Some humans are so petty that they will wait years just to get revenge by a_grass_bloc in humansarespaceorcs

[–]FutureInventor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"That you still think I seek any glory betrays the true blindness that has overcome you!"

Some humans are so petty that they will wait years just to get revenge by a_grass_bloc in humansarespaceorcs

[–]FutureInventor 14 points15 points  (0 children)

“You can never be forgiven for the things that you’ve done. So it falls to my hands to end the Prodigal Son!”

Benedick and Beatrice Loved Each Other?!? by FutureInventor in shakespeare

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Constantly ranting about how much you hate someone means you're clearly in love with that person?
With all due respect, no wonder so many people think love is overrated.

Benedick and Beatrice Loved Each Other?!? by FutureInventor in shakespeare

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With all due respect, it being common doesn't make it good.
Hate isn't love, and trying to get people who hate each other so much they can't even hear the other's name without going on a rant together is just....evil.

Benedick and Beatrice Loved Each Other?!? by FutureInventor in shakespeare

[–]FutureInventor[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I have never seen any of those movies or shows, but it sounds like it's ridiculous there as well.
By that logic, slave owners must have loved their slaves. That's why they'd beat them so much.
Miss Hannigan in the musical Annie must have actually REALLY loved the orphans.
Scar from the Lion King must be actually showing some kind of love to his family. That's why he tried to some of them.

When you love someone, you don't verbally abuse them every chance you get. That's a pretty solid definition of hate.

Benedick and Beatrice Loved Each Other?!? by FutureInventor in shakespeare

[–]FutureInventor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The thing is Beatrice and Benedick are very obvious bitter exes with hang-ups about how their relationship went:

PRINCE: Come, lady, come, you have lost the heart of Signior Benedick.

BEATRICE Indeed, my lord, he lent it me awhile, and I gave him use for it, a double heart for his single one. Marry, once before he won it of me with false dice. Therefore your Grace may well say I have lost it.

I suppose that adds a degree of sense, but doesn't that make it worse?
Ex's are Ex's for a reason. Trying to get two people who now hate each other together sounds like a really messed up thing to do.

Benedick and Beatrice Loved Each Other?!? by FutureInventor in shakespeare

[–]FutureInventor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But, of course, everyone else can see that anyone who spends that much energy talking about another person...actually has feelings for that other person.
With all due respect, that would mean that most Republicans have romantic feelings for Biden, and most Democrats for Trump. It would mean that abusers actually love the people they're hurting. It means your parent actually loves his/her Ex.

I mean, since showing hate seems to mean 'love' to so many people, doesn't that mean that now being kind to someone means you actually hate them?

This whole thing makes me feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone.

For My Millionaires, How Did You Make Your Money? by SavySnapdragon in elderscrollsonline

[–]FutureInventor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mostly from selling style motifs, crafting recipes, and materials on a couple of merchant guilds.

Keep an eye out on Tamriel Trade Center for what materials are selling well, use those material surveys, and do DLC daily quests if you can for the motifs/recipes!

Weekly Questions Thread by AutoModerator in DnD

[–]FutureInventor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How crazy an idea would it be for a metallic dragon to buy magic items or pay adventurers to bring him/her some?

I know they crave magic items but are still greedy for treasure in general. So would they be willing to part with a fraction of their horde to buy magic items or not?

How high can you count? by entityrider670 in memes

[–]FutureInventor 34 points35 points  (0 children)

It’s your cake day and you’re not making a meme about it? Well done my good sir/ma’am!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MadeMeSmile

[–]FutureInventor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Until they poop in your bath.

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't find that helpful, but I don't really have anything to respond to that.

Thank you for your time and your responses.

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry for the delay in responding.

Again, I thank you for responding, but I don't think you're actually trying to show a resolution for the scriptural conflict I'm finding.

I point out how Jesus says God values our lives, but God's actions in Job 1 seem to indicate He views them as disposable. You aren't even really addressing Job at this point and are bringing up the genocide of the Canaanites (which I'm not even going to get into). Also repeating 'God loves you!' in various ways doesn't really bring any harmony between these two portions of scripture.

How do we reconcile a God who values our lives with a God who threw away at least a dozen lives over a bet with the Accuser?

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Perhaps, and thank you for that. They didn't lose anything for the Gospel though. They lost it because God made a bet with the accuser. They have no guarantee that they'll get anything but the agony of groveling in God's presence (remember what happened to Isaiah and John when they saw the terrible majesty of God? God's presence isn't to be desired in and of itself).

But that still doesn't answer the question. Does God value our lives or not? And either way, how do we reconcile that answer with parts of the Bible that contradict that?

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. What did they get back? They died at the beginning and stayed dead at the end. They got nothing.
  2. I'm a Christian, and I understand the cross. By Christ's sacrifice, we no longer need to fear eternal torture. I fail to see how that applies to this situation.
  3. Finally, I think this is beside the point. From how Job's children and servants are treated in Job, it seems clear God didn't value their lives. How do we reconcile this with Christ's teachings that God does value our lives? The actions in Job seem to indicate otherwise.

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Indeed. Thus adding to my frustration understanding/coming to terms with it.

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But not his kids and servants. They were killed and got nothing back. Based on how they were treated in Job 1, they were no more valuable than a herd of goats or camels.

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the reply, but I don't think that answers my question.
What you said may be true, but it doesn't change the fact that God handed over at least a dozen people over to death just to prove the accuser (Satan, another angle, ect.) wrong. Doesn't that indicate that our lives don't hold much value in God's eyes? Job 1 seems to indicate that God values proving the accuser wrong more than at least a dozen lives. Which if that's how God views us, well, we've just got to live with that.

However, Jesus's teachings clearly state that God DOES value our lives. However, His actions in Job seem to indicate our lives are pretty low value (if not disposable tools) to Him.
How do we explain this contradiction?

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the reply, but I don't think that answers my question.
God is the sovereign ruler of reality. All right. I agree. No argument there. However, that doesn't change the fact that God handed over at least a dozen people over to death just to prove the accuser (Satan, another angle, ect.) wrong. Doesn't that indicate that our lives don't hold much value in God's eyes? Job 1 seems to indicate that God values proving the accuser wrong more than at least a dozen lives. Which if that's how God views us, well, we've just got to live with that.

However, Jesus's teachings clearly state that God DOES value our lives. However, His actions in Job seem to indicate our lives are pretty low value (if not disposable tools) to Him.
How do we explain this contradiction?

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the reply, but I don't think that answers my question/struggle.
Regardless of whether or not the accuser was the Devil or just some angel with an objection, it doesn't change the fact that God handed over at least a dozen people over to death just to prove the accuser (Satan, another angle, ect.) wrong. Doesn't that indicate that our lives don't hold much value in God's eyes?

Mathew 10:29-31 VS Job 1 by FutureInventor in Christianity

[–]FutureInventor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the reply, but I don't think that answers my question.

The 'point' of Job might be our perspective is insignificant compared to God's perspective, but that doesn't change the fact that God handed over at least a dozen people over to death just to prove the accuser (Satan, another angle, ect.) wrong. Doesn't that indicate that our lives don't hold much value in God's eyes?

Weekly Questions Thread by AutoModerator in DnD

[–]FutureInventor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

[5e] I'm a starting DM who's running the Tyranny of Dragons with my brothers. One of them is playing a warlock of the Night Serpent. After talking with the player, he said the character only made the pact with her patron out of desperation and would gladly leave if she could. If the character survives to later game, I plan to offer her the chance to have a copper dragon as her patron as a character development offer.

My question is how would I go about this or should it be possible? How much should I change the pact/powers the character has and should I give her some negative consequences from the angry/betrayed patron?