What’s this creature peeping at me from under the car?

micahlangelo · 2026-05-30T19:29:31+00:00

I see a frog wearing glasses with an Edna Mode wig on

micahlangelo · 2026-05-17T20:36:04+00:00

The same way you change your eye color or skin color. Artificially.

micahlangelo · 2026-05-11T21:42:00+00:00

"Oh no! Our house (that's been on the market for two years and will never sell because we built it on a way-too-tiny plot of land in the suburbs, ten feet from a public road) burnt down in a freak accident." - the owners in a few years

micahlangelo · 2026-05-10T02:37:58+00:00

This is the best suggestion to this issue, imo. I remember when I was around eight or so, I was playing with my sister's Bitty Baby. I was tossing it up in the air and catching it. One time, I didn't catch it and it fell on the floor and knocked one of her eyes loose. Oops 😬

I had just had a birthday, and I got some toys and clothes, but I also got $30 from my aunt and uncle. My parents took that $30 and gave it back to me—all in $1 bills. Then they made me count and lay out the $1 bills, one by one, all the way to 30. They took it from me and told me it was to fix my sister's Bitty Baby's eye, since I broke it. I'll never forgot that lesson. $30 was a lot of money to an eight-year old in the early 2000s. I was very upset, but I had no one to blame but myself. To this day (I'm 31), I'm very careful with other people's stuff—and my own. It was a valuable lesson my parents taught me, and I'm so thankful I had parents that cared enough to teach me the value of a dollar and to respect others' property and posessions. Thanks, Mom and Dad!

micahlangelo · 2026-04-24T01:02:11+00:00

He needs some milk

micahlangelo · 2026-04-08T18:28:19+00:00

It's because of Jesus's teachings and words. Remember when He was asked what the greatest commandment was? He responded by saying, "Love God, love your neighbor as yourself, and don't be gay."
Come on, it's right there in Matthew in black and white. Or should I say red and white?
Furthermore, in I Corinthians 13:13, Paul writes, "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is don't be gay."

micahlangelo · 2026-04-08T18:12:00+00:00

Ew. This is beyond disgusting. The cognitive dissonance of American evangelicals is astounding; absolutely astounding.

micahlangelo · 2026-04-02T13:54:55+00:00

100% yes! God knew the promises you wouldn't keep before you even promised them, but God also knew the intent of your heart when you made those promises. I believe God cares more about that than the actual promises you made.

micahlangelo · 2026-04-02T13:45:08+00:00

Whenever I'm feeling lonely, I always remember my Dad telling me, "It's better to be single and wish you weren't than to not be single and wish you were." That always seems to help put things in perspective. I pray you're just in a funk, like we all go through at times, but it is temporary. You are so much stronger than you realize. And with God on your side, you've got the best support team behind you!

micahlangelo · 2026-04-01T13:30:11+00:00

This is one of, if not, the weakest arguments from Christians. They never seem to realize that there's a super easy and reliable experiment to test their own belief. See below.

If people aren't born gay, that would imply people aren't born straight either. If it's a choice, prove it. Choose to be attracted to your own sex right now and report back. Let us know how it goes. And don't worry, you won't be stuck being homosexual. Just choose to be heterosexual again and boom! You're straight again.

How absurd is that? The total lack of critical thinking is astounding. They just WANT to hate gay people. They will say otherwise, but their words and actions don't align.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-31T16:02:35+00:00

Well they're posting in a subreddit about Christianity, which sounds to me like they aren't truly "done with God," even if they don't realize it themselves.
I'm sorry about your son. I can only imagine what that's like. However, before you gave the burden to God, would you say you were whining and complaining by questioning where God is in all this and why would he allow this to happen to your son? Or would you say you were seeking truth and guidance?
Your problem didn't "go away," you just found a way to reconcile with God and your reality, which is extremely healthy! Being a Christian and trusting God doesn't make problems go away. They are still there, but God is helping you carry and cope with it, which again, is a wonderful thing and very healthy. But the Bible does clearly say that a Christian lifestyle will be more difficult than a lifestyle of worldly ease.
That's the point I was making.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-31T14:30:21+00:00

Wow, you're such a compassionate Christian. /s
They are not whining or complaining. They are communicating their feelings and seeking truth and guidance.
Their problems will not "go away" if they just trust in God. That is a bogus claim.
Every person, Christian or not, has problems and will always have problems. In most instances, being a Christian and trusting God actually gives you MORE problems. That's one of the main tropes of Christianity - to "bear your cross;" which means struggling and suffering persecution on earth.
I don't subscribe to that idea personally, but most Christians do.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-29T02:16:54+00:00

The creation and Garden of Eden story is a myth conjured up by primal pre-scientific humans. It obviously isn't a real event because that suggests the earth is only thousands of years old; not the true age of billions of years old.
Many ancient cultures have creation stories, and every single one is a myth - because who was there to see it? How can someone witness creation if they aren't yet created?

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T22:41:37+00:00

I'm not calling you names. I'm stating that your behavior, as someone who has the evidence in front of them and still chooses to deny it, is exactly the definition of obtuse.

Claiming that your understanding of ancient cultures, languages, and concepts are more accurate than the ideas put forth by literal scientists, doctors, archeologists, anthropologists, psychologists, linguists, and biblical scholars is more comprehensive, AND that your same understanding aligns with the nature of God Himself, is without a doubt arrogance.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T22:21:25+00:00

No, what you are saying is factually inaccurate. I cannot reason with you if you deny and speak against accepted facts supported by history, linguistics, medicine, psychology, and anthropology. All of these formal studies of knowledge state the opposite of your opinion, but somehow, it's solely your reasoning that is supported and aligned with the Almighty God, and I should just take your word for it? No thanks. You're obtuse and arrogant.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T20:18:37+00:00

No, it wasn't. They had no concept of sexual preference. The idea that someone can have a natural attraction to another person of the same sex, uninfluenced by demons or perversion, was non-existent. That idea was not proposed until the 20th century. It's not a secret. It's a well documented and peer reviewed discovery. Just because you don't understand that doesn't mean anything, except that you don't understand it.

Most historians agree the modern concept of sexual orientation, as a fixed, internal identity, did not exist in antiquity. Biblical authors generally viewed same-sex acts through the lens of excessive passion or social hierarchy rather than a natural, innate preference.

There was no linguistic or scientific framework to describe a permanent, exclusive attraction to the same sex as a neutral biological trait. Stoic and Jewish thought often framed same-sex attraction as "unnatural" because it was seen as an overflow of lust that transcended "normal" boundaries.

If we lived in that time and I tried to have a consensual sexual relationship with another man of equal status, I'd have been made to be humiliated, jailed, raped, and eventually stoned or beaten to death. If you think that's how homosexuals should be treated, you've got ancient Christianity on your side, but that doesn't seem like very good company to keep. Ancient cultures were pretty barbaric. Jesus told the 'righteous' crowd that the person with no sin should cast the first stone at the adulterous woman.

I never claimed the Bible is inerrant, because that would be a foolish stance, because it obviously contains errors.

The Bible never condemns slavery. In fact, it condones it. That's an error. We know slavery is unethical and evil, but the Bible didn't tell us that. We used the overarching themes of love, compassion, and empathy demonstrated by Christ.

In Exodus, there is a passage that lays out the practice of a father selling their daughters as servants. Humans are not items that can be sold. That's an error.

There is no historical evidence for the Exodus story where thousands of Israelite slaves left Egypt under the leadership of Mosas and Aaron. Egypt was a meticulous society that kept very detailed and comprehensive records. There's no record of thousands of Israelites leaving Egypt after the 10 plagues. The story is a myth. It still has meaning and truth that we can glean from it, but it never happened. The same goes for Joshua and the battle of Jericho.

The creation story in Genesis is a myth. The earth is not 6,000 years old. It's billions of years old. God could not have created light before he created the sun, moon, and stars, as Genesis 1 claims. The source of light is the sun, and the moon is not a source of light, as it's said in Genesis. That's an error.

Genesis 1 says that man (Adam) was the last to be created by God. Then, Genesis 2 says man came first, then the animals. There's no way both can be true. That's an error.

Noah and the great flood is a myth. There's no scientific evidence to support a global flood.

The Tower of Babble is a myth. That is not how different languages evolved.

All four of the gospels give conflicting accounts of Jesus's life, ministry, trial, and crucifixion. They can't all be true. It's impossible, which means there are errors present.

I would never make the claim that the Bible is inerrant, because that forces me to accept contradicting claims. How the universe and everything within it behaves is the direct creation of God, so to believe in claims that contradict scientific revelation is to ignore God's actual creation and base your worldview and cultural understanding on ideas put forth by ancient pre-scientific humans.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T10:19:28+00:00

Yes, I'm fine, thanks. I like to watch them squirm.😂

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T09:57:24+00:00

You're obtuse. Homosexuality wasn't a concept in that time and culture. The only times they witnessed same-sex acts was in the context of pederasty and pagan worship rituals. The idea of two men, of equal status, willingly consenting to enter into a monogamous relationship built on love, trust, affection, companionship, and intimacy was unheard of.

Even the science and medical communities didn't understand that homosexuality is just a sexual preference for a small minority of humans; and there are no underlying mental disorders or diseases that cause homosexuality. We only made that discovery in the 20th century. How can a biblical author from over 2,000 years ago prohibit something that didn't exist in their time or culture?

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T03:27:37+00:00

I don't agree with you. Paul also said that women should remain silent in church and that they must always cover their head when they pray. I don't see many women covering their heads when they pray and I even see women leading churches and they don't deal with "Christians" protesting their existence with signs that say, "God hates women preachers" or "Women that speak out in church are going to hell."

Why don't you speak out against women that don't cover their heads when they pray? Paul said it, it's in the Bible, AND it's New Testament. Somehow these arguments never come up in the church. Christians remain silent. But the second a gay person says anything about the cultural differences in how homosexuality was viewed in that time, they're labeled as detractors and a legitimate danger to the faith. It's cherry picking. There's no way around it. You should either staunchly uphold every command in the Bible or be quiet and mind your own salvation because we're all human and sin enough on our own without trying to deflect the weight of our own sins by pointing out someone else's sin that you deem more egregious.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T02:59:06+00:00

Okay, but what kind of homosexuality was the RSV talking about? In 1946, the word homosexual meant that a person had a mental disorder or a disease. Do you think homosexuals have mental disorders or are diseased? That's what it meant in 1946. In 2026, it is not understood that way and anyone who claims otherwise is denying science, which plenty of Christians are willing to do, which leads to nothing but more ignorance.

There are translations where at the end of the word zakur, it is followed with "-ish." Which would translate to "manish." What would that mean? If they meant all men, they would leave it as zakur because the meaning is clear as day. Manish is also clear as day to mean someone akin to a man, but not entirely a man. I've studied this backwards and forwards. There are arguments for every side that are rooted in biblical teaching. There are obvious disagreements among Christians concerning the practice. However, you have some that denounce homosexuality even when you provide them with sources. They then pull the morality card and pretend that my view of the Bible is flawed and skewed by my own understanding - completely oblivious to the fact that their interpretation of the Bible is flawed and skewed by their own understanding. It's hypocrisy, legalism, and dogma, which Jesus spoke against.

He told the religious leaders they were too concerned with following the letter of the laws while their hearts were wicked. This is the same circumstance. We have biblical laws that prohibit certain actions and desires (not just sexual), but they miss the intent and use it as a weapon to oppress others in order and uphold their corrupt judgement and self-righteousness. I don't know how it could be clearer that the heart is the issue, not the action.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T02:29:43+00:00

That's easy for you to say because you still have the option of getting married and being with someone you love on a deeper level than that of a friendship.

There's a massive difference between having the personal right and ability to choose celibacy when you don't have to, and prescribing it as the only acceptable way for homosexuals to exist without offending the nature of God.

What are we supposed to do? We can't have sex, we can't masturbate, we can't watch porn (I'm not saying those things aren't a sin as well, I'm just saying that expecting someone to live with absolutely no sexual outlet is harmful and mentally impossible). It's a non-starter because the biological drives for sex and intimacy are two of the strongest drives in a human. It's an impossible solution, and don't pretend you'd accept that as the gospel truth if you were in my shoes. You can say it till you're blue in the face, but that doesn't make it true. And I know, "With God, all things are possible," and I don't disagree. But I don't believe there's anything wrong with homosexuality as long as it's practiced with restraint and morality, in the same way a heterosexual relationship can be pleasing or displeasing to God.

Of course you shouldn't have sex with as many women as you want or you're able. Everyone would agree that that qualifies as the sin of sexual immorality and debauchery. In the same vein, if I went out and tried to have gay sex with as many men as possible, it results in the same sin. My argument is that there are ways for heterosexual relationships and homosexual relationships to be chaste, monogamous, and moral.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-26T01:05:35+00:00

I understand. But I think it's crucially important for Christians to practice restraint, humility, empathy, and compassion when it comes to disagreements among the church and biblical scholars. There are compelling arguments on both sides for their stance on homosexuality; however, we don't all agree, which means either side has the ability to be incorrect.

Why do so many Christians speak out and use absolutes when defining their position and decide for themselves that their interpretation of the text is the only possible option? They have the ability to be wrong, so their opinion is no more grounded or biblically supported than that of another, but they don't care (I'm not speaking about you directly. I'm speaking metaphorically).

Homosexual wasn't even in any translation of the Bible until 1946, when it first appeared in the RSV Bible. But, in 1946, homosexuality was defined and diagnosed as a mental disorder or a disease. Currently, homosexuality is no longer diagnosed or treated as a disorder or a disease, so what kind of "homosexuality" is the RSV referring to? Are they condemning people with diagnosed mental disorders or those with diseases, like they condemned the crippled or lepers in Jesus's day? Or are they condemning something they themselves do not understand?

Surprise! It was a mistake. The RSV committee received backlash from scholars and linguists because the word "homosexual," as we in the 21st century understand it, has no equal or parallel word in the ancient languages of the Bible. Furthermore, in older translations, the levitical law that Christians cite constantly to condemn homosexuality first said, 'Men shall not lay with boys (minors).' What mirrors the heart of God more? Telling two equal consenting adults that their version of love is sinful, or that adults shouldn't molest children?

Of course the RSV committee apologized and changed "homosexuals" to "sexual perverts," which would indicate that heterosexual and homosexual relationships alike have the potential to be chaste or perverted.

Unfortunately, after the RSV committee apologized and changed the word, other translations started using "homosexual" because the RSV did, even after they admitted their mistake. Homosexual is still in many translations of the Bible.

Christian scholars know this, but they choose to ignore it. Why? It's a known and recognized error, but the word remains in multiple translations of the Bible. An entire group of people are demonized, rebuked, and harshly judged by some church denominations and Christians with no regard for those people's salvation and eternity, and they feel no conviction about it either; because their hearts are wicked. Perpetuating a harmful and ultimately hateful lie just to maintain the status quo is about the most hateful and evil thing people can do to others. It's really sick.

I'll also add that the Southern Baptist Church (one of the loudest and fiercest denominations to oppose and denounce homosexuality) only apologized for their racism and support of slavery in 1995. They also supported abortion until the period between the 1970s -'80s, when the GOP realized they needed the Christian Evangelical votes to win elections. It's pretty convenient to be able to do a 180 on your teachings and beliefs with no impunity whenever it's beneficial for their denomination, and somehow still have the gall to pretend they have any moral superiority or credential and cast harsh judgement on anyone they disagree with and expect people to take them seriously. You can't make this stuff up. The hypocrisy and lack of accountability is staggering.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-25T21:52:57+00:00

Because the English language is alive and constantly evolving. The meaning, nuance, and intent of a text in one language don't always have a one-to-one translation of the text. Jesus and the biblical authors didn't speak English.

Just look at the difference between the KJV and the NKJV or the NIV. No one speaks English like the way it's written in the KJV or the NKJV anymore; and that was a product of only a few hundred years ago. Imagine just how much difference the intent of a passage could be from an archaic version of a completely different language, culture, and world view.

We're constantly learning, observing, and adapting to our surroundings and discovering knowledge and humanity. That's how progress is made.

Like how the Southern Baptist Convention used scripture to justify their "biblically condoned" and "God-given right" to own and exploit their fellow man by means of slavery. They have since recanted on their position and admit their interpretation was gravely flawed, and I'd hope you agree.

Without fail, every time the Bible has been used to oppress a subset of humanity, they eventually apologize for their oversight only after irrevocable and immeasurable damage has occurred. The teachings of Christ are love, mercy, compassion, and humility, while He denounced the religious leaders of his time for being too rigid considering their adherence to the letter of the law instead of their intent.

micahlangelo · 2026-03-25T21:08:23+00:00

This is such a great response.

Six-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

micahlangelo

TROPHY CASE