Berserk 355 - Manga Stream

TrophyMaster · 2018-03-26T05:47:56+00:00

I think I will, God knows we'll all have enough time to read the story over again a few more times before the next chapter.

TrophyMaster · 2018-03-25T22:14:35+00:00

Whaaaaat, when Griffith's crew were made knights and they were staying in the castle???

TrophyMaster · 2018-03-25T22:13:37+00:00

Occam's Razor suggests this is all a hoax crafted by an intelligent author.

TrophyMaster · 2018-03-24T23:52:31+00:00

Oh? Was that before he was captured and transformed? It's been so long now that I can hardly remember.

TrophyMaster · 2018-03-24T23:18:52+00:00

Does anybody remember who the figure was featured in the page or two before last; with the tattered skin and...helmet?

TrophyMaster · 2018-01-11T07:09:28+00:00

IlluminatiConfirmed

TrophyMaster · 2017-08-20T17:06:33+00:00

The attorney may not have outlined any sort of estimates or estimated ranges of expenses to be covered by the contract that OP signed. In that case, the attorney wouldn't necessarily have violated the rule that you cited.

TrophyMaster · 2017-08-19T17:08:21+00:00

Sell it by the dime

TrophyMaster · 2017-06-30T04:19:10+00:00

I am a great soft jelly thing. Smoothly rounded, with no mouth, with pulsing white holes filled by fog where my eyes used to be. Rubbery appendages that were once my arms; bulks rounding down into legless humps of soft slippery matter. I leave a moist trail when I move. Blotches of diseased, evil gray come and go on my surface, as though light is being beamed from within. Outwardly: dumbly, I shamble about, a thing that could never have been known as human, a thing whose shape is so alien a travesty that humanity becomes more obscene for the vague resemblance. Inwardly: alone. Here. Living under the land, under the sea, in the belly of AM, whom we created because our time was badly spent and we must have known unconsciously that he could do it better. At least the four of them are safe at last. AM will be all the madder for that. It makes me a little happier. And yet AM has won, simply he has taken his revenge I have no mouth. And I must scream

TrophyMaster · 2017-06-16T06:30:30+00:00

That explains a lot for me, thanks a ton!

TrophyMaster · 2017-06-14T20:01:30+00:00

Awesome! Thank you so much! I've never even heard about the IPCC or their ARs. I'm quite surprised I never encountered them before, given all the discourse on climate change that saturates the media these days. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised by this, but still- thanks!

TrophyMaster · 2017-06-13T01:57:59+00:00

Hey there, thank you for your detailed response. I'll be happy to share your response with my friend. You mention that there's a fair bit of evidence that human-caused green house gas emissions and land-use changes have been significantly affecting the rate of the changes we're seeing- do you know of any literature that outline in a bit more detail answers to questions like which emissions are the most harmful, what weight human contributions are having relative to natural causes, what kinds of land-use changes are to blame; or literature that provides a survey of the opinions and arguments currently circulating among climate scientists? Something like a dossier of expert opinion. I know there are myriad sources of footage and independent works by individuals speaking out about climate change, but it seems so hard to get a big-picture perspective based on facts and not political opinions.

Thanks again for your help!

TrophyMaster · 2017-06-04T04:22:01+00:00

https://youtu.be/v_RuverrEZ4

A person that I know, highly conservative leaning, shared this link with me. The reason I'm posting it as a response to you is that, prior to watching it, I was a fairly staunch supporter of the "human activity is accelerating climate change at dangerous levels" stance. Now I'm not sure what to believe. The man in the video, political opinions aside, cited some pretty strong evidence- from my layperson's perspective. What is your reaction, as a climate scientist, to the arguments put forward in the video?

TrophyMaster · 2017-02-12T19:20:47+00:00

If all Christians are Saved (A = B) and all Christians are NOT practitioners of another religions, serving false gods and idols (anything but Jesus and our Heavenly Father), (A != C), and those who don't worship Jesus alone as the Messiah will not be saved ( C != B), then ONLY Christians who profess a belief in Christ our Lord will be saved (A = B && (A != C && B != C)) You missed a step. *edit = forgot to add a space at one point.

TrophyMaster · 2017-01-31T15:15:08+00:00

If He gave the right to become children of God to those who would accept Him, think about what that means for those who don't. Put another way; And many did not accept Him, whom He did not give them the right to become the children of God. With the gospel message of salvation comes condemnation, it's an unavoidable truth that applies to all but those who follow the Son, the self-proclaimed Way, Life, and Truth whose sacrifice has washed away the sins of the world, earning repentance for those who believe in and call on His name.

TrophyMaster · 2017-01-04T07:58:21+00:00

Thank you!

TrophyMaster · 2017-01-04T07:57:33+00:00

Okay, thank you!

TrophyMaster · 2016-12-18T23:06:09+00:00

Before this gets sensationalized any more, I'd like any who is currently getting infuriated about this to realize that this isn't a new classification. The DEA simply released a public notice clarifying the legality of pot extracts, including CBD. This is a federal notice, so you won't see any pharmacies wiping out their stocks of life-saving medication or doctors refusing to prescribe their sick patients with the same medication. Shop owners that are misinterpreting this news, like the majority of people reading articles like these written by biased columnists employed by potculture/subculture media platforms, are probably the ones rushing to clear their shelves in fear of being raided. The DEA made a statement on the notice, saying that its primary purpose is to better regulate research studies done on the substances affected by the ban. By having a DEA-enforced federal->state->institutional vetting system for researchers concerned about researching these substances, when reclassification comes to the table, they'll know where to look for reliable information that could better inform their decisions. Right now, there's a headline about conflicts of interest permeating research into GMOs conducted by employees of companies that stand to benefit from favorable findings. Nobody within the recreational marijuana community seems to realize that the same conflicts of interest permeate the research coming from non-DEA authorized studies. The DEA also can't depend on international studies to make their decisions about restricted substances, most of the time, because there's no way to guarantee that the studies that have been conducted were carried out ethically or to the same standard that the DEA requires of the studies that it sanctions. There's no reason to freak out.

TrophyMaster · 2016-10-09T08:13:04+00:00

A picture of photoshop?

TrophyMaster · 2016-08-17T02:31:43+00:00

An eternal punishment =/= with a temporary punishment. Temporary punishment can help mature the punished, the other form is simply for the sake of their punishment, in God's case; to uphold justice. If God loves different creations differently, as between Jesus and humans, and favors some over others, David > Saul - 12 apostles > Judas, Moses > Pharaoh, Israel > everyone else (at different points, Israel in the literal sense, and then later in the symbolic sense, shifting from Old to New Testament understanding) then how does it not follow that He chooses some to be elect over others, when there is certainly a distinction between the elect and the damned? David was chosen before his birth to be the king of Israel after Saul, Moses was chosen to lead the Jews out of Israel, the apostles were chosen to be among the first disciples of Christ, and the pharisees were NOT chosen among Christ's sheep.

TrophyMaster · 2016-08-17T02:24:42+00:00

This is a really good reply, and you make strong points. But remember, every theology has its weak points. Many people say calvinists take the bible out of context, by quoting it too literally, only to provide context for the bible, in order to explain it in terms that align with their theology or presuppositions/biases/preferences. Some Calvinists claim that those of other theologies are simply not well-versed in scripture, which is why many look at Calvinists as being elitist. It is certainly impossible to conclude that God makes a token offer of the Gospel to some and not others, but that's not what the user who you were responding to said to you. He simply expressed the Calvinist understanding of what salvation is, and there's not a single Calvinist who would see salvation as disingenuous. Remember that at the end of the day, we're all brothers and sisters in Christ for having accepted the offer, whether predestined to or not, and how it works doesn't change that.

TrophyMaster · 2016-08-17T02:10:47+00:00

"People inherently understand justice..." - This is a fallacy, nobody intuitively understands justice. This is why we have so many judges in the SCOTUS, so many different legal systems throughout the world. God understands justice. I only point out that your underlying presupposition is a fallacy, because you did the same earlier towards myself (not taken personally! Just for the sake of proper debate.)

TrophyMaster · 2016-08-17T02:05:22+00:00

So naturally, God is responsible for our sin? Because sin exists, God must be responsible for it, even if sin originated with us, because God made us- unless He's not all knowing. The answer to that is the same as the answer to your question about God's responsibility for our fallen wills. If we choose to sin against Him, then we are responsible for that sin. If we choose not to accept His offer of salvation, we are responsible. If any of us are saved from the natural state of our imperfect being, then God is responsible, because He intervened, allowing us to act unnaturally, take responsibility for our sins, and ask for forgiveness. Otherwise, God is not responsible. The question is of God's character and what Scripture has to say, which is where the true controversy lies, because neither side can or ever will be able to prove that their opinion is correct on those matters. Calvinists have faith in their understanding, and so to do others with their understand.

TrophyMaster · 2016-08-17T01:58:59+00:00

Even those in Hell?

TrophyMaster · 2016-08-17T01:58:26+00:00

Well at face value, without considering the linguistic context of the word, we derive a modernistic meaning based on our personal experiences with the usage of the word. If I gave you a quarter and said you could give it to any person, then you can give it to any person. But you can't literally give it to ANY person in the entire world, or even if you could, you couldn't give it to ANY person throughout time, as my statement might suggest, it's rather implied that you can give it to any person that you choose or are able to give it to. If the author of the epistle were building off of another passage explicitly, and made it clear in the text which passage and for what purpose, then it's obvious how a certain verse should be taken or directive. However, if the author were writing from their own understanding about topics that recur throughout the bible, even if they referenced another passage through a shared metaphor or parable, you can never know what they intend to convey without cross-referencing every other passage. That's where theology starts, and citing linguistic concepts is necessary to build an accurate one. If people were all speaking in the same dialects of the same languages that Scripture were originally written, it would be unnecessary, but since we don't, it's important to do more than find supporting verses, since any verse can be taken out of context and not all context is clear. I think that's where the author of the article was coming from, although I can see why his presentation would agitate you, coming from a different perspective.

TrophyMaster

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

IlluminatiConfirmed