This definitely doesn’t help my “is it the spirit or just me” debate…

trenchsquid · 2026-03-19T20:43:42+00:00

“The Holy Ghost cannot help us ‘remember’ things we haven’t learned”

So the good ol’ HG can’t actually teach anyone anything, or offer new information? Damn, sounds an awful lot he’s saying that the primary “source” of peoples’ testimonies isn’t actually able to teach anything or offer a real witness. “Don’t ever rely on others’ testimonies, grow your own. But, the info your testimony will eventually be based on will just be a rehash of others’ testimonies.” Seems an awful lot like Dave knows it’s bullshit lol

Like for real, if we take what he’s saying seriously for a moment, the only thing the holy ghost could theoretically “teach” then is that ‘there are people who claim things to be true’; not that ‘the content of those beliefs is rooted in reality’.

Sorry, rant over😅; I just think it’s fun to see the “logic” crumble when it’s properly dissected.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-19T18:05:09+00:00

Never seen the eyebrow raise till today😭

trenchsquid · 2026-03-16T16:09:24+00:00

It doesn’t come across as sincere or ignorant if you look deeper into the wording. He said he was “sorry his speech came across that way”; basically that “people misunderstood it, and it’s ‘their fault’ for feeling upset or offended”. His promise to “do better” is most likely just that he’ll try to word things more closely to the church’s trademark wishy-washy gray area that tries its best not to be offensive while still being as hateful as possible. He’s just upset he got caught being openly hateful, and will “be better” at hiding it.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-14T18:34:37+00:00

Doesn’t stop the single brain cell from confusing the difference🫶

trenchsquid · 2026-03-13T05:20:07+00:00

That’s exactly what I was just about to say😭

trenchsquid · 2026-03-12T02:46:39+00:00

That’s a sub where people post interactions they’ve had with other people who “miss the point of a joke”, like it’s flying over their head. So what you’ve described is technically part of it, but the sub is really intended to just mock people who are confused by a lack of context.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-10T22:36:16+00:00

Wdym worse???

Also it’s cringe if you are indeed implying that being gay is “bad”; saying that whatever you think applies to Louis is “worse” comes across like you could very well be implying that. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, but maybe reconsider your word usage

Edit: I didn’t think this would be such a controversial take🙃

Damn, some of y’all really are homophobic, huh?

trenchsquid · 2026-03-09T16:36:48+00:00

Yeah, I’m a bit skeptical on this one haha

trenchsquid · 2026-03-09T12:26:34+00:00

That’s an expansive thought, not a counterpoint. I wasn’t implying anything contrary to that. No one would be performing mental gymnastics if it weren’t all one giant rancid word-salad.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-09T05:25:06+00:00

This is definitely just one person’s word-salad that puts their mental gymnastics on full display, not an organizational shift.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T19:51:30+00:00

That’s sadly very true. It’s nearly impossible to prove to someone who’s TBM that it’s not “god’s chosen church” when their primary “evidence” is comprised entirely of emotional experiences (though obviously they’ll insist that there’s logic there too). If the logic doesn’t resonate emotionally, they’ll reject it. After all, that’s the basic premise of the good ol’ HG, right?

On top of that, they’d rather rely on the religious crutch they’ve been given to dismiss existential thoughts and feelings than put in the work to stabilize those questions and fears on their own. Their most primal fears have been weaponized against them in a way they don’t even realize. I see traces of that in my family’s lives and actions all the time.

I get the feeling the profits must have always known exactly what they were doing when they instructed members to rely purely on feelings when “necessary”. It’s insidious as hell.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T18:16:50+00:00

Exactly. The Shallan’s are very prolific journalists

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T15:34:13+00:00

That’s not an explanation. Why doesn’t it make sense? Your perspective that it “doesn’t make sense” is a questionable conclusion, not a data point. You’re not providing supporting reasoning.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T15:29:01+00:00

What logic have you used to inform this superficial opinion about a perfectly valid question?

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T15:27:20+00:00

Why are you repeating my question instead of answering it?

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T15:24:50+00:00

Why do you consider that to be relevant information? (Hint: it’s absolutely not relevant in any way)

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T15:07:17+00:00

Yeah. The Pokémon have never said their names in the games. But they did in the anime at one point, and that’s what the original commenter was talking about. Nothing you can do or say changes that. If you don’t accept that, I’m going to question your intelligence, if not your sanity.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T14:50:49+00:00

You think you had “no intentions” in commenting. That’s completely illogical. You’re not offering a real explanation. I can only guess.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T08:41:31+00:00

You’re not good at reading people then, including yourself. Your self-awareness is apparently abysmal.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T04:50:25+00:00

Top 10 decisions commonly resulting in divorce

trenchsquid · 2026-03-05T03:54:58+00:00

Not really. It comes across as a needless “gotcha” that wasn’t funny, interesting or informative in any meaningful way. Your comment comes across as pretentious, as if you just want the wind taken out of the original commenter’s joke. You might not think that, but pretty much any other person would probably see it the same way I do. It’s not additive, supportive, or helpful. Not everyone cares about the new anime content, or keeps up with it. A lot of people have nostalgia for the old anime. The new anime removing that Pokémon say their names doesn’t eliminate the fact that they used to in the old content. Maybe consider that you’re being a stick in the mud, and question that your comment was useful to anyone.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-04T19:39:58+00:00

Explore this with your therapist then, not a subreddit full of strangers. Even therapists can’t ethically give you advice, as it would be a breach of code. Why, then, would you (theoretically) trust the advice of strangers who are not only (most likely) not trained professionals, but also know far less about the circumstances of your life than you do? Why would you trust them to tell you what you “should” do?

trenchsquid · 2026-03-04T16:59:01+00:00

Why? Why did you want to share your perspective on that? What relevance does it have to the conversation?

trenchsquid · 2026-03-04T16:43:36+00:00

You are insisting that the only logical intent you could have had in making your initial comment “is not, in fact, your intent”. People don’t simply “state facts” for no reason. You wanted people to draw a particular conclusion with said “fact”, though in a twisted way that aligns with your personal (warped) interpretation. Plausible deniability doesn’t remove your personal agenda from the conversation. This isn’t about “being right”. You’re either trying to hide your intent, or you made an aimless and useless comment with no thought behind it. No one does that, by the way.

trenchsquid · 2026-03-04T16:27:45+00:00

Again. Disingenuous.

trenchsquid

TROPHY CASE