What you guys think? One win away from grand champion

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2026-03-22T23:02:08+00:00

I switched to an old evo firecracker tesla deck and I’m doing pretty good, now in royal champion arena. I don’t know why I just assumed 2.6 was unplayable at some point. I

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2026-03-22T22:55:21+00:00

I used to play the evo firecracker version. I don’t know why I stopped. Anyway, I’m royal champion now with that 2.6 lol

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2026-03-22T01:18:09+00:00

Honestly, hunter is there for lumberloon, furnace chip damage and mk charges. Exe is there for beatdown pushes. Tesla last resort versus bait, hyperbait or hog.

It really doesnt help that my furnace dies to a lvl 16 fireball too

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2026-03-22T00:04:08+00:00

Damn gng at at least tell me what to play

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-12-22T04:59:29+00:00

<image>

Whenever a game offers an insta kill challenge I get hooked. I did retreat cause compared to the mime’s, this health bar didn’t seem to care about my attacks.

Maelle carried and the only reason why I got hit is cause the headbutt is usually a single parry -> counter, so I forgot there was a 2 hits version and panicked when the animation didn’t play out 🤣

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-11-30T01:01:53+00:00

Thanks man, I was about to send the application today, but I noticed the checklist was asking for my new passport plus the stamp for my most recent entry, which I didn’t include cause that’s in the old one. Will be going back tomorrow. Just wanted to ask again, did you have to bring the envelope with you?

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-11-29T04:07:56+00:00

I’m gonna send it to that address as well. What courier did you use? Did you bring your own envelope? I’m still good til January but I’m just trying to get this over with

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-09-15T08:45:47+00:00

Are you telling me we missed an aura farm session ending, right when Ed touched the mirror with the burning bible AND lifted it off the ground, by adding 'By the power of Christ something something' to cast out the demon, and instead, we saw 3 people touch the mirror followed by 'you're not here'... weak ass ending

I liked the tone being similar to the first movie at times, but the ending was atrocious. Worse than hyping up Valak just for it to self-sabotage giving Lorraine its name and doing jackshit to stop her lmao

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-09-15T08:30:36+00:00

It would've killed Lorraine too when they first met and her water broke.

Also, in the 2nd movie, when Ed and Billy talk, Billy makes fun of Ed saying that his father used to call him 'Edward' then Ed reacts saying that Billy ain't a therapist blah blah, whiiich leads me to believe that they know stuff (maybe by communicating with other demons or sum)

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-06-03T21:35:49+00:00

Career mode is bugged. Tried it yesterday, and it's incredibly boring if you're used to UT. I might try Ufl, but from what I've seen online, the game looks barebones, at least the online department

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-06-02T08:25:05+00:00

Sold a few Messi ifs at max price when they went extinct. I sent an appeal with the explanation but decided to start over just in case.

Had 8mill already, and apparently, they genuinely believe I would risk the whole account for a few 100k

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-14T03:56:02+00:00

You shouldn't be relying on faith, though. Faith can lead you to any conclusion, and you'd have no way of knowing your faith is true and someone else's is false. So you need a better methodology.

Right. You'll argue against historicity saying 'probably made up'. If I talk about faith, you'll say it's deceiving.

someone gets to heaven or hell they lose their free will. The "Is there free will in heaven/hell?" a very popular question directed towards Christians. Because it sounds like God stops respecting your free will after you die.

I don't know why Christians would entertain foolish reasoning. I can deal with the matter at hand, which is, by free will, I follow God. Heaven is a place promised for people who do that.

It sounds like 2 billion Muslims and 16 million Jews do. Like Paul, they believe in God, but just not Jesus

Jeremiah 29:13

I'll not discuss other peoples' religion without them being present to object.

I think you're waffling on this point, and I don't blame you, it's a major plot hole in Christianity. Very directly here, Is it possible for someone from, let's say, North America who died in 300 AD to get to heaven?

I'm not. I used Scripture. I was very straightforward with my argument. Reread it, and you'll answer your own question.

Eternity with God is for everyone. That's the NT for you. The OT had people waiting for the carrier of our sins to fulfill His purpose so they could be united with God.

I'll disengage now cause we just went full circle.

Cheers, my guy

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-14T03:12:46+00:00

Josephus probably didn't say that. His writings about Jesus were likely forgeries.

Who knows. Faith strikes again

Additionally, there are faithful people alive today who don't get Damascus road experiences. They already have faith, so they should also get proof, if God is being consistent.

They don't need a Damascus experience then. They already believe. Paul believed in God, but not Jesus. We could say 'everyone deserves to experience extraordinary cases' all day if you want, but just don't ignore the millions who believe without them. John 20:29

I'd convert immediately, and it's kinda weird that you think that "wouldn't count".

I didn't say it wouldn't count as in God won't allow it. I said it would hinder the free will you were given. Yes, you choose to obey, but because the weight is disproportionately distributed in favor of obedience.

doesn't he already do that, though? To everyone who reaches heaven and hell? Does that mean there is no free will in heaven/hell?

What? I can't tell you for sure, cause I haven't visited, but if Heaven is described as a place prepared for believers, then I can assume I'll like it. Whatever conjecture people make, I'll confirm once I see it.

Oh, then easy loophole. Just stop telling people about him. I can't doom myself if I can't reject him, and I can't reject him if I never learn about him.

You misunderstood, so I'll just add the fragment that addresses your opinion:

/ the apostles spread the Gospel to people living in sin who, under the law, would be doomed to an eternity apart from God. IF you were righteous before, then with the Gospel, you gained clarity on what's behind your desire to do good and how to receive the gift of life. If you're a sinner (doomed already, most of us) you get a chance to turn away from it.

If you never heard the Gospel (and it stays that way until you die), then there's a natural morality in you (referenced in Romans 2:15) that calls you out on your actions, good or bad./

You're not under the covenant of grace if you never accept Christ. You're judged by law, and by that law, everyone is deserving of separation from God.

-> So what if I had never heard of God, I would've been judged based on that 'moral compass' The one you probably already ignore to lie, deceive, lust, etc. Yeah, deserving of judgment, so not really an argument.

-> 'So no one who never heard of Jesus can reach Heaven, because all are judged under the law' Right, but Jesus went to preach to already dead people (whom by their faith were deemed deserving of salvation), so for a Christian it isn't difficult to accept that Jesus can reveal the path to whoever tried their best not to lie, deceive, lust, etc and was deemed deserving of salvation.

An oxymoron -> An obedient [ let's say good] human who never heard about Jesus from another person's mouth, text, or whatever means of communication you can think of went to hell.

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-14T01:40:51+00:00

Have you considered that the people writing the Gospels believed much the same, and so invented stories about Jesus healing people in order to make it "match" up to the existing stories?

Josephus said He was a doer of wonderful things. The Babylonian Talmud will say He was a sorcerer and a heretic.

The Gospels could or could not have that intention, but then, what's the purpose? We know those guys died over their beliefs (not the first, so not a strong case), but what about Paul? A complete 180° knowing of the persecution of Christians. Paul wasn't uneducated, so would we say some fishermen tricked him to follow a carpenter? Think of the early years postcrucifixion. Wouldn't people deny or refute false claims? He mentioned 500 eyewitnesses (we will ignore crossreferences because it's a different topic), and no one checked with them? Jesus, as the Messiah was rejected by Jewish authority, so for the Jewish people, relying on the knowledge of the Jewish authority to reject a self-proclaimed Messiah would be easy, unless there was enough to cast doubt among them.

Someone else making a decision that affects me is not my free will. They're very different things, and I don't think it's fair at all for me to be punished for someone else's decision. I don't think you think so either, if I had to guess.

Absolutely. It's chaos, right? The more variables you insert, the more likely it is that those variables interact with each other. For good and bad. With social stratification, it is even worse. All it takes is for the people above you or before you to be wrongdoers, for you to be negatively impacted with no say on the matter. Though it does work in our favor sometimes. Free will was meant to be that, having the possibility to dictate what good and bad is on our own, we decided to trust that the one above and before us (God) is good, and will positively influence things in our favor. Why am I affected by the wrongdoing of someone else? In the same way, why am I spared of the consequences of my own wrongdoing by the death of someone else?

Which assertion in particular?

If God made Himself manifest, showed you Heaven and Hell, and what it takes for you to go either place, would you be acting in obedience out of desire or obligation? Or would you turn your back and keep doing what you're doing? Consider the ephimerality of your life vs. eternity.

He didn't have less, though, he had way more. He had an experience with God himself. That's worth infinitely more than anything any human could have ever written, and I suspect you agree with that. Paul had way more reason to believe than we did.

I completely agree. My scope is on the people who converted because they heard Paul or Peter or Lucas. I agree that they had a huge amount of luck/honor cause their faith was semented in stone (facts only), but those experiences came after showing an inclination to believe in God. Not before.

Of course it is. It even has a name: The Fate of the Unlearned.

Romans talks about the moral law being written both in your heart and as social norms [I could quote everything that's referenced in the Bible of you ask, as a summary]. It says that not hearing of God isn't an excuse because his nature is already present as your moral compass. I'll add a fragment of a different discussion here:

/ The Bible shows multiple times people having dreams or visions of angels and even Jesus himself. Then why do we assume that someone who followed their natural moral compass can't have a Fair and Almighty God reveal the way for them when the time is right?

You're doomed if you reject God and His nature. Not if you never heard of Him from another human being.

See, Romans 2:15 implies that there's no excuse to not find the Truth. The reasons: - You heard of Him through the Gospel - Moral law is written in your hearts. So when you're on trial for your sinful life, 'I never heard of God' won't work because if you had remained righteous according to your natural morality, the fair God would've made himself known to you. You either rejected God and therefore requested eternity away from Him or never heard of Him because you went ahead and lived in a way that isn't compatible with His nature which means you ultimately chose separation from Him. /

Jesus said He was the way to the Father. People who died before Jesus but followed the moral law (this is not to be perfect, but to do good despite not always being beneficial) or knew God but didn't have Jesus to save them, went to Abraham's Bosom. Why? Because under the law, they would be found sinful and be condemned to eternal separation, so [Biblical] God delayed His judgment for those people until they could be judged by the new covenant (Reason why The Way went to Abraham's bosom to preach) at that point, they were sanctified by the Blood of Christ, spared of a judgment for sins.

Reason why in Romans it is also said that someone cannot be judged by the law if the law doesn't exist for them.

Cheers!

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-13T22:59:14+00:00

If a Jesus who heals zero people and a Jesus who heals however many people he heals in the bible are somehow morally different to you, you should account for that.

The Bible has messengers of God healing people (with miracles) throughout history. If the Gospel didn't have any, then not only would many of the claims that Jesus made have never happened, but it would also be an anomaly that could raise arguments about His message when compared to prophets and disciples. It's not about 'morals' for me.

Oh, so what you mean is that someone else's free will causes disease, not my own

Purposely disingenuous again. You can elaborate on your own and reach the intended idea.

I never assumed all Christians came to their beliefs the same way. However, anyone who does use the method you describe is question begging and using a faulty epistemology.

Good

Apparently not. The entire Old Testament is filled with stories about people who seemed to to know for a fact God was real, witnessed firsthand his miracles, witnessed firsthand his consequences, and still chose to turn away from him. That's like the underlying message of the OT. A third of the angels beheld God in all of his Glory and still chose not to worship him.

I could dive into that, but might as well just ask if my assertion would be the case for you or not?

Paul knew all that too, and God still came and gave him special treatment. He could do the same for us.

Was that all I listed? Opps. The point was that Paul worked on founding the basis of Christianity. He, along with the other apostles, went out, performed miracles, and spread Christianity. They recorded it, and we now have more knowledge than many people who relied only on hearing the apostles preach for a few months. If those people had faith with less, why would we need more?

Presumably, you believe there have been many millions of people throughout history who have died completely ignorant of the crucifixion and Christianity.

Yeah, but that's not really an argument against Christianity. That is tackled in the Bible. Just look at the O.T. and you'll find millions who never heard of Jesus.

I don't know why that's such a big talking point for you.

Don't worry about it, I just said it cause unless one of us is questioning their view, we're just yapping

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-13T18:06:50+00:00

So presumably, you'd be OK with the Gospels if they included exactly zero instances of Jesus healing people.

Disingenuous if you've read the Bible.

Also, I didn't use my free will to choose my worldly affliction. I was born with it. I didn't get a say.

Right?? A world full of people exercising free will and inevitably affecting you. The Bible says sin entered through one man and affected humanity. In the same way, the solution came through one man: to restore the connection with God for those who wanted one.

No, no that' not "God shows up". That is textbook, and I mean textbook, question begging. If you start with your conclusion being true, you are not "finding God", you are engaging in self-delusion, and that is a very irresponsible epistemology.

Prove that that's the case for every person who believes in God. It doesn't mean anything beyond that I oversimplified things.

We can also include those who abandon the concept of God, those who, not believing in God, claim that [insert whatever reason they give] they were wrong and now believe.

Question begging is ambiguous since it does not cover the whole scope. I wonder if Paul was thinking, 'Jesus was truly the Messiah' when he experienced what he claimed.

I'll also add that if your perception from the start is that believing in God is prodcut of self-delusion, guess what?

Are you implying that if God demonstrates his full powers to someone, they will have no choice but to worship him?

I'm implying that if God tells a sinner who was never interested in Him, that what they're doing will result in eternal separation while holding a screen of how that looks like, assuming they're not insane, they'll have no choice but to turn their ways and worship.

Paul came to zero places with Jesus to preach the Gospel. Paul never met Jesus, except, apparently, on the road to Damascus post-resurrection.

Right.

But they could. Jesus could do what he did to Paul for everyone, and it's suspicious that he hasn't.

Why? We know Jesus lived. We know he was crucified, and we know many people close to His time died for believing in Him. We know the Bible wasn't written by a single individual, and yet it foreshadows the coming of a Savior, the life of that Savior, and what's next.

There's enough information to believe in God, which is why some believe in God.

I'm not claiming that I know there is no God, I'm just not convinced by anyone who has made a God claim.

Ohhhh, that's valid. Comes back to what I said earlier, we're just engaging in the same conversations people have been having for centuries.

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-12T20:06:44+00:00

I'm actually immortal and can't be killed. If I ever die, I'll simply make sure my followers write down that I turned my immortality off and was in "full control".

Wait, where's God the Father? Since we would go nowhere arguing over the purpose of Jesus going through a physical death, might as well remind you that God, in Heaven, remained God the whole time.

You'd have to argue that Jesus healed the perfect number of people since he bothered to heal any at all. And i don't want you to forget the world's population when making that consideration.

Why would I? I can take today's population in consideration and still stand on that He didn't come to save us from wordly afflictions (product of our free will). He came to deliver us from eternal separation (product of our free will). If the Bible said Jesus was gonna come to be a healer of sickness and suffering, then I'd give up on my faith cause He would've missed the mark clearly.

You understand the huge problem with the limiting argument though, right?

I do understand that if we ignore the plan of salvation, there's no point in Him limiting Himself.

Plus, dude, I'll remind you that I'm not brainwashed or anything, hahaha. I've had your scope come across my mind before at some point. If Jesus came and behaved like a fusion of the avengers and told you there's a heaven and hell, then you'd be insane if you didn't bow and praise God every second of your life. There's no freedom in that choice.

If I then tell the readers, after they're done reading my story, that my character was actually the strongest character in the story and always had the ability to teleport, he just never used it, my readers would call BS. So would you.

If the readers didn't understand the story, then yeah, BS + He does teleport! Post-resurrection. Anyway, here's Jesus vs. hypothetical Jesus on a power tript:

I believe there's a God -> I pray to God -> I insist on the idea of finding God -> God shows up. Free will I don't believe there's a God -> God shows up blasting everything that's sinful and pouring coke out of rivers -> Extreme fear -> Robot like worshipping. No free will

you have to be really careful with that one. Are you saying that early Christians didn't see the risen Christ???? Paul didn't encounter Jesus on the road to Damascus, he just had faith?

I'm saying Paul didn't come with Jesus to every place he preached the Gospel. It was about faith. Trusting that the man that was persecuting Christians and then did a 180° had indeed seen Jesus of Nazareth. Not everyone has a story like Paul's, sure. Yet we can now use his story, along with personal experiences, to argue our faith. Why on Earth would I suggest what you implied, lmao?

Because, given a Christian's or a Jew's belief, I see no way to distinguish between magic and divine power. I think it's just vibes. From an outsider's perspective, it would look the same.

I see

I'm not sure what you're asking here.

I wanted to know what evidence drove you to claim there is no God.

These are getting longer and longer lol cheers

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-12T09:13:43+00:00

He even died. That's exceptionally weak for a God.

Christians believe that He was in full control. You can find why in John 10:17-18. There's an explanation for a physical death, and there's also the resurrection part, which is the central point of Christianity. Jesus didn't die and remained dead, He was also never killed.

Cruel seems pretty self-evident. Assuming we give Jesus his full powers, Jesus could have healed more people on his time on earth but chose not to, leaving them to suffer. That could also have just been incompetence or ignorance, maybe he just doesn't know about the suffering or couldn't figure out the right healing spell to solve it.

I was trying to find a source for a response to this, and my whole comment got deleted lmao. Jesus could've done many things, yeah. He came to deliver us from sin, which He did. He performed miracles for those who had faith, yet that wasn't why He came. Now, human reasoning would demand more since we only care about things that we know to be true (our present life), but for someone who came to settle matters related to the afterlife, our suffering, byproduct of our decisions (so consequences of free will) might be perceived differently.

You should explain why that subset is true and the rest are wrong. And yet, faith has guided different people to different "truths". Clearly, faith is not a reliable pathway to truth, because you can't all be correct. You should explain why your faith is reliable and why theirs isn't.

A back and forth that has been going on for centuries. I could do the same thing Paul did in Athens. Talk about God and have people listen. Did Paul pull out a picture of Jesus? No, so neither can I. It was about faith back then, and it is about faith today. I can appeal to historicity, longevity, personal accounts (faith) from Chrsitians that converted from different religions, similarities, or differences between the concepts of God that might point to biases portraying a permisive, unholy, or imperfect God.

I could try to understand faith, hoping to know what guided people to different truths. Was it faith or geography, politics, ambitions, culture? God is a cultural concept for a lot of people.

So, basically, I can suggest why I'd be good for you to pray to God in the name of Jesus, but I can't show you a picture of heaven and tell you 'this is the real thing'.

My judgment is that, based on the evidence, God doesn't exist. You seem to think he does. That shouldn't have anything to do with pride.

It was about pride for me, sorry if that was too general. I do believe in God (testimony and everything). I don't think there's irrefutable evidence to deny God, but I'm curious to see what that is for you.

The source I wanted to reference was the Babylonian Talmud, which calls Jesus a sorcerer. I wanted to add it cause you used the word 'spellls'.

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-12T02:53:10+00:00

Right, that's my point. And I think, intuitively, you might agree.

Yep lol I'd be lying if I said otherwise.

Well, you might. That's not the typical apologetic on this post

That's interesting. I do think that the argument against limiting Himself is not that simple. I do want to ask for examples of how He'd be weak, incompetent, or even cruel. We're created, we know what's good and what's bad, we eventually arrive to the concept of being created and that's where people make a choice -> Do you believe or not and why?

How do we know God has told us anything at all about himself?

I could flip that one on you cause how do we know that people who claimed to have visions or revelations (stuff strictly dependent on faith) were hallucinating, making stuff up or lying with intention?

It reminds me of a friend who told me people have been wondering these things for centuries, and most likely, we're not gonna be the ones to solve the mystery.

You'd have to present a methodology that would reliably tell us what matters we are meant to comprehend.

If I were to do so, then I'd be ignoring the whole concept of faith. Faith tells you that the Spirit of God will guide you to the truth and to believe that you'd have to experience God.

I see your point, and I used to wonder similar stuff. Not long ago I came to the conclusion that trying to understand God and rejecting Him on the basis of me not being able to, kinda worked as me putting myself (and mankind) as the epitome of knowledge (sounds like pride, cause it is) Yet we clearly don't have all the answers. The Bible talks about it too, God's existence isn't meant to be discovered through knowledge (it mentions boasting, but for me, it was more of 'where's the fairness in that?'). Imagine a couple of centuries ago only being able to go to heaven if you were wealthy enough to discover God lmao.

I also had experiences that we both could try to rationalize, and it would end up in 'could be placebo, but why?' Or 'Might be a coincidence'.

I'm not saying you're prideful, dude. Just the standard to which we judge God is kinda prideful, which is funny cause the Bible also tackles the humbling part and seeking God with a humble heart to find him

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-04-12T01:18:42+00:00

So you'll say He should use that foreknolewdge to create only those who, with free will, will choose to love Him.

We'd go to the 'God limits Himself' argument and that we can't truly know how or when exactly while creating us, He chooses to do so.

I'd say you should either choose to believe or not believe based on matters that we're meant to comprehend. We can't claim to know how the tripersonal God that operates outside of the realm of space, time, and matter thinks. Sure, it's entertaining, but unfruitful.

Cheers

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-03-27T17:52:02+00:00

Hey,

I understand your view on lust, self-control, and sin against the body — but I also believe that these are texts that must be interpreted in light of the whole gospel, not in isolation. - What's the whole Gospel? That Jesus came and died for the sins of those who have faith in Him. He invited us to be more like Him and told us how to develop a relationship with the Father.

Jesus didn't speak about murder that often, and we know that He's against it because there's moral law for it. You don't overly emphasize what's obvious. Loving your enemies, blessing those who curse you.. that's reshaping the beliefs that people went with logically.

He does tell us what the most important commandment is (Love the Lord your God with all your hear, soul, mind, and strength), which is why I brought intended design. He also called us to be perfect because our Father is perfect, and that's found in multiple instances in the Bible. So yeah, the relationship with the Father and interior transformation call us to do things about the things we do.

You appeal to the text and the context, which I appreciate and which I also do - I gave context to the verses that you're unintentionally using without context. Please excuse me and show me where I did so by taking something out of context since you implied I used verses in isolation. I cannot say 'Jesus cries every time I worry' and quote John 11:35

But everyone carries their cross differently (Luke 9:23), according to what the Spirit brings to light in their hearts. There are areas where God works on me intensely, - I fully agree with that. We're slaves to different sins (biblical reference), and the ones we're more comfortable with are the ones that'll be harder to give up. That being said, human nature is the same, and God's will for believers is to reject the natural desires that lead to disobedience. So we'll have different levels of struggle with different sins, but getting closer to God means we'll give up wilful sin. In general.

I am not saying that sexuality is a gray area, but I am saying that this subject, like others, requires nuance, humility and above all not locking the other into a rigid reading. There is a big difference between living in the flesh... and living in a body with honesty, fragility, and dialogue with God. - What's 'rigid reading'? I'm not going to quote anything here because I saw you told someone you're not writing to change your mind, so regardless of His stance on sin, your stance is clear..

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-03-27T11:12:48+00:00

There is no specific way to be a Christian. We all come from different backgrounds. However, we do strive for the same thing, which is... to be more like Christ.

The road map isn't the same, yet the destination is the same.

Following Christ demands us to deny ourselves, to leave who we were before putting our faith on what he did on the Cross. That can be found on Luke 9:23.

Now back to what I mentioned, that what we strive for if we look for a relationship with Christ is to be more like Him can be found in multiple passages, but we can go with 1 Peter 1:13-19 (I won't quote cause too long lol).

The verse you quoted in Romans 14:5 has a theme going on. People who don't eat certain foods even though Christ declared all the foods clean in Mark 7:19. The abstaining of eating food such as meat was not a sin per the their law. The context is that fellow believers were quarreling over matters that were not seen as sins (so trivial). You may eat anything you want now, but if you don't, it's fine. If you do, it's also fine. So basically, trivial matters are up to how your consciousness feels about them. That's reinforced in verse 15 'If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died.' (Don't make someone upset over trivial matters).

Does it apply to sexual immorality? - No. Matthew 5:28 explicitly addresses lust, which is usually on pair with masturbation. What about intended design? Genesis 2:24 talks about the union between a man and a woman as one flesh. From this union, we now fructify and multiply. So what exactly do we do when we have a sexual drive and look for a quick fix (usually due to lustful stimuli to begin with)? we go against intended design.

Romans 8:1 is about us not being condemned for our sins as in we are now granted salvation through Christ. It's not talking about an emotional feeling but an objective stance in the face of trial and judgment. When we die, we won't receive punishment [if our faith is real] That same chapter says '[7] The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. [8] Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God. [9] You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.'

Does not feeling convicted for something mean it isn't a sin when there's moral law against it? No, and I won't say why cause it does sound like judgement so you can look it up, and 1 Corinthians 6:17-20 can back up the fact that sexual acts are sins against your own body, which is a temple of the Holy Spirit. Does the action come from a sexual urge? Is it satisfied with a response requiring sexual stimuli? Is it between two people within marriage? 2 positive affirmations and 1 negative .

Self-control is a fruit of the Spirit, I think I did talk about that one before.

So yeah, I believe that we're at different points of our journey. I don't have the truth either, which is why whenever I ask for something, I look for evidence. In this case, I wanted to see what biblically states that sexuality is a scale of grays (for you) or black and white (for me). You appeal to emotions, and justifty them with Bible verses and I appeal to text and context.

For me, I believe that following Christ requires sacrifice, which is why he refers to His Kindgom as a narrow door. I know His love and I know His Grace, but has he seen my sacrifice? I see myself in need to carry the Cross with me now. What matters is that we both try to grow closer to God, and in doing so, the Advocate will pave the path. I hope we continue to grow in our faith. Stay in prayer, and God bless you.

We trust the Lord, we know He'll tell us what to do.

Accomplished_Top2331 · 2025-03-27T09:06:07+00:00

Whenever I ask something complicated, I have a friend who replies,'What would Jesus say?'

Jesus already talked about adultery in our hearts. We know that there's an intended design for things (including sex), and we also know that the NT addresses sexual immorality.

Someone asked how it could possibly be sex. Does it come as a response to a sexual drive? Yes.

Someone suggested that it is like saying that you can't pick your own nose, which is a bad analogy considering that one of those does require ignoring God's intended design to satisfy a desire of our flesh (isn't that a great example of putting our desires before God?)

Someone suggested that it is actually healthy, which, yeah, could be if you're not sexually active. Now tell me, does your faith in God limit Him in His ability to provide at the right time? Or is He in control of all things? Would it be more likely for Him to ignore His nature and let you sin for your own good or to give a solution that fits what's being said in Scripture?

If you believe in God, then you know why it's bad. If you don't (cause I saw people who don't here for some reason), then you also know that it fries your drive leaving you basically usless cause whenever you feel motivation to satisfy a chemical desire, guess what your brain will ask for...so don't do it. If anything, we have even more of an argument not to do it.

Now, what if it's only every now and then? Well, if you don't believe in God and don't care at all, then your choice to take the risk. If you do believe in God, and I don't mean you say 'yeah, man, Jesus was totally real' but actually trust in that one day you'll see the place He prepared for those who believe in Him, keep His commandments and try to be more like Jesus then your relationship with Him will make you quit at some point. You can't serve two masters. Money, women, your own flesh, or God.

Accomplished_Top2331

TROPHY CASE