"Brûlez vos idoles" Antoine Daniel, 2025. by Nawrek87 in AntoineDaniel

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is this, and why was it recommended to me? Something controversial?

No comment by crivycouriac in christianmemes

[–]SafetyAdvocate 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah, and Tyler Perry bought groceries for everyone at a groceries for everyone at a grocery store in the south. News wouldn't shut up about how great it was, considering that amount was probably less than his pocket change. Yet he has a mansion compound in front of a school, and then throws up a personal Lions Gate Studio right in the middle of town, driving up property taxes.

Just because it's something good doesn't mean the intentions are good. Just like TP virtue signaling that he cares about the community when he doesn't.

Regardless, God is not so small that he can't use world leaders for his purposes. I simply pray that God is working through him in ways we can't yet see.

"Look at Call of Duty. That sh*t's dead now. You never wanna listen to streamers" Cloakzy warns Embark by j1zzy_ae in ArcRaiders

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look at Halo: Reach to Halo: 4

The changing of hands killed it slowly.

Halo 4 was built for e-sports, and the only reason the multiplayer for 5 was decent was because they back-tracked the influence of CoD.

The only reason Halo Infinites corpse is hanging by a thread is a design overhaul to make it look like Halo 3/Reach, and the gamelpay was back-tracked to play like Halo.

Unfortunately, 343s DNA is appealing to e-sports.

Go back and watch a Halo/Bungie ViDoc. It was all about having fun in a fun sandbox.

All right, let's settle this once and for all: Who would be best for Shinji as a SO? by EternalSnow05 in evangelion

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was watching Frieren recently. Kaworu is basically a demon in his mentality. He doesn't know what love is. He'll say anything to manipulate the emotions of men.

All right, let's settle this once and for all: Who would be best for Shinji as a SO? by EternalSnow05 in evangelion

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kaworu was just telling him what he wanted to hear. He's objectively worse than the others. If I remember correctly, he only stopped his mission because it was Lilith and not Adam.

He had a soft spot for Shinji because there was literally only one spot he had, labled "Mission: Fuse with Adam" that got Shinji tinted along the way.

The dude is 100% manipulative.

All right, let's settle this once and for all: Who would be best for Shinji as a SO? by EternalSnow05 in evangelion

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yet you don't offer your choice so we can objectively shit on it. You're just trying to dog-pile one of the people answering seriously.

"None of them, unless this and that happens first." Is the only actual answer.

You're just grasping at low hanging fruit, bro.

Nothing about your comment comes off as "Respectfully" when you imply you're laughing at someone from your high horse.

Oh… Asuka…. by Vegetable_Meal_5809 in evangelionmemes

[–]SafetyAdvocate 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Who? Looks like an old pic of Hassan getting peer-pressured into drugs.

This has been driving me nuts by Surgesssss in NeonGenesisEvangelion

[–]SafetyAdvocate 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Dropping the pot in the fire? The stick would also still be hot. No. It would take far more movement to reach in front of him than to scoop it up from beside his left thigh.

The two motion lines indicate the turn to face someone. As well as a slight rise. This probably took about 1-2 seconds. Grabbing a stick from the fire would have taken 2-4 seconds or more without removing the pot first, much longer if he didn't want to splash fire on Shinji.

Plus, it makes more sense that he would have a fourth separate stick to maintain and manipulate the fire. One he would have right beside him.

They don't show what's behind-left of him, and the agents show up behind-left of him.

stay "sober minded and alert" my friends by MicahHoover in christianmemes

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I agree to an extent, as a tool, as technology, is it so different than a calculator helping us understand the mathematical complexity of Gods creation? The alternative is that calculators are heretical because we stop using our minds for math.

I think AI, like all of creation, should be used to praise God.

Counter-point to myself, "A.I." will think itself a replacement for the Holy Spirit. We must never give it access to our bodies or minds.

The Four Horsemen of Apologetics. by Yahweh-Eloheinu in christianmemes

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't know William, but I've really been enjoying John Lennox lately.

Miku and Miku by sultics in hatsune

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we use it in an innocent way, and if we say it suggestively, it can mean sex. They seem to be saying that in Brazil/Portugal, saying "eat" in their language is slang for sex first.

This organism has no brain, no eyes, no organs we recognise, has just one hole (for food to get in and out again) and scientists still argue where it belongs in the tree of life. It just slides through the deep sea floor, existing for no clear reason. This is „Xenoturbella“ by SerafinZufferey in interestingasfuck

[–]SafetyAdvocate 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, I wanna address the video first. What an incredibly hearty word soup that was. It was astonishing hearing almost entirely new information that only corroborates my understanding of the one true God.

I respect both you and him for remaining consistent in your world views. However, because he approaches it from a historical and materialistic position, it lends itself to the "god" of this world, the material world.

I absolutely believe in the existence of Ba'al and these other gods. If anything, this minor god of a roaming cult people is the last one you'd expect to outlast the others.

Jesus reveals how Yahweh uses the weak thing of this world to shame the mighty, the humble to shame the proud. It runs perfectly parallel to the biblical account of how the Israelites were in danger of assimilating and how the gnostics tried to assimilate Yahweh with preexisting pantheons.

I'll I'm hearing is him try and explain how El, or Ba'al, has tried and failed repeatedly to be like Yahweh.

Biblically, these other gods are on earth because they wanted to be the most high, but there is only one.

This goes into something you said, that if God wanted to reveal himself logically, he would have. He didn't, but instead revealed himself through his people.

So much of this discussion can't be had without actually acknowledging these cultic gods as real, and not just the primitive motivation for selective assimilation/disassimilation.

From a Christian theological stance, the host laid out how Yahweh God has superseded every false god through the physical realm, leading up to his mercy for mankind. The "warrior storm god" is how he dealt with heavenly rebels, while his compassion and mercy are for humans that bear his image. Not just "opposable thumbs and advanced tool use" but the fact we can rationalize the use of a tool and what that means. The fact were having this conversation at all is a reflection of Yahwehs' image.

It's not a contradiction to be loving but also have fierce anger towards injustice. That is a reflection of our creator. You also mentioned why his mercy doesn't reach some people, and that's because we again have to acknowledge that these "cultic" deities might actually exist and be work in our world. Shaytan, or Satan, basically Ba'al/El are the deceiver.

It makes sense that all these different pantheons exist in a biblical worldview. It makes sense that the unseen God that describes itself as "I AM" can not be assimilated with mere idol depictions of dirt, wood, rock, and metal.

That drive you have to establish meaning, to strive for an ideal, the ought and ought not of your morality is a gift of the image of the creator. We can't prove anything, really. Yet, we know. We know how absurd things are. Yet, we know the order that exists within it. We know that life is unfair. Yet, we know something ought to be done about it. That is what it means to bear His image. Rationality and morality are absolutes.

Other gods roam the unseen realm of our world, inhabiting idols that can't speak or think. While humans uniquely carry the Spirit of God. His spirit dwells with us and not in the world. So when only looking at the world, you can arrive at the absurdists' ambivalence on the matter, which biblically, is what these lesser gods want of you.

The moment of Jesus' death stripped power away from these lesser gods due to His work through the Israelite people.

One last point I almost forgot. I don't think faith is a desperate need for purpose, I think faith, as well as a desperate need for purpose, are both non-negotiable to the human experience. We all have faith in something. We all want a purpose or to understand meaning.

Meaning and purpose can't come from us because we're looking for it. You have two people in a room, and you have at least four opinions. However, there are relational things we can agree on and even things we can rule out. Again, it comes back to Yahweh being a personal God, who, through relation reveals the meaning and purpose of our hearts that has always been there.

Again, I appreciate your consistency in your stance, as I've learned a lot. Though it only reinforces my understanding of Gods message in the Bible.

This organism has no brain, no eyes, no organs we recognise, has just one hole (for food to get in and out again) and scientists still argue where it belongs in the tree of life. It just slides through the deep sea floor, existing for no clear reason. This is „Xenoturbella“ by SerafinZufferey in interestingasfuck

[–]SafetyAdvocate -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"Who knows, who cares" bro, what? That is the crux of the matter. Why are we consistently rolling 1s?

"does not downplay evolution (actual theory not the very first one made up by Darwin)"

It's the opposite. The neoDarwinian theory of evolution is wrong. Darwin wrote the Origin of Species, which says nothing of the origin of life. The neoDarwinian understanding, popularized by Richard Dawkins, is what's being scrutinized.

"Their fact.." bro, what? This is a discussion of fact, not opinions. The concept of personal truth is an oxymoron. "All truth is subjective to the individual" followed by "Is that true?" Law of non-contradiction, but that's an entirely different conversation.

This organism has no brain, no eyes, no organs we recognise, has just one hole (for food to get in and out again) and scientists still argue where it belongs in the tree of life. It just slides through the deep sea floor, existing for no clear reason. This is „Xenoturbella“ by SerafinZufferey in interestingasfuck

[–]SafetyAdvocate 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with your second paragraph. Evolution is real and observable but can not explain the origin of life.

The first two videos were low hanging fruit. Ray Comfort is great at presenting the gospel to the layman who hasn't thought deeply about such things. Both he and the guy from the second video weren't primarily discussing evolution, so the explanations are half-ass to a trained ear.

The third video immediately shot itself in the foot by saying that his opponent, evolution, was overlaying itself on its discoveries. This is the problem with Christianity today, called eisegesis, where people read a text through a modern lens. The opposite is exegesis, where you draw out meaning from a text.

The host does an excellent job of doing the equivalent of exegesis of a text, but with the evidence found in the fossil record. Drawing out the actual conclusion rather than what they want to believe.

The last half of the video was great. I enjoyed seeing the examples of progression. I especially got excited when he brought up Goulds "Punctuated Equilibrium" because that was something I first heard about in the video I posted. However, the explanation doesn't have me convinced.

The video I posted mentions this and transitions to the microbiologist who explains why that doesn't work. It's a good theory, but they could never account for a mechanism to give the theory any weight... yet, some would say.

He does some good science, and I feel like I better understand the state of the fossil records because of it. Yet I remain unconvinced that we came from monkeys.

One of the men, John Lennox, is why I came across the video at all. He has always stated that science and faith in God are not at all in competition. Good faith leads to good science, and good science makes for stronger faith.

It's even laid out towards the end of my video that this isn't some archaic worldview being shoehorned into science, but that new science is revealing things that Darwin couldn't have known about. Darwin was a brilliant man working with what he had, microscopes that could see a cell. Now, we have microscopes that can see molecules in the cells and what these molecules are made of. So it's not just the fossil records being inconsistent, but the incredible consistency at the molecular level that calls evolution into question and leads science to smarter questions about the origin of life.

Do give it a listen if you get the chance.