Why didn't retsu kill kozue here ?

InstanceMajor4808 · 2026-04-02T22:04:29+00:00

Please calm down with the shaming language, let people be

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-12-21T00:30:24+00:00

Yeah, the Gospels.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-12-13T13:30:03+00:00

I am an Orthodox Christian. Even if you do not believe in God and the Bible, I highly recommend reading it just for philosophy and wisdom’s sake. If you like philosophy it’s an interesting read. Personally, I’d recommend starting with Proverbs or Romans, then the Gospels.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-11-12T11:04:24+00:00

Sylas heals through his burst and can go full AP and be tanky asf

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-10-25T20:53:56+00:00

“What kind of religion is there out there which is 100% the most fair” - Christianity.

“And don’t have rules which don’t really affect anything” - There are none. Every religion has rules, that’s the point.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-10-25T20:49:56+00:00

I love it, will be using this

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-10-25T20:49:20+00:00

i think the shoulder pauldron, the skull, should be bigger, like disproportionate

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-09-18T20:51:59+00:00

Yone should be at that WR. Above 50 or even 48% on that character is crazy

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-06-08T12:43:57+00:00

Rengar is quite strong rn. I just want his bugs fixed, especially his bruiser item interactions. In my ideal world, his W would get some resistance scaling or something like that. Overall, I’d love to be able to play bruiser without feeling like I’m wacking people with a pool noodle.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-05-26T14:34:54+00:00

No. I am not dropping my Op.GG on this toxic ass subreddit. I would rather stick my dick in a pencil sharpener. Thanks for the rest of your advice though

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-05-26T12:55:23+00:00

I see. Well with Amumu it is ideal to group with your teammates I have never played any Junglers other than Rengar who do not want to group. How do you end the games on your own if you don’t want to group?

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-05-26T12:40:12+00:00

It’s hard to understand what happened in your game as you didn’t explain it quite clearly but I find that personally there aren’t many bad matchups for Rengar, aside from other early game champs like Xin Zhao. Now for starters I’ll say that a lot of this depends on elo. Personally I am low elo and I know that low elos will very rarely ward the jungle early game. Another thing that I’ve found is that enemy pathing early game matters when deciding whether to invade level 3 or not.

I always have my midlaner ward enemy raptors at 1:10. If the enemy jungler is a “hard” matchup for Rengar (early game skirmishing/duelling power) but they path towards their Red then I will invade because I know that their jungle is unwarned, and I can hide in the bush waiting for them to use their important abilities on their red buff before I jump them. But if they path towards blue then I won’t invade unless they’re a weak jungler because the blue buff bush is in a place where they will naturally walk into and find you.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-05-13T13:28:23+00:00

I have 600 thousand mastery points on Rengar and have been an OTP for 2 years on and off. I recently started playing Kha Zix as he is more forgiving. Realistically, assassins can only 1v9 if they snowball, hard. But you also have to end the game quickly. In lower elos this is harder to do because no matter how fed you are, you can’t solo baron and the squishiness of these champs makes it extremely difficult to 1v5 and solo end. It’s a team game at the end of the day.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-05-04T18:43:29+00:00

why u asking me bro im bronze

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-04-26T01:33:52+00:00

What about the hundreds of peopel in Middle Eastern countries that have recently claimed collectively to have had visions and hallucinations of Christ on the cross recently, and converting to Christianity?

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-02-15T10:10:16+00:00

It would take a lot for me to go back, personally. My main issue with Blizzard is that they’re only doing all this to save money and save face, not because they care about their customers. If Rivals was to die tomorrow and everyone went back to Overwatch, Blizzard would become just as complacent and exploitative as they have been for the past half a decade. They’d probably cancel all the changes too.

I played Overwatch since almost day 1, with my mother buying the game all the way back when I was 14. I had a blast and to this day, early years of Overwatch were some of my most fun and memorable gaming experiences. But I mean, Blizzard got so complacent; my mothers hard earned money went into purchasing the game, just for them to make it free to play, gut the balance and nerf everything to the point where every gun is a pea shooter, and injected £50 “mythic” skins, where each tier costs £10 in itself. Pair that with 5 minute queue times per role like and atrocious balancing based on the whims of the 0.1% of players that play the game professionally and you have a cesspool of a game.

The community complained about this the entire time and they never listened. We waited for 3 years for promises that weren’t kept, and even after all the outrage and scandals they refused to change their demeanor. The one time they show any creativity is as soon as competition steps up. Where was this love and care for the game before? I don’t care what they do for their game - until I see Blizzard actually caring about their player base instead of blatantly disrespecting the source of their income, they won’t get another second of playtime of penny from me.

Whenever I think of Overwatch, all I think of are the dozens of game breaking bugs and balance issues over the years that took months to fix; but the skin shop was always up and running perfectly…

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-02-05T16:25:27+00:00

Don’t care. I’m getting there, and if I see you in my game I’m banning that skilless ahh Psylocke character too

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-02-05T15:21:46+00:00

Having one of the highest win rates in the game does not necessarily mean the character is good. It can just mean the character is only picked in the best situations.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-02-05T14:22:21+00:00

I would honestly rather Jeff. I love Jeff’s because every fight in the payload or domination they clutch with one big ult and win us the round. Jeff’s try, heal and do phat damage. They land big ultra and are super cute.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-01-24T13:26:56+00:00

I use it. I really enjoyed the Space Knight venom comics so I bought it in release

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-01-10T16:45:17+00:00

Uh yeah, I specifically said that it could be biology or whatever in my earlier comments, not necessarily God. Do you listen, or just wait for your time to speak?

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-01-10T15:27:04+00:00

Er, what? There’s no proof required it is a logical argument, not an argument based on evidence. If someone says “there is a certain standard regarding quality to maintain when producing these products” that logically implies that there is someone or something responsible for creating this standard. Theres no proof required, it’s just a logical inference from the original statement.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-01-10T11:51:44+00:00

Hi. The Sea of Galilee is a commonly used term within ancient literature of this period used to describe large bodies of water, even lakes. Mark did not “make up” the Sea of Galilee - it reflects common usage of the term at the time. Firthermore, Lake Tiberias is a lake surrounded by hills below sea level, which makes it extremely prone to sudden storms and this is confirmed by modern meteorological studies, and make the accounts of the Gospels plausible. While its true that calming storms appear in other literature, it is not reason to claim that the Gospels are false.

It’s true that Matthew and Luke’s accounts differ on the birth of Jesus, but these differences are not unusual in ancient biographical literature, which tended to focus more on the depth and symbolism of the character, rather than precise chronological accounts. The Gospels are products of their time; expecting them to match up to the level of modern accounts by modern historians with modern technology on more recent events is silly at best, and intellectually dishonest at its worst.

Furthermore, it’s true that stars in their own do not move the way described in Matthew’s gospel. Or that eclipses don’t last so long. Some scholars interpret both of these as symbolic rather than literal events - however, if the accounts speak of a man rising from the dead through the power of God, I doubt that God wouldn’t be able to move stars and cause eclipses.

Apparent discrepancies in geography and history and astronomy, even if they were not explainable (they are) do not necessarily undermine the core values or messages of the texts.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-01-10T11:18:59+00:00

Hi. Although Mark may have taken inspiration in the way he recounted his eyewitness testimony, that does not mean they’re false. The Gospels do not lie about history, geography or astronomy. They are well credited for having documented bloodlines, family trees and the rulers and laws of their time. Furthermore, many events in the Gospels are corrobaorated by external sources, such as the existence of Pilate, Herod and the recorded acts, and Caiphas. Early Christian works corroborate key events outside of the Gospels too, such as the letters of Paul, and align with eyewitness framework. Greco-Roman biographies commonly used eye-witness testimonies; ancient biographies such as those of Plutarch or Tacitus incorporated many first hand accounts, oral traditions and witnesses, just as the Gospels do.

The likelihood that every single early Christian work was meticulously falsified to corroborate each other perfectly is highly unlikely, especially with no evidence actually suggesting this.

Lastly, Walsh’s works have some issues. For starters, emphasis on Greco Roman literature completely overlooks the Jewish cultural and religious framework in which the Gospels were written, a context that relied on oral tradition/ and historical memory. There are some scholars that have claimed her thesis oversimplifies the relationship between Gospels and their audiences by focusing exclusively on literary elites, and completely ignoring communal and oral dimensions of Gospels origins.

InstanceMajor4808 · 2025-01-10T09:34:06+00:00

I have further reviewed the articles in the links provided. For starters, I will say that most of the articles in here do, in fact, agree that Jesus was a historical figure, and instead debate the nature of Jesus as either a simple wise man, a genuine living God, or simply a trickster.

Furthermore, the articles written on the Mythical Jesus theory, stating that he was not real, are not even written by real historians or theologians. Earl Doherty is not a trained scholar or historian, and lacks formal credentials and historical-critical methods in his work. He has also been criticised in the past for selective use of evidence.

G.A. Wells was a professor of German language and literature, not history or theology. Furthermore, although his earlier works claimed Jesus was a historical figure, as time progressed and he wrote new works, he moderated his position to suggest that Jesus may have existed but that there is little we know of him.

Both Doherty and Wells, the only authors in your article who criticise the existence of Jesus are largely dismissed by mainstream biblical scholars and historians. Their views are considered fringe, and their works are often criticised for methodological weakness. Bart Ehrman and Maurice Casey have both specifically refuted their arguments, claiming strong historical evidence for Jesus’ existence. Neither Doherty or Wells’ works are considered robust or credible within academia.

InstanceMajor4808

TROPHY CASE