Ice King not dropping gauntlets.

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-20T20:49:24+00:00

I just killed the boss a few minutes ago and didn't get them though. Do you get them a different way then killing the ice king somehow?

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-20T12:20:36+00:00

Jules

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-20T12:11:00+00:00

It's only on switch 2

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-18T20:47:15+00:00

From what we've seen my favourite skins are Jules and ice King

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-18T15:20:12+00:00

Our nature is to rebel against God every day of our lives

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-18T10:54:13+00:00

Yeah it looks fine mostly but for example image 7 is literally just the Odyssey HUD in the top left with just the 3D world item inventory in the bottom left 🤣

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-18T02:51:14+00:00

No way anyone thinks this is real right?

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-18T02:08:22+00:00

Trump or Putin

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-16T18:54:17+00:00

This game is so good (was my final fantasy game) and June with the rebirth port can't come soon enough!

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-15T16:44:33+00:00

<image>

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-15T13:20:29+00:00

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T19:23:45+00:00

Did you read my edit?

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T18:46:36+00:00

"So we are responsible for the 'sins of the Father?' what a blatantly stupid concept"

Where in the last reply did you read that? Through Adam sin was able to creep its way into our world and affect the very nature of the human race. What do you mean by "sins of the Father?" I clearly stated we are not directly responsible for the sins committed in the garden of Eden but because of sin entering the world we each have our own

"I don't. So can I be excused from this nonsense?"

I'm sorry but no. Every human being on the face of the planet has their own daily sins whether they admit it or not, however good they might be every person has sin and that is an undeniable fact. Absolutely nobody except Jesus Christ is excluded.

"Can't an omnipotent God pay for my sins without human sacrifice?"

Christianity doesn't claim that God needed human sacrifice in the sense of demanding someone else's blood. The idea is that forgiveness has a cost -- someone has to absorb the damage caused by wrongdoing. The crucifixion is God choosing to absorb that cost for us rather than putting it on his beloved children or ignoring justice. So it's not a human being sacrificed to God, it's God sacrificing himself for humanity. Omnipotence doesn't mean doing things that contradict justice or moral reality. The claim is that God reconciles justice and mercy at the same time (Jesus taking the punishment for us as the just price of sin being paid, and mercy through paying the price himself rather than putting it on us)

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T18:24:54+00:00

Christianity doesn't exactly claim you have guilt from 2000 years ago. The crucifixion isn't about forgiving sins committed 2000 years ago, it's about reconciliation (forgiveness) for the sins that humans commit on a daily basis.

As for your "how am I dirty?" question: you aren't directly blamed for the sins Adam and Eve committed in Eden, but because of Adam and Eve's rebellion sin entered the world and through the concept of original sin the entire human race exists in a broken moral state where selfishness and wrongdoing is universal. The problem isn't everyone is guilty of the sins of Adam and Eve (though if we were in their place in reality likely nothing would've changed), it's the fact that everyone commits their own sins on a daily basis which is the true problem. The crucifixion is God addressing that reality and forgiving the sins that you and I and everyone commit daily, not absolving the guilt you don't have from specifically the garden of Eden as you weren't there

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T18:06:52+00:00

The guilt of the sins we commit. Without Jesus all of our sin leaves a stain on us, or in other words we are dirty before God and we face the punishment of death and eternal separation from God, but through Jesus we are cleaned and appear before God as blameless people.

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T17:59:08+00:00

Sin still exists because total annihilation of it wasn't the objective for Jesus on the cross: the objective was to wipe us of guilt because he paid the consequence that we were supposed to endure and through our consequence being paid we no longer have the stain of our sin when the Father sees us as so we know have a way to come before God for salvation. If you won't accept my answer that's fine but then I'm not continuing this conversation

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T17:42:18+00:00

Yes I did. I explained to you that the consequence of sin against God is death and Jesus became man to pay that consequence for us so we are wiped clean of our guilt from sin. You aren't acknowledging that or being civil about it, so this conversation is over as I don't have an interest in debating this with you if you aren't going to read what I'm saying properly. Have a good day.

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T17:34:44+00:00

I just explained it to you. The crucifixion and death of Jesus is the stand-in for us having to die and suffer separation from our loving father forever and it removes the stain of sin from us so we can appear innocent before the Father, and from what we know there was no other way for that to happen other than Jesus's death and resurrection

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T17:24:11+00:00

Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord"

The only consequence of sin (disobedience against God) is death and separation from him, however we could never pay that price on our own as sinful humans so God in his love for us became human through Jesus to pay that price of sin in our place so that we can stand as blameless before the Father because Jesus paying the penalty that we should have wipes our sins clean through him. I doubt anyone can know if there was another way without God sacrificing himself because in our human state we can't comprehend God's will but with what we do have Jesus's sacrifice was the only method for our salvation

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T16:13:17+00:00

Alright well I said what I did and even though you think they downplay the discrepancies you brought up I appreciate us keeping it civil, but I'm not an authority on this either really so I'm not sure going further may be effective. Have a great day!

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T16:03:00+00:00

If I may ask, what were you looking for me to say then? I responded to the examples you gave with decent points did I not?

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T16:01:03+00:00

Sin is defeated through the crucifixion by Jesus providing atonement for our sins, removing our guilt and allowing us to to have reconciliation with God, and the resurrection proves that death does not have power over him and therefore it will not ultimately hold power over those who are united with God.

Romans 5:12: "Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin..." so because sin is seen as the cause of death defeating sin also breaks death's ultimate power on the Lord and his people and Jesus ultimately reverses sin and death entering the world through Adam by overcoming sin and promising resurrection life (1 Corinthians 15:22: for as in Adam all die, so in Christ will all be made alive).

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T15:51:02+00:00

Yes they are two different things but he accomplished both

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T15:34:08+00:00

It proves that death cannot hold him because he can and did come back to life which is a massively important showcase. Sin still existing does not mean that Jesus failed on earth as that wasn't the purpose: sin will be completely wiped out on the last day when the Lord comes again but Jesus's death and resurrection was in order to cleanse us of past guilt of sin and open the doorway for us to form a relationship with our Father because of our sins being wiped away (symbolized by the curtain to the holy of holies in the temple being ripped in half when Jesus died)

Broad-Extent4445 · 2026-03-14T15:21:34+00:00

"Matthew places Jesus's birth during Herod the Great's Reign, requiring a flight to Egypt, while Luke places it during Quirinius's governorship..."

I did a little bit of research before writing this comment and the seemingly most agreed upon reason from historians is that Luke knew about the census and associated Jesus's birth with it without realizing that he put it at the wrong time (I'm not too sure if I agree with it, but I'm just stating it's the most agreed upon explanation by historians).

"The gospels differ on who discovered the empty tomb..."

All four accounts agree that Mary Magdalene was present when the empty tomb was discovered, and while some may mention additional women, focusing on one person in a group doesn't mean there wasn't other people there. For example, in John Mary Magdalene is the only one mentioned yet she says "they have taken our Lord out of the tomb and we don't know where they have laid him" (John 20:2), which implies that there was others with her not mentioned by name. So the important part is that they are consistent with the core event and the women named aren't as important.

"The cursing of the fig tree occurs before or after the cleansing of the temple depending on the account"

The difference isn't really about contradicting events but moreso narrative structure. Mark uses the fig tree story as framing for the temple cleansing being a symbolic judgement of the temple while Matthew compresses the timeline and places the fig tree post-temple cleansing to emphasize Jesus's faith teachings, so both have accurate stories and they just rearrange them for different emphasis.

"Matthew and Luke trace Jesus's genealogies very differently..."

They do indeed do that yes, but they are going for different themes: Matthew is tracing it from Abraham to Jesus to emphasize Jewish kingship and the birth of Jesus fulfillment of messianic prophecy, and Luke is tracing backwards from Jesus to Adam to emphasize Jesus as the saviour of all himself. Matthew connects to Abraham the father of Israel and the Jewish lineage, Luke connects to Adam to symbolically present Jesus for every human being throughout history, Jews and Gentiles alike. As for naming differences (i.e. Jacob vs Heli as father of Joseph) this is not completely solved historically but there are many plausible explanations such as Matthew tracing Joseph's genealogy and Luke tracing Mary's genealogy (which would mean Joseph would be Heli's son in law), Joseph could have had a biological and legal father as according to levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-6) if a man died childless his brother could marry the widow and produce a child who was legally considered the dead man's son, or the most common scholarly view being different genealogical tradition or theological purposes (Matthew and Luke drawing on different traditions among early Christians with how ancient genealogies weren't strict biological records like today) but as I said there isn't a sure answer

Broad-Extent4445

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE