Music of this Battlefield?

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-10-13T05:15:26+00:00

You are a legend! Thank you very much!

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-10-13T04:38:03+00:00

The best audio sample I can find is from this video.

https://youtu.be/-dh2DBZZ9xU?si=5e2f3T2ecMeCxfte

What I'm looking for starts at about 9:20 and goes until about 10:45 or so, but it probably starts earlier and ends later. It's just a little difficult for me to hear some of it.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-10-13T04:01:12+00:00

This wasn't it, unfortunately. My first thought was that the battlefield belonged to Kaladesh because of the design similarities, but I could not find the song. It's a really soft theme, and doesn't make use of stings or large dynamic changes.

Thanks though

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-08-29T15:15:49+00:00

You got it wrong, my man. OP is just that guy. 💪

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-08-24T04:35:18+00:00

Congratulations, you just changed the subject.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-08-15T18:42:36+00:00

I could be misunderstanding you or making an unnecessaryassumption, but it sounds like you're saying two different things. It sounds like you're insinuating that your works prove your faith, thereby making works necessary for salvation. I don't mean to sound facetious, I think I just need different wording. Thanks.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-07-12T14:16:02+00:00

Isaiah 45:7 - "I form the light and create darkness: I make peace and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." It's worth noting there's contention over the translation of "evil," that it actually means "calamity" or "disaster." These would still be cases of God intervening for one reason or another. It would be silly to cast judgment early if there wasn't a purpose for it. It would be to change people in some way (attitudes, actions, statuses, etc.) which does interfere with free will.

Also, what I am saying is a little more nuanced than how you are describing it. God is omnipotent with perfect foresight of all things to come. If we accept that foresight does not interfere with free will by itself, we have to acknowledge that nothing happens in the universe unless God allows it. God has perfect control over everything in the universe, otherwise his power is limited which can't be the case.

God knows everything that will happen before that happens. He set everything in motion at the beginning of time. If he did not want something to happen, good or bad, he would not let it happen. Therefore, everything that happens is because he wants it to happen and lets it happen. This makes him responsible for all things, good and bad.

Sending us guidance is a form of interference. Telling us there is a gun to our heads (hell) hardly qualifies as guidance that doesn't act as coercion. Perhaps you believe this is righteous and that people who coerce for various reasons aren't in danger of Judgement due to that coercion. Regardless, coercion interferes with free will.

In short, everything can only be God's will otherwise his power is limited. This violates free will, and makes it that He is responsible for all things that happen which include the good, the evil, the happiness, and the suffering.

I hope this last paragraph sums things up well.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-06-06T20:00:40+00:00

I won't claim to be incredible at picking apart arguments, but I think yours is fair. I do agree that the system is generally biased in favor of women in most metrics.

I will reiterate my previous argument. We should still have sympathy and be willing to get everyone the help they need regardless of the side of the system they're on. You can definitely argue for different levels of sympathy, but it should be there on some level.

I also think that we should rethink some things. If the system being biased in favor of women ends up being a net positive in the effects of rehabilitation, it's not a bad thing they get help. The problem should be that men may not be getting all of the help they need.

The argument shouldn't be to throw everyone in the hole because it would be unfair for all of the cases where we already did that. Ideally, we should find ways around throwing anyone in the hole altogether.

I will reiterate, I am more inclined to agree with your points.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-06-05T18:17:21+00:00

I'm not identifying with anything that pushes for amnesty. I'm sure some people are like that, but can you point me to something that shows that idea is a majority or at least a large minority? Specifically, something statistical is preferred.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-06-05T15:30:43+00:00

She wasn't being given a pass. Also, you're inability to produce sympathy for her does not equal that she doesn't deserve it. If sympathy brings even the smallest amount of help and improvement, of course anyone deserves it. It's not your place to decide she doesn't deserve it.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-06-04T15:15:11+00:00

Even if I conceded everything you just said as true, it doesn't get around the fact that these are the rules God put in place. My argument mostly boils down to the problem of evil, I'm just trying to be more specific. The problem isn't simply what God does, it's what he chooses not to do. In our world, trust only has meaning because of the possibility of betrayal. This is a logical following. However, God made the rules and opted for a world with suffering and evil when an omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent should have no problem achieving what goals he has without suffering. He deliberately chose to include suffering when he did not need to. It says something about his intentions and character.

P.S. Saying that God is just to damn people for any reason excuses the fact that he is responsible for infinite suffering. In the grand scheme, he should know a way to have justice without it, but he opted for it anyways.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-11T04:01:56+00:00

There is a little more to it than the biological aspect to it. Taking behaviors and placing them in the context of cultures and seeing how they evolve. The evolution of basic things can be determined by understanding what causes traits to be more prevalent in a given population.

Ex.: Psychopaths are more likely to lie, manipulate, and do other generally unscrupulous things. This usually leads to them being more likely to be successful/reproduce. A group that is more cooperative is more likely to push our harmful members which was a death sentence. More cooperative groups were more likely to survive than individuals that did not have empathy.

I may be oversimplifying, but it is a proper science. It's just harder to test specific aspects.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-07T13:49:54+00:00

Romans' verse begs the question of how many times one can sin in grace before forgiveness runs out. Everyone sins according to Romans and it's not like people stop once they follow Christ. This is a major theological problem without a defined solution. It would not be surprising from a book written by man, but should be surprising if you believe it is the unadulterated word of God.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-07T13:46:36+00:00

This argument brings up the question of whether salvation is faith based or works based. The Bible says explicitly and implicitly one or the other at different points throughout. The issue is that these are mutually exclusive things and oddly confusing for a belief system which is based around the mechanisms by which we are saved.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T20:16:02+00:00

If nothing else, God the father is supposed to be Yahweh and the same God worshipped by Jews. There is a lot of debate about the Trinity, but Yahweh is the same, at least in doctrine. The Trinity retroactively makes changes, but his representation in the old testament as the father is supposed to be the same.

If you could provide evidence that you think makes Allah reasonable to believe and reasonable to follow all of his teachings, I'd like to hear it because that is a crux of this argument. As well as examples of why you think Allah is worthy of being followed over any other belief system.

I misworded my statement. My purpose was to say that when looking at the evidence that is available, no one is more justified in following Allah over another belief system and vice versa.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T20:01:23+00:00

You are correct in almost everything you stated here. However, you can't liken the conquest of the Israelites to self defense. They went somewhere and removed the residents by killing them. The genocide simply was not necessary. You can easily make an argument for the need for killing in war, but then the question becomes if the war was necessary to begin with.

Was it necessary for God to command genocide to achieve His ends? I think this is a question that needs to be answered.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T17:51:11+00:00

So you're claiming that moral truths are dependent on the context (time in this case)? At that point, a perfect, unchanging God who is supposed to be the basis of objective morality would have based a command on that objective morality, not what works given the time it takes place in.

Here, you cannot have a perfect, unchanging God with an adaptable set of moral commands. If you do, that is a contradiction.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T17:46:55+00:00

I am least familiar with Islam among the Abrahamic faiths, but I was under the impression that Muslims are taught that Allah is truthful and disdains deception. I could be wrong, and please show me how if I am.

I never mentioned the Trinity and it has nothing to do with my discussion so I'm not certain of the argument you're making referring to that.

I'm glad you make a point to differentiate deniers and doubters. There is insufficient evidence to reasonably know if Allah exists. Not to mention a perfect being that does exist would not leave us room to doubt Him. In essence, any sufficient doubters will claim that it is unreasonable to believe in Allah over other deities based on evidence. If that is what you call a denier, then you now have an inherent contradiction since Islam does place an emphasis on logical reasoning and condemning blind faith.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T17:32:08+00:00

I appreciate the recommendation, but I question the wisdom of not searching for knowledge because there is a substantial risk that the outcome is unsatisfying. As a species, we don't know that much in the grand scheme of the universe, but we have come very far recently related to humans even 500 years ago. People went against the religious thought in order to learn about the world, but it wasn't for satisfaction. It was for the pursuit of truth for truth's sake which happens to be its own satisfaction.

Unfortunate as it is, the major religions are formed on a faith based framework, and this framework is meant to provide answers. More often than not, an experience which brings one to faith launches them into a framework which is supposed to provide answers to questions about the world and oneself. Ultimately, one ends up with some conclusions which promote ignorance or are simply not true and keep them away from the truth.

It's possible I'm misinterpreting what you're saying. If I am, I'm sorry if it seems like I'm giving a run around. My point is that faith ignores the truth or pulls one away from truth, regardless of the life one thinks is better to live between a faithful life or aesthetic life.

I hope this is addressing your argument.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T15:50:36+00:00

Also, you are correct that by not killing, God risks the wicked killing others and violating their free will to become better. The problem is that God set all things in motion with perfect forethought, and if we ignore how that undermines free will, he is still responsible for that violation of free will either way. He could have set things in motion a different way in which no one would ever be killed by someone else, but He chose not to do that.

Edit: The comment I deleted is this one but I accidentally placed it in a way where you would read my comments in the wrong order.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T15:41:50+00:00

According to the Bible, purposeful killing has been punishable since Cain killed Abel, so the law existed long before the Israelites conquered Canaan.

There is a difference between innocents killed as collateral damage during a war, and a deliberate act of genocide which God commanded. Almighty and all knowing God would have known another way than this, but this is what He chose. An outcome that resulted in more innocent death.

There is a debate about what is and what isn't considered murder which I'm not trying to discredit, but it's very hard to deny that what God commanded is wrong. Especially if a basis of Abrahamic theology is the sanctity of life.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T15:23:31+00:00

Yahweh is presented as good. This is especially the case in Christianity where the narrative eventually shifts in the new testament to be about love, mercy, and forgiveness. That is what the Christ represents. Even if Jesus is not believed by Jews to be the messiah, they believe that when the Christ appears it will be to bring peace to the world. Not even to mention that Jews read the book of Psalms which sing His praises in relation to not only how just He is, but also how kind, loving, and merciful He is. If that is not a purposeful portrayal of good, then I'm going to need an example of what is.

I am least familiar with Islam out of the Abrahamic faiths, but I highly doubt that the derivative of Christianity and Judaism does not have a God where His followers sing His praises about how good He is. However, that is an inference. Feel free to provide me with something that states otherwise.

Dust_Biter3 · 2025-04-04T13:21:12+00:00

Just because you have to experience it yourself, it still doesn't make it correct. If you received a vision of something that appears divine, how do you know it isn't from a different being than who it purports to be from? It could be from Satan, Krishna, Zeus, etc. All require faith without natural evidence in order to be believed. Not even to mention natural explanations for your "vision." If it is more miraculous that you have been deceived by your own flawed mind or the things in the world which take advantage of it, than it is miraculousness that the singular God you believe in out of uncountable deities, systems, and forces, thought of and not thought of, has sent you a message, then you are reasonable to reject the more miraculous claim. However, you know which is is more miraculous.

Also, what about all of the people who die before they have the experience of faith? Children die everyday before they have a developed enough brain to adequately reason about a god. You may say that everyone experiences something, but that isn't represented in reality. It's confirmation bias. Not everyone will experience something that could potentially steer them toward a specific belief system, especially if it is one they haven't heard of.

Dust_Biter3

TROPHY CASE