anamnesis is entirely because the Scions recognize that we only got one, heavily curated part of the Ancient story, and we can't just take Emet's word as law.

Venat literally speaks of the Ancients in similarly glowing terms! Do you think she has an angle when she talks about the people she loves so much?

Exactly, yes. In Elpis Venat's fairly open, but also has nothing to hide (like Elpis-Emet, actually), while as Hydaelyn she's very selective about information and is absolutely working an angle. Specifically, she poses as a deity that only speaks on its own terms, meaning that she's not really open to questioning and can and does open and close communication for her own reasons. Hell, need I remind you that she hides significant amounts of information from both us and Sharlayan for her own ends?

I would argue for exactly the same skepticism of Hydaelyn's information as Emet, for exactly the same reasons; while everything she says is true, she doesn't tell us the whole truth. (But Hydaelyn also doesn't have nearly as many scenes, so it doesn't come up nearly as often.)

EDIT: Also, on the subject of the Amaurot DMV: I would argue that yes, that was indeed part of the outlook he was trying to communicate. Because if I learned anything about Emet from the Elpis MSQ, it was that he is a HUGE stickler for the rules of Amaurot. I can fully and wholeheartedly believe that he thinks that a perfect and aspirational society has orderly yet inevitable wait times at the DMV.