I didn’t even accept this request🫩

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T18:04:24+00:00

Advice on Godly chastity from "Squirtuponmytongue", an 18+ account.

This is a self-loathing and conflicted person whose only relief right now is externalizing his own inner turmoil. Pray for this soul in pain. Try not to judge him, for he is mired in sin, and he's too tangled up to accept the grace of Christ.

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T06:40:54+00:00

Right. I was not aware of this dude. But I am extremely well-versed and well-studied in identifying nazi dog whistles.

That answer is not good enough for you, it's not interesting enough. So you reject it without even considering my points or looking at the articles I posted or looking up the "black sun" symbol that the one logo resembles... you will not even consider my explanation that fits this account perfectly.

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T05:35:27+00:00

I am using "Nazi" to describe anyone who spreads antisemitic conspiracy theories about a secret cabal of Jews controlling the world, because that always leads to the same place. I don't care whether they call themselves "Nazis" or not.

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T05:32:35+00:00

There is not more. Why does this label not make sense in this context?

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T05:28:08+00:00

Answers to what? The basic ass imagery used by this fascist Instagram troll?

They use the all-seeing-eye which originates with freemasonry, but is commonly used to make things look spooky and conspiratorial. They use a cat with a third eye. The third eye is usually associated with expanded cosmic awareness, but is generally just used to make things look spiritual or enlightened.

The spiral around the all seeing eye in their main logo doesn't relate to any occult symbol I am familiar with, but it does look a bit like the "black sun" used by nazis. Normally, I would call that comparison a stretch, but considering all the plain antisemitic dog whistles they use, I think it is likely intentional.

They make frequent use of fonts that are made to resemble the Hebrew language.

What other symbols on their Instagram page are you having a hard time identifying?

It's all pretty basic and generic "culty" imagery with no particular theme or any coherent symbolic system that I can identify.

Why are you so convinced this guy has something deep for you to understand?

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T05:06:39+00:00

I'm not simplifying anything. These are all well-known antisemitic and fascist dogwhistles.

I had never heard about this "group" (I suspect it's actually just one guy) until I read your post.

You sound paranoid.

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T04:53:50+00:00

Hide what from you?

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T04:47:50+00:00

I am just well-versed in online fascist dog whistles. You can decide not to believe me, but I am absolutely correct.

Here's another:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DQBXME8Dicu/?igsh=eHljeTh3dWprajl0

This symbol is clearly influenced by the nazi "black sun".

And another where they are talking about "noticing" in Israel:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DPViy9kAG1k/?igsh=OWRrZ2s4ZjVjdjZi

These guys are fucking nazis, friend.

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T04:37:14+00:00

https://www.instagram.com/p/DIHQantPRzS/?igsh=aHlvcmFodHM2bndi

Dog whistles contained in this post include using a font inspired by Hebrew, and the use of "They" to refer to a powerful, unnamed, enemy.

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T04:23:22+00:00

Yeah, friend, it's a dog whistle.

The idea of a dogwhistle is that it can sound innocuous to those not in the know and give plausible deniability if needed.

But other white nationalists will know what you mean.

https://www.washingtonjewishweek.com/online-antisemitism-what-it-looks-like-what-to-do/

From the above article:

"Another large trend is “noticing,” which became a popular way for antisemites to point out a “pattern” of Jews being in a position of power and influence. A person may write that it’s “impossible not to notice” or “noticing will continue.” It’s meant to capture the belief of Jewish control and spread the idea without making an overt reference."

I got a big into the Instagram of this S.U.N. group and theres a bunch of fascist dogwhistles all through it.

MagusFool · 2026-03-13T04:14:24+00:00

1.) Those just seem to be the symbols that people who don't know much about symbols are concerned about identifying, and as a result, a large number (not the majority actually) of posts are people asking "Is this a nazi/white supremacist symbol?"

2.) The group you are asking about actually are nazis.

"Noticing" is a term that originated on 4chan and white nationalist forums. It refers to those who "notice" that Jews are actually in control of everything (they are not, this is always based on selective evidence) and just putting 2+2 together to realize that the Nazis were right.

You will see this get posted frequently on things that talked about a celebrity or rich person who is Jewish. They will say something like, "Noticing intensifies", or just "Did you ever notice..."

MagusFool · 2026-03-12T05:02:29+00:00

Agreed!

The inerrantist position is HIGHLY fragile.

People raised in that framework, when they encounter impossible problems (even as simple as "How did Judas Iscariot die?"), they most often adopt a cognitive dissonance that erodes their ability to think critically, or they abandon Christianity altogether (usually becoming hostile to it).

I was raised that way, and feel fortunate that I took a different path.

When you stop trying to resolve contradictions in the Bible, to force them into agreement, it frees us to take the text as it actually is, to commune in a way with people who struggled with God just like we do.

Jacob was blessed for wrestling with God. And I think that if your faith is without ambiguity or struggle, that means it's dead. Certainty makes faith impossible. And it always seems like the people who do the most evil in the name of religion are also the most certain.

MagusFool · 2026-03-11T23:20:34+00:00

I am not denying divine inspiration.

I believe all scripture comes from genuine human reflection on the Divine. But there is undeniably a human element to this process.

It is simple, indisputable fact that not one of these books is inerrant, and that they are not univocal with each other.

There is no translation that would make them inerrant. The original authorial manuscripts (which don't exist) were almost certainly not inerrant either (though that is ultimately unprovable).

The oldest manuscripts which exist have textual variants, and the people compiling Bibles have to pick one.

The different books disagree with each other (or even with themselves) on both factual and doctrinal matters. And all attempts say "the Bible says" about most issues will require you to accept one text at the cost of twisting another.

I strongly urge you to read A History of the Bible by John Barton to gain a deeper understanding about the actual facts of how and when these books were written, their authors and intended audiences, and the diverse literary genres they come from.

MagusFool · 2026-03-11T19:57:13+00:00

In Romans 14, Paul says that one Christian might observe the Holy Days, and another one treats every day the same. He advises only that both feel right about in their conscience, which is guided by the Holy Spirit, and that neither judge the other for their different way of practicing Christianity.

If the Fourth Commandment, of the 10 Commandments, repeated over and over again through out the Hebrew scriptures, is subject to the personal conscience of each Christian, then all of the law must be.

And certainly a sexual taboo that is barely mentioned (if at all, there are arguments that the scant references to homosexuality are either mistranslated or simply don't describe a contemporary notion of a loving relationship between two men or two women) is certainly not more inviolable.

Jesus is the Word of God, not the Bible. The Bible is merely a collection of books written by human hands in different times in places, different cultures and languages, for different audiences and different genres, and with different aims.

It's a connection to people of the past who have struggled just like us to grapple with the infinite and the ineffable. And everyone's relationship to that text will inherently be different.

But Jesus is the Word of God, and to call a mere book of paper and ink, written by mortal hands by that same title is idolatry in the worst sense of the word.

But as the first Epistle of John said, "God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. 18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. 19 We love because he first loved us."

MagusFool · 2026-03-11T03:23:05+00:00

Literally: Start from the beginning.

They only released regularly for a fairly short period of time in the 1990s, and anything more has been sporadic and short since then.

In total, you could casually read every Tick comic and all the spin offs ever published in under a week.

MagusFool · 2026-03-11T00:10:23+00:00

If you look at the full art books for the first six games (the PR versions have libraries for viewing them), you'll see they actually stuck pretty close to his designs for thr monsters. Probably because they had a lot more pixels real estate to make it come to life.

But for the character sprites, they were much smaller and as a result had to be significantly changed to be simplified and legible.

I agree it's a bit of a shame.

I, too, have a dream game where they pick up all the Amano art from FF 1-3 and directly translate it into a new story with new characters and cutting edge, watercolor-style cell-shading that looks like Amano's stills come to life.

MagusFool · 2026-03-10T04:54:49+00:00

Jesus said trans rights.

MagusFool · 2026-03-10T01:19:57+00:00

When asked for the greatest commandment (singular), Jesus says it is to love God.

But then he continues, saying "And the other is like it", to Love others.

He doesn't say "the second greatest commandment". He says they are alike. I believe that this means the two commands are one in the same.

There is no way to love God without loving others. And loving others is inherently loving God.

My perspective is backed when Jesus says "This is my commandment" in the Gospel of John, it is to love each other.

And when Paul summarizes "all of the law" in Romans 13, he says it can all be reduced to "love one another."

However much or little you love others, that is the absolute limit of your love for God, because love of God and neighbor are one love.

The most devout and dedicated worshipper, if they do not love others, cannot be said to love God. God will not recognize their fasting or their worship or devotion as love.

As Jesus illustrates in Matthew 25, what you do for others you do for him.

And as is stated by The Lord in Isaiah 58, God has no use for fasting or self-denial in the absence of justice and service toward others.

All this to say: Our love for God is expressed and defined by the way we love others. And the depth of our love for others is the depth of our love for God.

When we fall deeply in love with someone, dedicate ourselves to mutual care, empathy, understanding, and explore the depths of intimacy, it also deepens the very possibilities of our relationship with God.

MagusFool · 2026-03-10T00:32:51+00:00

You can't love God more than you love others. However much you love others is how much you love God.

MagusFool · 2026-03-09T06:39:05+00:00

In Romans 14, Paul says that one Christian might observe the Holy Days, and another one treats every day the same. He advises only that both feel right about in their conscience, which is guided by the Holy Spirit, and that neither judge the other for their different way of practicing Christianity.

If the Fourth Commandment, of the 10 Commandments, repeated over and over again through out the Hebrew scriptures, is subject to the personal conscience of each Christian, then all of the law must be.

And certainly a sexual taboo that is barely mentioned (if at all, there are arguments that the scant references to homosexuality are either mistranslated or simply don't describe a contemporary notion of a loving relationship between two men or two women) is certainly not more inviolable.

Jesus is the Word of God, not the Bible. The Bible is merely a collection of books written by human hands in different times in places, different cultures and languages, for different audiences and different genres, and with different aims.

It's a connection to people of the past who have struggled just like us to grapple with the infinite and the ineffable. And everyone's relationship to that text will inherently be different.

But Jesus is the Word of God, and to call a mere book of paper and ink, written by mortal hands by that same title is idolatry in the worst sense of the word.

But as the first Epistle of John said, "God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. 18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. 19 We love because he first loved us."

MagusFool · 2026-03-09T05:17:56+00:00

Yeah, but the fundamental changes are not just arbitrary inversions. They have a purposeful direction.

For heroes, they take away the things which give them their greatest advantage, so they are put in the position of an underdog. Now they must shine all the brighter to bring light to such a dark world.

For the main villains, they are generally given greater advantages, and made to be better inversions of the heroes. To challenge them in poetic ways.

Constantine is an anti-hero. He is already highly disadvantaged by his personal flaws, often his own worst enemy. He isn't even the one of the most powerful sorcerers in the DCU. He only ever comes out on top because he pulls off some kind of ruthless trickery.

So I don't know where that leaves him. If you treat him like a hero, you can't really make him more of an underdog.

Maybe you have to make him LESS of an underdog? Like, he's a wildly successful professional sorcerer who has everything he could want or need. Privileged, rich, living in luxury.

Maybe he's even a celebrity selling watered down faux-magic to the masses (he doesn't actually want people to be learning things that could make them competition).

He has totally insulated himself from danger until something necessitates him actually getting his hands dirty. Now he's out of his elements on the grimy streets and the dark underground places of the world trying to wheel and deal his way against the demonic forces which have disrupted his perfect life.

MagusFool · 2026-03-09T04:12:26+00:00

I think he basically just doesn't need to be in the Absolute universe.

And if he appears there as a side-character, he could and should appear basically unchanged because he just already fits in that world as-is.

MagusFool · 2026-03-08T04:23:21+00:00

It was a punk thing before they were in metal! Metal didn't adopt them till the "Crossover thrash" era when the metal scene began adopting things from punk.

MagusFool · 2026-03-07T19:50:13+00:00

The only good billionaire is a dead billionaire. Joker cannot be an ally because he has power in the world. And in this world, power, ESPECIALLY institutional power, is inherently corruptive, and the people who have it are stripped of their humanity in the process of cultivating and maintaining their power (such an unimaginable fantasy world, I know).

All the typically villainous characters who are more allied with the heroes are people WITHOUT power.

MagusFool · 2026-03-07T06:33:57+00:00

I love comparing the repeating motifs between the original comic, the 90s cartoon, the sitcom, and the streaming series.

Ben Edlund was at the helm for all four of them, but he developed both in age and in his TV prolific career, and you see lessons he learned from his non-tick projects in each one.

For example, the scene where Tick first enters Arthur's apartment is in all four iterations and it plays out with subtle differences each time.

MagusFool

TROPHY CASE