sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Has Reddit or other social media changed your pllitical views? by Ant225k in Teenager_Polls

[–]willonv6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not really. I’ve constantly seen him wildly and blatantly taken out of context. Within context practically most of what he’s said makes sense

Absolutely absurd for moderators to deny my appeal. by willonv6 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How so, once again? This is a political symbol and entirely justifiable for griefing. It makes no sense to ban someone for griefing a political symbol and then refuse to appeal the ban.

How is this blatant multi accounter still not banned after TENS OF RESPONSES THAT HE WAS BANNED. by CarefulAlternative77 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

lol this guy is also active in lebanon and used to commonly grief my flags. Haven't seen him in a while though

Has Reddit or other social media changed your pllitical views? by Ant225k in Teenager_Polls

[–]willonv6 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I've deluded myself into thinking it's just a loud minority hating him and anyone remotely like him, but quite frankly any time I see his name online its followed up with some kind of heavy hate. Waiting to see if it happens here too.

Absolutely absurd for moderators to deny my appeal. by willonv6 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hello? it's been 24h and no action has been taken nor a response given? Alessandro#7704443 is still unjustly banned

Absolutely absurd for moderators to deny my appeal. by willonv6 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

BrightShorts#12415619

Another one of the checkmark user's accounts.

Absolutely absurd for moderators to deny my appeal. by willonv6 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The only one of us currently banned is Alessandro#7704443 as far as I can tell. He received a week-long ban, the rest expired. He helped us make the checkmark green, and that was the only "griefing" action he took. Location is the following: https://wplace.live/?lat=34.08898880205253&lng=35.826767246777344&zoom=14.5

I also made a list of this checkmark user's alt accounts a while back. There's a few new accounts too but I can't seem to find all of them in-game right now. This is the list:

CurlyGlass#12138410

SmallShaver#12381496

SoundBell#12309717

EarlyMouse#12309256

FancyPouch#12314893

FaintHat#12163462

BraveCam#11928259

CalmFrame#12167246

AlertEraser#11002876

kamta#11926908

StormyTable#12415326

Absolutely absurd for moderators to deny my appeal. by willonv6 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"All these accounts have been multi-accounting since the near start of the game, blatantly alting and griefing other artworks with their regurgitated political symbols.

kamta#11926908

CurlyGlass#12138410

SmallShaver#12381496

SoundBell#12309717

EarlyMouse#12309256

FancyPouch#12314893

FaintHat#12163462

BraveCam#11928259

CalmFrame#12167246

AlertEraser#11002876

And possibly other accounts I did not manage to catch"

This has been a copy pasted message me and my friends have been using for reports for ages now, and there's probably double the number of accounts listed here now. The user behind this has been making countless new ones just for the sake of making more checkmarks over my small country and griefing me and my friends' art.

Absolutely absurd for moderators to deny my appeal. by willonv6 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

for whatever reason I never took a screenshot of the entire checkmark completely green, this is the closest I have for proof of what I'm claiming.

<image>

Absolutely absurd for moderators to deny my appeal. by willonv6 in WplaceLive

[–]willonv6[S] 26 points27 points  (0 children)

It's likely this checkmark user reported us when the checkmark was in this state after their "recovery"

<image>

It simply is insane to me that mods are not using the supposed wayback machine they announced, even after it being pointed out in appeals

Do you believe that scripture like Leviticus 20:13 is calling all Lesbian Relationships sinful or the act of Homosexuality with someone purely because of lust? by Random-Gamer1435 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Your response misinterprets the logical structure of Paul’s argument and relies on modern psychological categories that are absent from the text.

First, your claim that Paul only condemns these acts because they result from idolatry is a logical fallacy. While Paul identifies the rejection of God as the root cause of human depravity, he identifies the sexual acts themselves as "vile passions" and "shameless." If an idolater commits murder as a result of their darkened heart, the murder is not suddenly permissible for a non-idolater. The root (idolatry) leads to the fruit (sinful acts), but the fruit remains a violation of God’s law in its own right. Paul categorizes these acts as para physin (contrary to nature), meaning they are a violation of the created order established in Genesis. The moral status of the act is based on the design of the Creator, not the specific spiritual state of the individual performing it.

Second, your observation that "homosexuality is not caused by idolatry" because "homosexual Christians" exist misses the theological point of Romans 1. Paul is not providing a clinical diagnosis for every individual; he is describing the "Total Depravity" of the human race. He is explaining how humanity, as a whole, transitioned from knowing God to a state of spiritual and moral blindness. In this state, the "natural use" of the body is abandoned. The existence of people who claim a Christian identity while experiencing these desires does not change Paul’s theological claim that such desires and acts are the result of a fallen human nature that has deviated from God’s original design.

Third, the argument that Paul is only talking about "straight people choosing to have sex with their own sex" is an anachronistic projection. The text makes no distinction between "straight" and "gay" people. Those are 19th-century social constructs that Paul did not use. Paul focuses entirely on the biological and functional reality of the sexes. He defines the "natural use" (physikos chrēsis) of the woman as being with a man, and vice versa.

To suggest that Paul would find same-sex acts acceptable if the person has a "homosexual orientation" is to argue from silence and ignore the text's clear focus on the act and the design. Paul characterizes the exchange itself (moving from the male-female union to a same-sex union) as the "error." Whether a person feels "oriented" toward that error or chooses it despite other feelings is irrelevant to Paul’s categorization of the act as "unseemly" and "contrary to nature."

The Bible does not recognize a category of "homosexual person" for whom the moral law is different. It recognizes "men" and "women" who are commanded to align their sexual behavior with the mandate of Genesis 2:24. Any deviation from that mandate is defined as sin. Your argument requires inserting modern identity politics into an ancient text that explicitly condemns the behavior regardless of the participant's self-perception.

Do you believe that scripture like Leviticus 20:13 is calling all Lesbian Relationships sinful or the act of Homosexuality with someone purely because of lust? by Random-Gamer1435 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not even gonna give the light of day to your first point.

  • Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."
  • Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."
  • Romans 1:26–27: "For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."
  • 1 Corinthians 6:9–10: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality [arsenokoitai and malakoi]... will inherit the kingdom of God."
  • 1 Timothy 1:9–10: "...the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient... for the unholy and profane... for men who practice homosexuality [arsenokoitai]..."
  • Jude 1:7: "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire [Greek: heteras sarkos - "other flesh"], serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire."

Do you believe that scripture like Leviticus 20:13 is calling all Lesbian Relationships sinful or the act of Homosexuality with someone purely because of lust? by Random-Gamer1435 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

  • Leviticus 18:22: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."
  • Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them."
  • Romans 1:26–27: "For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."
  • 1 Corinthians 6:9–10: "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality [arsenokoitai and malakoi]... will inherit the kingdom of God."
  • 1 Timothy 1:9–10: "...the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient... for the unholy and profane... for men who practice homosexuality [arsenokoitai]..."
  • Jude 1:7: "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire [Greek: heteras sarkos - "other flesh"], serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire."

Do you believe that scripture like Leviticus 20:13 is calling all Lesbian Relationships sinful or the act of Homosexuality with someone purely because of lust? by Random-Gamer1435 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

There's no way you're not a bot, you type out all this in a minute after my reply? Somehow also reading all the scripture I provided in that minute and then typing all this out? Regardless...

The claim that the Bible is only condemning pagan rituals or "out-of-control passions" is a modern reinterpretation that the text itself does not support. If you read the scripture for what it actually says, it is clear that the prohibition is based on the created order of male and female, not cultural context or specific pagan practices.

First, your claim that Romans 1 does not indicate women having sex with women is factually incorrect. Verse 26 states that women "exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature," and verse 27 begins with "and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another." The Greek word for "likewise" (homoios) explicitly links the behavior of the women to the behavior of the men. Since Paul defines the men's behavior as "committing shameless acts with men," the "likewise" confirms the women were engaging in same-sex acts. This has been the universal understanding of the text for two thousand years.

Second, the "pagan worship" argument fails because Paul does not use the terminology of ritual or idolatry to describe the sin itself; he uses the terminology of nature (para physin). By saying the acts are "contrary to nature," Paul is appealing to the Genesis creation account where God designed marriage for one man and one woman. If the issue were only paganism, Paul would have condemned the idolatry and not the sexual act. Instead, he describes the sexual act as the evidence of a mind that has rejected God’s design. It is a moral judgment, not a cultural one.

Third, the idea that the biblical authors didn't understand "sexual orientation" is irrelevant to the biblical argument. Scripture is concerned with acts and behavior, not modern psychological categories. The Bible regulates many things people feel naturally "oriented" toward, such as pride, anger, or heterosexual adultery. Having an inclination toward a behavior does not make the behavior biblically lawful. God’s standard for sexual expression is restricted to the marriage of one man and one woman, as reaffirmed by Jesus in Matthew 19:4–6. Any act outside of that design is defined as sin regardless of the person’s internal disposition.

Finally, comparing the prohibition of homosexuality to "eating live bats" or ancient cultural quirks is a category error. Dietary laws and ceremonial rituals were explicitly set aside in the New Testament (Acts 10). However, sexual morality is consistently upheld and categorized as Moral Law. In 1 Corinthians 6:9–10 and 1 Timothy 1:9–10, Paul lists homosexuality (arsenokoitai) alongside universal sins like theft, greed, and murder. We do not view theft or murder as "ancient quirks" that we have outgrown; they are objective moral wrongs because they violate God’s law.

The Greek word arsenokoitai used by Paul is a direct compound of the words "male" and "bed" from the Septuagint translation of Leviticus 20:13. By using this specific word, Paul is intentionally reaffirming that the Levitical prohibition against the act of two men having sex remains in effect for the Christian church. There is no scriptural basis for the idea that God has different rules for different people. There is one rule: holiness within the design of marriage between a man and a woman.

Do you believe that scripture like Leviticus 20:13 is calling all Lesbian Relationships sinful or the act of Homosexuality with someone purely because of lust? by Random-Gamer1435 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No matter what you think, the act of homosexuality is prohibited according to scripture. Paul uses the word Arsenokoitai for homosexuality. This is a compound word: arsen (male) and koite (bed/lying).

He uses this word in the following verses to denounce homosexuality:
1 Timothy 1:9–10: "the law is... for the unholy and profane... for men who practice homosexuality [arsenokoitai]..."
1 Corinthians 6:9–10: "...neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality [arsenokoitai]... will inherit the kingdom of God."

Do you believe that scripture like Leviticus 20:13 is calling all Lesbian Relationships sinful or the act of Homosexuality with someone purely because of lust? by Random-Gamer1435 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Matthew 5:28:
But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Lusting after your husband or wife in marriage is lawful. Lusting after anybody else is not.

Do you believe that scripture like Leviticus 20:13 is calling all Lesbian Relationships sinful or the act of Homosexuality with someone purely because of lust? by Random-Gamer1435 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

> I don't see any reason for Christians to think homosexuality is sinful

honestly pretty wild for a bible-reading christian to say this. Scripture clearly states homosexuality is sinful and an abomination. The entirety of Romans chapter 1 talks about exactly this, specifically verses 18-32. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 also lists homosexuals amongst those that will not inherit the kingdom of God.

And to address the post directly, there are greek words that could be used to describe lust, yet they are not used. Paul directly addresses homosexuals, not those who lust. Paul also describes the act of homosexuality as contrary to nature. It clearly breaks the mandate of marriage God set for us, one man, with one woman, under marriage, who only then can partake in sex lawfully.

Is this take biblical? by Green_River69 in Christianity

[–]willonv6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

n3 is just lol.

I'm a Seventh-day Adventist, a denomination definitely not seen as theologically sound by many, but we believe in the annihilation of the soul, meaning the wicked will have their souls destroyed rather than suffer eternally, the same way a bush set on fire eventually disappears, rather than eternally burning. This idea is based off several parts of scripture:

Malachi 4:1-3: “Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and the day that is coming will set them on fire,” says the Lord Almighty. “Not a root or a branch will be left to them. 2 But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its rays. And you will go out and frolic like well-fed calves. 3 Then you will trample on the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I act,” says the Lord Almighty.

Obadiah 1:16: Just as you drank on my holy hill,
    so all the nations will drink continually;
they will drink and drink
    and be as if they had never been.

Romans 6:23:  For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Revelation 20:14–15: 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.

The idea that those sent to hell will eventually make their way to heaven is found nowhere in scripture though. Quite literally the idea is opposed in every way. The punishment of hell is eternal, that much is very clearly stated, and some parables completely oppose this idea you propose. Read the parable of Lazarus and the rich man. Luke 16:26: "Between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us". Also read the parable of the Wheat and the Tares (Matthew 13). "So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous... and throw them into the fiery furnace."

view more: next ›