Youtube comments of Kantrel 7 (@blumiu2426).

  1. 715
  2. 161
  3. 74
  4. 61
  5. 58
  6. 51
  7. 31
  8. 31
  9. 27
  10. 25
  11. 25
  12. 23
  13. 21
  14. 21
  15. 20
  16. 20
  17. 19
  18. 18
  19. 18
  20. 17
  21. 17
  22. 17
  23. 17
  24. 16
  25. 16
  26. 16
  27. 16
  28. 16
  29. 15
  30. 15
  31. 15
  32. 15
  33. 14
  34. 14
  35. 14
  36. 14
  37. 13
  38. 13
  39. 13
  40. 12
  41. 12
  42. 12
  43. 12
  44. 11
  45. 11
  46. 11
  47. 11
  48. 11
  49. 10
  50. 10
  51. 10
  52. 10
  53. 9
  54. 9
  55. 9
  56. 9
  57. 9
  58. 9
  59. 9
  60. 8
  61. 8
  62. 8
  63. 8
  64. 8
  65. 8
  66. 8
  67. 7
  68. 7
  69. 7
  70. 7
  71. 7
  72. 7
  73. 7
  74. 7
  75. 7
  76. 7
  77. 7
  78. 7
  79. 6
  80. 6
  81. 6
  82. 6
  83. 6
  84. 6
  85. 6
  86. 6
  87. 6
  88. 6
  89. 6
  90. 6
  91. 6
  92.  @kalebkuhn9128  The only people pointing it out are the same people who were attacking Yasuke personally with racist remarks, making up fake facts while saying nothing of the other character or DEI/ESG. You're still repeating yourself, it's not doing more than it has the last time you said it. Bringing up Africa's part doesn't change Europe's part in increasing the industry and some actually capturing slaves themselves, namely the Portuguese and pirates from various places. It's the definition of deflecting. No, you're making that up when it wasn't remotely stated or hinted at. Point out exactly where I insinuated and don't just ignore I said it like when I asked you to prove your statement before. I'm sticking to the subject at hand and you're trying to take it further by bringing up other cultures not involved with the game or the comment made by the dev. Slave trade was not new to Europe either, it was around in the Middle-Ages. See how pointless bringing that up is? Your whole point is "Africans had been doing it, so they are just as bad". Explain what that has to do with the OP being wrong about the Portuguese capturing slaves. Being tribal has nothing to do with slavery. You didn't stop to think before you typed that, knowing Europe was not tribal, America was not tribal, every world super power in history deemed civilized were the biggest centers for having slaves. You aren't reading what was said. If something isn't allowed to run it's course without outside interference, but introduce money, weapons and goods for the practice, it incentivizes it to continue until the trade ends. Read that again careful and tell me where here or last comment I said slavery would have ended without Europe popping in. You have a habit of putting words in other's mouth and never backing it up. You don't know how to debate your point without making up one and arguing against it. So again, pointing out African was selling slaves means nothing. Everyone was. It doesn't change the context that Portugal was and got it's hands dirty. Where they got them has no bearing on the dev stating they had them, thus the OP bringing up a whataboutism shows some insecurity with the fact and need to defend a true statement. Metatron has pointed out more than once how when Progressives get something right, the anti-woke want to try and disprove it just because the opposition said it. It's childish and only leads to looking foolish in the end.
    6
  93. 6
  94. 6
  95. 6
  96. 6
  97. 6
  98. 5
  99. 5
  100. 5
  101. 5
  102. 5
  103. 5
  104. 5
  105. 5
  106. 5
  107. 5
  108. 5
  109. 5
  110. 5
  111. 5
  112. 5
  113. 5
  114. 5
  115. 5
  116. 5
  117. 5
  118. 5
  119. 5
  120. 5
  121. 5
  122. 5
  123. 5
  124. 5
  125. 5
  126. 5
  127. 5
  128. 5
  129. 5
  130. 5
  131. 5
  132. 4
  133. 4
  134. 4
  135. 4
  136. 4
  137. 4
  138. 4
  139. 4
  140. 4
  141.  @Lowdian  1) You added the "jokingly". An article by a game magazine or two wrote about it and it wasn't said to be a joke. They felt gamers weren't expanding to try different races and looks, and the response became the changed character creator. 2) Sexual freedom includes everything. You don't know much about Progressivism because structurally, it has no limits. When you allow one thing, you cannot forbid another because one is just posing limits where they feel comfortable and not another. Go look up what those Frenchmen believed, because you'll find they approved of "cheese pizza" too and little wonder why it has become an issue in modern times. The implication of animal sex is enough, what? You really think they could get away showing everything? Be serious. They got away with far more in sex scenes than any Japanese game that showed cleavage. 3) Again, Vincke said himself why they made Baldur's Gate III. It explains why it felt so little like Baldur's Gate and more Divinity mixed with other things because it wasn't going to be DnD at first until the opportunity came from WotC. They used it, pumped and dumped, to be crass. You're being nonsensical. Why are you correlating their business strategy with ideological insertions and issues of the game? You may be that confused, but I don't see how that is possible. You have provided nothing but your opinion, conjecture and calling what I'm saying weak? Projection only works when someone is unaware, otherwise you just look foolish.
    4
  142. 4
  143. 4
  144. 4
  145. 4
  146. 4
  147. 4
  148. 4
  149. 4
  150. 4
  151. 4
  152. 4
  153. 4
  154. 4
  155. 4
  156. 4
  157. 4
  158. 4
  159. 4
  160. 4
  161. 4
  162. 4
  163. 4
  164. 4
  165. 4
  166. 4
  167. 4
  168. 4
  169. 4
  170. 4
  171. 3
  172. 3
  173. 3
  174. 3
  175. 3
  176. 3
  177. 3
  178. 3
  179. 3
  180. 3
  181. 3
  182. 3
  183. 3
  184. 3
  185. 3
  186. 3
  187. 3
  188. 3
  189. 3
  190. 3
  191. 3
  192. 3
  193. 3
  194.  @drooskie9525  I'm a Christian that happens to be Protestant. The Roman Church's doctrines twisted the Word and never gave it up, so there is reason to still protest. Different in what respect? The people or the Word? People seldom change and God's Word was said to never change and has not changed. ...You realize that is the translation and also given for our understanding, right? Just as The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are described such for us to better understand and not literal. And where in the definition of "council" denotes divinity? Nowhere. Angel means messenger and we see them carry out that role. We are told they also serve in court during judgment, but in service to Jesus. They are not beside him or we would have been told Lucifer was beside Jesus, not subject to. Angels repeatedly reject worship in various verses when men fell down to worship them because of their holiness. They pointed to God and being a fellow servant (twice in Revelations, 19 and 22). You're describing something akin to Buddhism, not Christianity. All things are Buddha and at the same time, not. We are Buddha and Buddha is separate as well. Definitely not Christian nor found in Scripture, but intermingled doctrines likely traceable to come into practice. You use the word "principality" specifically. Why is that? One could say dominion, authority. We are told all authority is given to one, that being Jesus. There is no other to turn to, none that can forgive sins because no one else died for us to take that up. People are so enticed by being gods themselves, heeding to Satan's first lie, we even seduce ourselves to believe God's word supports our vain deceptions of grandeur. We just as swiftly take away God's authority and Jesus's prominence and think there are tiers as there are on earth. Remember man wanted a King, not God, but he allowed it. We also got every woe and issue that comes with earthly Kings because wanted to follow the pattern of secular society, not God's kingdom.
    3
  195. 3
  196. 3
  197. 3
  198. 3
  199. 3
  200. 3
  201. 3
  202. 3
  203. 3
  204. 3
  205. 3
  206. 3
  207. 3
  208. 3
  209. 3
  210. 3
  211. 3
  212. 3
  213. 3
  214. 3
  215. 3
  216. 3
  217. 3
  218. 3
  219. 3
  220. 3
  221. 3
  222. 3
  223. 3
  224. 3
  225. 3
  226. 3
  227. 3
  228.  @salomaogomes7311  But this is just the Western perspective on what is good storytelling. Not everywhere in the world would agree because of different views, culture, morality and cinematography. I disagree, you are watching the experience, not making choices. RPGs allow you to make decisions and change aspects of the plot. Mass Effect? Far better story and interaction. There are many classic games in the RPG genre with stories that blow TLOU out of the water in lore, dialogue, characters. They just don't have the movie flare, but hit home in the way a game does. Maybe the integration of movie and game is what some desire, but for others like myself it's boring. Watching more than playing or set pieces which Naughty Dog professes in. The politicking was blatant in Part 2 of course, they were emboldened by that point with cultural changes. The first game held off until the DLC to make it more prevalent what they were going for...but used children for it... Hard to believe when they patched out the few bugs that had been spoken of. You indeed are a rare case. If the game was so buggy, the multiplayer would have been a disaster and not praised as it is. If you say so. TLOU has grit and grime, but personally find GoT to be superior in what they did with a realistic setting yet added artistic elements to enhance it. People complained of bugs in TLOU Pt.2, I don't think many, but does any game have no blemish? Very few don't. You're comparing a game with set pieces to an open-world game. No idea what you mean about "cabins", but how many wood houses do you think, out in the mountains of ancient Japan, looked different? Even then, I have no idea what you're talking about. Each location had different construction depending on environment; plains, marsh/swamps, mountains, sparse or destroyed settlements. There was nothing repetitive in GoT aside two types of side-quests (stopping bandits or dismantling a camp). If you found drowned-out color palettes and ruined civilization a test of graphics, then I guess we disagree. TLOU is beautiful in it's own right, as do I find Days Gone to be in the same vein. But GoT does things with the engine that are breathtaking, both in grimy dark settings and vibrant scenic views.
    3
  229. 3
  230. 3
  231. 3
  232. 3
  233. 3
  234. 3
  235. 3
  236. 3
  237. 3
  238. 3
  239. I'm amazed how little most know about Bruce Lee. If you'v heard the saying it's better to practice one kick a thousand times, than a thousand kicks once. MMA is the latter. Not that they can't fight, but it's a sport. Yes, they train regularly, but only fight how many times a year? Compare that to martial artists where it is daily, a lifestyle. Competing actively or testing in various scenarios is key, but also training response to be second nature is a relevant. The ones you see in rings against MMA are rarely ever true studied in their discipline. Bruce Lee trained in the traditional sense, meaning to kill. Disable. Not to just defeat an opponent. He had a philosophy to it, but the flashiness in movies he said was just that; it focused on simplicity, ending a fight immediately. He fought on the streets of Hong Kong growing up, was taught by Ip Man and later developed his own style. Who in MMA can say that? Every martial artist prominent in tournament and street fighting during the 60s and 70s trained with or challenged Bruce Lee; a small Asian guy that physiques say they should topple effortlessly. Aside those that boast (which none ever said they beat him), near all say he beat them or saw him beat someone they never expected. Plenty of YouTube videos on this. It's amazing the mentality that combat sports equals ultimate fighting when ultimate fighting is a fight to the death. Ending a fight instantly, which is not allowed in MMA. It's about show, despite the skill of the fighters; not a real fight. Size or ability usually don't mean much if you go into a fight wanting to beat someone up, but the other guy is thinking of how to end your life. Two completely different mindsets and approaches. You don't hear about anything Bruce Lee did because he didn't compete for sport, he studied, trained, learned to be more effective in various ways, but always in ending a fight before it began.
    3
  240. 3
  241. 3
  242. 3
  243. 3
  244. 3
  245. 3
  246. 3
  247. 3
  248. 3
  249. 3
  250. 3
  251. 3
  252. 3
  253. 3
  254. 3
  255. 3
  256. 3
  257. 2
  258. 2
  259. 2
  260. 2
  261. 2
  262. 2
  263. 2
  264. 2
  265. I can see a combination of things; how many people are moving to Tokyo for jobs instead of staying there? I can see people staying indoors because most lifestyles now are on their phones, online and indoors compared to in the past. Certainly the outlook on life it seems I've seen from Japanese channels is very nihilistic and with difficulties emerging from the economy/forces beyond our control trying to control and make things harder, it will hit far harder. I can't see how a government local or beyond can fix the birth rate issue. That's far more personal and deals with the psychological, social and spiritual positions of the people in that they rather isolate and watch things decline. I think it will truly become obvious when Japanese start leaving Japan as that is very rare for them to do. If not that, Japan will start opening itself to foreigners which I feel was the long game (not of the Japanese government necessarily and Japan alone), but everything seems to be being pushed toward having no cultural identity and globalist design. At the same time I do wonder who is putting the numbers together considering there is that push for immigration, whether legally or illegally by governments (and can be internal battle in them too). We are simultaneously told there is not enough food or land on earth to support us, but then that we are staring down the barrel of unsustainable numbers? That sounds like the dream of the WEF and they succeeded what was in books they put out wanting less people on earth. Global warming was supposed to be because too many of us pollute or are walking pollutants and should not have children, but then in just decades economies will tank hard? There is something about it when I think and look at everything overall that doesn't add up. Those that easily give into fear this will be effective on I can tell and a scary way to live.
    2
  266. 2
  267. 2
  268. 2
  269. 2
  270. 2
  271. 2
  272. 2
  273. 2
  274. 2
  275. 2
  276. 2
  277. 2
  278. 2
  279. 2
  280. 2
  281. 2
  282. 2
  283. 2
  284. 2
  285. 2
  286. 2
  287. 2
  288. 2
  289.  @Paugose  You are asking why God didn't make robots. Robots cannot love, it's just doing what you want it to. When you give something free will, it will choose to love you and has actual value. The cost of that was always the ability to rebel, which an angel did and mankind through his influence. The next question is why does sin exist. Sin is rebellion against God and what he stands for which are on the commandments. Because it's hard to understand in relation to God for many, parents are included to be honored; if we can grasp that scale of respect and love, then we can apply that toward Him. The first four laws are our relationship with the one that created us, the last six are about our relationship with each other. If we rebel against the six which is immoral thoughts and actions to our fellow men, we then can understand how it's interpreted with the four toward God. So unless you agree with murder, adultery, false witness, ect. then we know why it's called the Law of Love. You're referring to Jesus who became a man with same temptations, thus so we couldn't make the excuse that salvation was impossible. He never sinned not because he was God, but because if he did, the plan of salvation would have failed and all would be lost. So he denied himself the pleasures we have no issue with and then took on those sins on the cross. Your concept of God is flawed and not biblical and aligns more with pagan or New Age/spiritualism. How do you define existence if not life to finite things, an awareness of your state of being. God is three persons of their own individuality in complete harmony. All things came from Jesus, the one that created, so it's more fitting to say existence came from God, not is God. And your last assertion is not only false, but go against cult leader mentality, which I take it you're suggesting. Cult leaders seldom if ever martyr themselves. They will their followers, but you will find not many examples that kill themselves and a reason why we know the ones that have. And you're also saying Jesus was superhuman to not only convince Jews and Gentiles alike (if you can grasp that dynamic in societal and religious differences), but knew 100% that his death would lead to the faith being the largest in the world in the future. It's as if you're saying he had to be God in order to know that, because no cult ever lasts longer than their founder before fading into obscurity or abandoned because there is no foundation to the belief. They are built on manipulation of the weak to be used, exploited, completely opposite from the testimonies through history from various cultures.
    2
  290. 2
  291. 2
  292. 2
  293. 2
  294. 2
  295. 2
  296. 2
  297. 2
  298. 2
  299. 2
  300. 2
  301. 2
  302. 2
  303. 2
  304. 2
  305. 2
  306. 2
  307. 2
  308. 2
  309. 2
  310. 2
  311. 2
  312. 2
  313. 2
  314. 2
  315. 2
  316. 2
  317. 2
  318. 2
  319. 2
  320. 2
  321. 2
  322.  @shawnsg  You're jumping the gun a bit like the other guy did in your fictional scenario. If you are going to be hired, they would inform the employees of working hours and schedule. From what I know, informing employees that will be working for them of their beliefs as in relation to Saturday off instead of Sunday is always explained. Unless someone can prove they did not inform anyone of this before hired, nor informed of your own beliefs in wanting Sunday off, then people seem to be complaining after the fact for no reason. That has nothing to do with a superiority complex, they would have to tell you and treat you as inferior. Dismissing someone's religious beliefs is dismissive and unaccommodating, nothing to do with being above someone. I wouldn't even say this of the job that fired me because I refused to work Saturdays when boss kept trying to make me when I told him no. It's not "like" a sin, it is. They broke the fourth commandment. Nothing is subjective and not sure why it's complicated to you. Anyone on their payroll is an employee. They clock in, clock out with them at the factory. Anything else outside that would be scheduled on other days to be done as no one is doing business on the weekend, anyway in that capacity. So you still haven't made your case other than completely subjective scenarios with holes in them. I've still received no reply from the other fellow that worked for them if he was informed of the work schedule and if he was a Sunday worshipper. These are rhetorical, because he would have to have known these things as they are are one of the first things you learn looking at the company to be hired, the job your applying and then during the interview.
    2
  323. 2
  324. 2
  325. 2
  326. 2
  327. 2
  328.  @metalbenderiainson8099  Sorry if it took me a day or so to respond as I kept your comment in mind, but eventually got distracted by things. I really love talking about mythology, theology and folklore. I don't think there is much I can speak to with a sort of objective view, given as you said paganism/heathenism is up to individual interpretation, plus I am not fully versed in all aspects of it. Instead, asking questions seems better. Are there different forms of worshipping the Norse gods? That might also tie into has it ever been treated more as a religion at any point in time and did rites and rituals of some kind accompany this? Second is, do these individual interpretations of the Norse gods mean some are less "reverent" than others and because of civilization changing so much in the centuries, can it be said how the gods would look at the world now? I can see how some would prefer to think they are spiritual beings or aspects of nature because they have no direct impact on the world, whereas it would be interesting to know how those that believe they have distinct persons relate to the world or their people, today. Deeper than this, are the Norse gods distinct or exclusive to their people, or those with ancestry linking to their worship and culture? Reason being is that the Vikings were not aware of all cultures in the world, so would they believe their are gods for every other culture or would the Norse gods apply to all? This question has always been with me growing up, and came up again with God of War having Kratos interact with the Norse pantheon. It pits the two against one another in a bid for supremacy, sort of speak, and what kind of scale should/could they be viewed on? Or am I looking at this from the wrong perspective altogether? One thing I would be objective about is, given they are human in nature, do they change with the time or would they, given their status above men, expect man to conform to them in some way still? After all, they received worship, not expected to worship. I say this given there are beliefs man can become god, and we do see this in Norse mythology, or is that not saying the same thing? Ironically, I'd think Loki would thrive today given how chaotic things are, even the debate over his person and preferences. It is such a small thing that people make their identity, so to me that indicates how easily manipulated they can be when lost in the weeds and not the overall.
    2
  329. 2
  330. 2
  331. 2
  332. 2
  333. 2
  334. 2
  335. 2
  336. 2
  337. 2
  338. 2
  339. 2
  340. 2
  341. 2
  342. 2
  343. 2
  344. 2
  345. 2
  346. 2
  347. 2
  348. 2
  349. 2
  350. 2
  351. 2
  352. 2
  353. 2
  354. 2
  355. 2
  356. 2
  357.  @PikeBishop1  You're just repeating what I said with the first comment. That was my point. What we know of written history is what we learned from and parts of unwritten that were later written down and not so far back no longer recalled. Look at Africa. Geographically is lacks many resources that Europe has. Fertile land, that leads to cattle and agriculture. There is no spreading desert to threaten this. When you have those foundations, it leads to steady comforts and time and ability not to focus on every day survival, but other endeavors. This should be basic understanding. Funny, I recall Asian countries being considered safer, not white. How many instances of violence have occurred in Europe? Wars and so on compared to Asia. Don't forget the exporting of that to other places in the world. Just because they took slavery and colonization to other places besides homeland doesn't mean it lacked it. Every culture has done it, but one primary group has been the more active in spreading it around the world in various ways, today that is primarily through political intrigue and warmongering. And if you want to stick to modern times, we can mention the rape of resources from other countries that America and Europe have benefitted from that effected countries are left destitute for. There is a reason so many cultures are willing to go after white people when it itself has in truth been a primary actor in trying to dismantle other nations and cultures for gain of some kind. It doesn't make it right, but this is reaping what is sown and everyone that looks the same has to pay for it. European countries are documented for various forms of domestic abuse, a large degree incest in these supposed safe and peaceful places. The more decadent a people, the more immoral they become and if white people are seen to have benefitted more, then they are the more prolific partakers of such things. One need only look on the clear and dark web to see this. Who makes up most of academia and pushed a racist evolutionary theory? It valued philosophical and inherent paganized thinking that leads to immorality and another form of the decadent depravity seen in those of power. No matter the race, there are two sides to every coin. For every pro you think one has contributed, there is a con as well. For every boon, there is a ugly truth to how it was gained. Never be too quick to praise one self and forget the devil is in the details. The irony is other ethnic groups should know this, but when the shoe seems to be on the other foot, the same mistakes repeat. Human nature is corrupt.
    2
  358.  @PikeBishop1  Atlantis is considered fiction still. And no, Europeans did not create the modern world in the sense you're trying to paint it. What it contributed from Rome, Greece to some extent were inherent, but philosophy and academics already existed in places they came into contact with. They shared information and ideas that later led to what came later. Recall that Asia was civilized and developed compared to Europe long before, and Africa had Egypt as it's cultural and academic mecca. Anyone that remained tribal was due to their civilization being conquered, stunted by conflict, lack of resources as stated or chose such based on tradition/religion. About every developed nation was built on slavery as it was as common as war and other aspects of life. If it exported or imported slaves, it used that wealth to build it's walls and wealth, so no nation can ever claim to be built solely on self innovation. That's the height of arrogance that leads to social class structures and prejudice in the first place. When Europe was still tribes and clans, Asia had it's empires. Does that make them superior? Why then does evolution rank them behind the Caucasian if the Asian did things first? Then it gets muddy because of the inklings of advancements in ancient cultures we cannot replicate today. They weren't lesser because they didn't have the ease of technology, they were far smarter with what tools they had. Also, city society was not always the goal of every culture in the world. Some preferred to live on the land or just lacked the destructive ambition to advance what is always first war, that leading to invention. In that light it is almost as if you are saying white people are naturally more destructive and not driven to improve the world, but to advance in greed and domination in perceived superiority.
    2
  359. 2
  360. 2
  361. 2
  362. 2
  363. 2
  364. 2
  365. 2
  366. 2
  367. 2
  368. 2
  369. 2
  370. 2
  371. 2
  372. 2
  373. 2
  374. 2
  375. 2
  376. 2
  377. 2
  378. 2
  379. 2
  380. 2
  381. 2
  382. 2
  383. 2
  384. 2
  385. 2
  386. 2
  387. 2
  388.  @salomaogomes7311  I have no idea how a post-apocalyptic plot that has essentially been done in movies, was new and amazing. The main focus of Naughty Dog is to make game-movies. The characters were great, but not the plot. Everyone loves the interaction between Ellie and Joel, the rest was predictable. The irony in saying one is generic when based on a legendary film-maker's premise, and the other isn't when inspired by zombie-movie trending at the time lol! I've heard of a few having trouble with bugs that were fixed shortly after release, but never anything severe. No article I've come across, so either your exaggerating or the loneliest number. Now let's look at the games themselves; nothing was new about TLOU gameplay and it wasn't the best at what it did. The graphics were praised, characters, but not the rest. Could Ghost of Tsushima have been better in plot? In ways, yes, but I can only think of the ending being a bit better. Felt quick-ish, but might have eluded to something more like a sequel coming later. I didn't like the historical inaccuracies like women samurai or in positions of authority when NOT the case in ancient Japan particularly. I've studied Japanese history so that was important (aside romanticized aspect of ninja). There was pandering that took about 10% or less enjoyment out of it for me. The rest was perfect. The best graphics I've seen on PS4 that struck me as being PC-level, as someone that plays on PC. I've watched Kurosawa films and it indeed strikes true in many respects, yet by now it's dated and plots weren't that complex. It was the execution and cinematography used that was lauded. The gameplay was perfect; so much I couldn't play Wild Hunt compared to it's controls. So TLOU might have had better character dynamics, but GoT was just a better game in graphics, gameplay and overall story. Last one is subjective if you like zombies or samurai films more. But because of politics when ND pushes, SP won't gain that influence lest they sell out.
    2
  389. 2
  390. 2
  391. 2
  392. 2
  393. 2
  394. 2
  395. 2
  396. 2
  397. 2
  398. 2
  399. 2
  400. 2
  401. 2
  402. 2
  403. 2
  404. 2
  405. 2
  406. 2
  407. 2
  408. 2
  409. 2
  410. 2
  411. 2
  412. 2
  413. 2
  414. 2
  415. 2
  416. 2
  417. 2
  418. 2
  419. 2
  420. 2
  421. 2
  422. 2
  423. 2
  424. 2
  425. 2
  426. 2
  427. 2
  428.  @reginaschellhaas1395  It's not confusing at all. There are seven days of the week, there always have been throughout history. The biblical Sabbath has always been the seventh day; the Jewish nation has kept it since ancient times and in no way would they forget or get what day it was considering their faith was their life, children memorized chapters and when Pharisee would enforce it. You can look up the history of how the Catholic Church distanced itself from the Jewish people as they blamed them alone for Christ's death and did not want to share the same day of worship while persecuting them. The other reason is Constantine only converted out of political necessity as killing Christians only made more pop up. They never put away their pagan beliefs, thus why so much is found in the Roman church and pagans can point to the garments and ritual origins not found in Judeo-Christianity. The pagan holidays were adopted by the Catholic Church and turned into biblical holidays. It was another means of taking popular customs and just changing the names to be of Christian nature, disciples, saints. The statues we see in Rome are of Roman gods, not disciples and Mary and Jesus are of Temmud and Sol Invictus. Sabbath means "rest", so the issue isn't necessarily calling one or another day the sabbath, it's what is the true sabbath. As Scripture says, "God made Sabbath for man, not man for the Sabbath" in Jesus' words. People get confused with the ceremonial sabbaths held on new moons, but that was cultural/Levitical. The commandment Sabbath was meant to never forget, as if Jesus knew man would forget it and day would be obscured in some way. There are quotes from early Protestant leaders that admit they knew what day the true Sabbath was, but it seems to be lost now in churches or they can't afford to change because of tradition and losing congregation members. That's not including the Catholic Church saying they changed the day and provide evidence of it.
    2
  429. 2
  430. 2
  431. 2
  432. 2
  433. 2
  434. 2
  435. 2
  436. 2
  437. 2
  438. 2
  439. 2
  440. 2
  441. 2
  442. 2
  443. 2
  444. 2
  445. 2
  446.  @kats9755  Why did you leave out that desire to live coming at the expense of another? So yes, very much it is weak-willed, cowardice and selfish. How often do we actually hear about it? How often does it happen in comparison to those that do not? That find other means or we find them all dead without resorting to such? You're making an assumption toward your bias unless you have evidence to the contrary. The rules always change in most people's minds even for the most basic of things. Relationships, work, themselves. We see this dubiousness the most in 1st world countries because people are used to comfort, hate discomfort and generally faith-based virtues are not held. Having a family is no excuse. A thief stealing for his family risks his life or hand, which will leave his family in a worst state for temporary relief. Those people must return to their family with the trauma of what they did, them knowing what they did. Do you really think they went about life as normal? We seldom read such when it comes up. Cannabilism for any reason has no justification. It's no different than trying to justify murder and theft for one's survival. The weak and cruel resort to these methods while the strong find other means, and there are always other means. The reason the custom was a last resort of extremes is because it was understood it was not something naturally desire or wanted. You think that hesitance goes away while doing such or live with after? Survival is not a means to justify an end, but still the end will justify the means. To die with a clean conscious is far better than heaping regrets so you can make it to an old age.
    2
  447. 2
  448. 2
  449. 2
  450. 2
  451. 2
  452. 2
  453. 2
  454. 2
  455. 2
  456. 2
  457. 2
  458. 2
  459. 2
  460. 2
  461. 1
  462. 1
  463. Japan has unique social issues either socially engineered or fostered by their disconnect from one another. Most people are fake polite compared to even other Asian countries not being afraid to be honest. A number of Japanese talk about it more, but much is ingrained. Friendships are shallow, people talk behind other's backs and mental illness is ignored. Prostitution and pornography are a big issue with former being age of girls and latter how worker get ripped off. Crimes go unreported or ignored more than people think, so there is a lot that will destroy peoples illusions of Japan when not looking at it as some utopia for either ideology or vacation spot. It's been a lot of American and European tourists being problematic, so the "civilized" aren't doing much better in their eyes. People also project their views onto the Japanese in who they like and dislike. It varies from the cityfolk to the rural, where you will get the combo of youth and city people being more accepting of foreigners yet Progressive at the same time. You won't get them always to say they hate blacks or others when they see white people as outsiders, too. They do have their beauty standards and that doesn't easily fall aside, even for other Japanese of darker complexion. Their issues are easily exploited, a bit one being how corporate there abuses workers. Their recession I feel was kept in check for future opportunities like now. They are just too perfect a society to topple with Progressivism, even more than Europe was, despite the ideas coming from there. If Japan is going as far as to rent boyfriends, friends, fat people, crying men, parents and maybe more I haven't seen, they have already collapse internally in being able to relate to even their own. I feel many don't actually care about Japan, they just want it to represent their values and be personal getaway from homegrown issues.
    1
  464. 1
  465. 1
  466. 1
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. 1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. 1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1
  509. 1
  510. 1
  511. 1
  512. 1
  513. 1
  514. 1
  515. 1
  516. 1
  517. 1
  518. 1
  519. 1
  520. 1
  521. 1
  522. 1
  523. 1
  524. 1
  525. 1
  526. 1
  527. 1
  528. 1
  529. 1
  530. 1
  531. 1
  532. 1
  533. 1
  534. 1
  535. 1
  536. 1
  537. 1
  538. 1
  539.  @twrcrew8852  That was probably the worst rebuttal I've ever read. All I read were excuses and justification and theories for likely your own selfish nature. It's no doubt it's the most common one people give it to because it's easier and caters to vices. That still means nothing in what is objectively better and has net benefit. Doing good has no downside except it convicts those that do evil and they will find a way to make them pay for it. We know for fact that selfishness is the reason for every woe in the world and why people hate themselves and hate more they won't change it. Self-defense isn't selfish. It's protecting one self from harm. You're making a false equivalency. If you are saying they are selfless by standing there and taking it, a personal choice, that is simply choosing passivity. You try and boil down all things to only selfish benefit when we know that isn't the case when we have definitions and examples to the contrary. Because something is rare doesn't make it non-existent, it makes it more valuable. It is not what is the majority that matters, but the results; the means justify the end. You do wrong, everything looks wrong. You do good, you're conscious of what's wrong, but go against it. It may make you feel good, and some do it only for that reason, but that's not selflessness. You don't understand the definition if you think so. It is doing good without benefit to one self. There are three loves: Eros, Phileo and Agape. One is greater than the other two. You're welcome.
    1
  540. 1
  541. 1
  542. 1
  543. 1
  544. 1
  545. 1
  546. 1
  547. 1
  548. 1
  549. 1
  550. 1
  551. 1
  552. 1
  553. 1
  554. 1
  555. 1
  556. 1
  557. 1
  558. 1
  559. 1
  560. 1
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570. 1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. 1
  576.  @Lowdian  I don't think it's because it's too long, it's just an inconsistent platform that screws up more often than not. 1) It wasn't an interpretation lol! You're trying to bend it whatever way you can so the devs aren't saying what they said or they are at fault for being no different than the rest of game industry. People did the exact same thing with CDPR and learned a hard lesson. That was your interpretation of it and as much as a bias you have, you aren't questioning yourself. Ironic. What stands as evidence is the changes made to the game that go along with Progressivism. The character creator had the same crap the new Dragon Age does, it's been noted how many male characters are not in proactive roles such as warriors, knights but women are, emphasis on sexuality and sexual freedom and content toward latter end of game and other areas that possess the ideology. Not many are denying it at this point, but they do say you can just play around it or ignore it. You are flat out denying it to spare your own feelings. I know what it said, why are you sharing it with me? Lol! That was pointless and didn't change my mind. If you can't read what was said and then from the changes they made and what they took away from the creator, ability to make paler skin, then you are a) a liar seeking to defend this blindly or b) a daft person that makes their heroes from other fallible people and brands they form their identity around. Hard to look at any other way. I look at everything objectively as possible, even of the things I enjoy. I'm not willing to be deceived or self-deceived for entertainment sake. I played the EA up to release and know well what they did and didn't do and they held back most of the woke crap until release. It's a WotC property, so really expecting it not to have that content makes no sense.
    1
  577.  @Lowdian  2) It does, many personally exclude it because not their taste or number was smaller. You are giving me your opinion on the matter, not facts. How you feel about it means nothing just because you find it distasteful, but it has always included every sexual deviancy. Always has because that's the natural human course when seeking pleasures; you go to the point of depravity. Remember what we consider acceptable now was just as abhorrent a hundred years or more ago when morality was higher. Every single person understood what the scene implied and the responses toward it made it clear. You are at the height of ignorance to suggest otherwise. To show actual bestiality explicitly is illegal, especially with the level of realism that is a barrier between legality. Please use common sense. And it does have relevance because it is the only game to push the boundary so far in gaming when so much of journalism and Progressivism is puritanical. It got away with it because the studio or the content was aligned with them and Japan isn't known to be and rejects it by majority, so it gets harsher treatment and censorship against it is not equal to what Western studios get. 3) You read into that way, I never said it. I say exactly what I mean and if you are unsure, ask. Don't make assumptions. I said Larian used the DnD IP to further their own goals when so many thought they cares so much about it and why they did the game. What I do know is Larian has had Progressive if not Liberal politics in their more recent IP. Nothing egregious, but clear enough. I don't think they are ideologically opposed, no, but I don't know to what extent they agree as not all do. I do know what content they put in their game and again, actions speak louder than words. People lie and companies do all the time, but what they do says everything. 4) I have no idea why you assumed that I was personally weak, as that makes no sense. I have no need to be defensive, but if you felt my rebuttal harsh, I just don't necessarily hold back if it's not personally attacking someone. The problem I have is you make too many assumptions, only give your personal opinion on things more often and take that as fact enough. If you have a personal attachment to Larian or the game, admitting it is fine. However, you realize that means you have a bias and anything you have to say is colored by that, so you don't have an unbiased take.
    1
  578. 1
  579. 1
  580. I think this makes for a great opportunity for a conversation. The Bible does make not of inactive Christians. It's mainly talking about in the faith and going out and testifying and converting, but it can simply mean being active in exercising one's beliefs. Many don't do this and only talk and talk about talking. It's safe and why I think the church's were taken over because 1) No one actually studies the Bible and 2) Many lack actual conviction. So I understand the point of not using deception because 'let your yes be yes and your no be no', yet there are situations that deceptions is seen as the best way to protect or uncover what's hidden. Certain laws in place won't convict someone unless they openly admit to a crime and you have to deceive them into a position or deceive to get into a position to gain that information. So the question is truth above all better than expedience to get to the truth. On one hand I think the truth is that Christians sticking to principle will be Ned Stark'd, because one isn't play the game of deception to gain the upper-hand. That may just be a reality of this world. But is that still the method in the situations given by Matt, do we act on intuition and little information or despite not having proof we know the thing to be true, but then you've acted against the law of the land. I don't think we need or have to become the enemy to fight the enemy as we know how that ends, but possessing the skill enough in every situation to let someone hang themselves just isn't practical. Again, a good discussion/debate to have.
    1
  581. 1
  582. 1
  583. 1
  584. 1
  585. 1
  586. 1
  587. 1
  588. I think an important point on the Rapture is that it was first introduced by a Jesuit priest from South America, I do believe. I wish I knew his name off the top of my head, but if anyone knows who the Jesuit Order are, they were created to contest, to put it lightly, the Protestant movement. Everything they did from reporting them and spreading false teachings in order to fragment or break the movement. There are many other teachings that can be traced back to such origins. One key reason there are so many denominational beliefs is because Sola Scriptura is ignored, ore as Paul said Scripture should prove itself to hold up when tested. Many passages, books and verses reference each other and why it's a detriment for church's that only have the New Testament and not the Old. Jesus learned from Old Testament and that understanding led to what is in New. Visions are symbolic, figurative and the proof of that is they are always explained a few passages later, the next chapter and can be referenced back to in another book. Daniel's vision relates direction to John's as Daniel is looking forward in history while John is looking backward. For instances, water is key term for multitudes or people. Horns are symbols of power and authority, a woman represents the church. The name Michael only appears whenever a vision is being related, so it is symbolic in reference. Looking into the meaning of the name and angel meaning "messenger", the highest messenger in Heaven is Jesus; no other can contend with Satan and the great controversy is between them. One minor thing taken out of context is "biblically accurate angel" when it is taken and only appears in a vision. All else is left out in that passage that is referring to a chariot bore on beasts back. If you ask anyone what the entire vision meant they couldn't tell you, thus why that one part is taken out of context and said to be an angel. However, angels are depicted on the Ark of the Covenant and they aren't floating eyeballs with wings. That is trying to make them mythological creatures. We are told Lucifer had his throat specially prepared to sing as head of God's chorus, so a physical form relative to our own is implied in many instances. All of it is referencing the character of God and the many eyes of the wheel stands for his omnipotence. Studies are required to know how to approach visions and parables. Revelation is said to bestow a special blessing on those that understand it, so it's clearly not meant to be taken at face value. One has to study with belief, because if not, everything comes off as fantastical or nonsensical. I do think critics deliberately put forth little effort because many study the occult and how that incorporates numerology, astrology, various Eastern mysticism teachings and more and can come to conclusions about it and find it's origins. It's far more complex and at times meant to confuse, but Jesus said His way is simple. If one doesn't want to believe or understand, you won't.
    1
  589. 1
  590. 1
  591. 1
  592. 1
  593. 1
  594. 1
  595. 1
  596. 1
  597. 1
  598. 1
  599. 1
  600. 1
  601. 1
  602. 1
  603. 1
  604. 1
  605. 1
  606. 1
  607. 1
  608. 1
  609. 1
  610. 1
  611. 1
  612. 1
  613. 1
  614. 1
  615. 1
  616. 1
  617. 1
  618. 1
  619. 1
  620. 1
  621. 1
  622. 1
  623. 1
  624. 1
  625. 1
  626. 1
  627. 1
  628. 1
  629. 1
  630. 1
  631. 1
  632. 1
  633. 1
  634. 1
  635. 1
  636.  @FaithfulOfBrigantia  Well, that's a whiplash of assumption I've never had online before. Do I, personally, want revenge for....who? Myself? Brazilians? And your history is incorrect. Mass migration never took place in America, it was slow yet steady given the circumstances and travel by ship. The Natives displaced or wiped out other groups, so despite conquest being a dark business, every civilization and people has done so at some point or escaped it in their small numbers. I'm stating the fact that reaping what one sows is a thing and if you don't realize it, doesn't it seem like things are flipped on their head specifically against Caucasians? Dominate numbers in the West and gained resources from other countries that are still 3rd by means we'd rather not know, but someone did and subverting the presumed position it held? I can see other white elites having this mentality because they are above racial supremacy; they are economically superior to all. That mindset is the most prevailing above all prejudice. Meanwhile, other nations have been taking advantage of the complacency of the West to take it over. There is a predominate Portuguese ancestry in Brazil and why they speak that language, I have no idea what you are on to try and blame it on the Italians. Portugal was the most fervent in the slave trade and last to stop, but they did other trade and went far out. Whether with slaves or cultures they ran across, we clearly know who left their mark in other cultures. If you feel like I'm trying to guilt trip, I'm not, I'm stating the facts of history concerning this specifically. Whataboutism just makes you seem insecure and defensive. Most definitely if you are trying to make this personal and saying I want revenge lol! I belong to neither group.
    1
  637. 1
  638. 1
  639. 1
  640. ​ @FaithfulOfBrigantia  Karma means one's actions come back on them or on a people in some way. That has nothing to do with an individual pointing out a mysterious yet traceable occurrence in the world. It's why people believe it to be a cosmic/spiritual justice that can't be explained. Personal wishes have nothing to do with it, much less my own. If you need a finger to point at, you seem quite desperate to do so. I don't think you understand how it works because you are fixated on this idea of "revenge" being an element of it. It has nothing to do with getting even/tit-for-tat, that is your misunderstanding. I suggest you look it up. Karma or reaping what one sows means that individual actions or collective typically returns upon them in some way, even when the deed is hidden. It can come as irony or they are betrayed by themselves in some way. It comes from the same idea that we answer for everything in life in some way because of consciousness' eating away at a person or seemingly impossible circumstances of deed being uncovered. I'm sure you know the concept in some cultural form as all have it. Think of past civilizations that benefitted from conflict, slavery, conspiracy, a mix of that and good deeds or simple tribe/nomads getting by honestly. The mightiest fall upon themselves or by those they used to oppress. I've no idea who these "settlers" are that went to South America when the only settlers were the colonists from Europe. They did go that far into S. America, as did Europe (Spain), but sounds like you are referring to someone else. I think you misunderstood what I was referring to when mentioning the resource theft of nations, because I was being broad in my wording, not specific. The resource to the concern of Portugal was slavery they benefitted most from, it made a lot of money, so much pirates were the last to give it up. Broadly I thought it understood how the Western nations exploited other underdeveloped nations; using violent groups like King Leopold II with the Congo and America and Europe Africa for diamonds and forget the material used in cellphones, but China had a hand in as well. It makes sense given exports of good that don't exist in places. A dark truth of the world, but it's only so because we wanted to reap all the reward and let the people it extracted from languish instead of help them enrich from it. Yes, geographic resources as related above attribute to how much a favorable condition a civilization may have at developing. Europe was ideal for it compared to say parts of Africa, but parts did flourish and we know those in sub-Sahara and other places still found industry through exporting their skills or developing from what they had. Conquest added to this. So instead of you thinking I'm disparaging anyone, conflict and war are natural part of this world, even the Bible acknowledges this. It's how we conduct it that matters, intent of the heart and then that "karmic" justice or reward comes into play. I think you misunderstood again by not reading what I said or not my reply to the other. From what already existed in Brazil, genetically diverse as I said myself, had Portuguese ancestry added to it when they came, through their women as it was part of their custom in bringing in others. From what had been a norm there became added most recent in history. From what I know of Brazil, the darker skinned are not a large number from what I was told by a Brazilian and understood prior, being that African ancestry. Again, the cultural influence of Portugal is there for a reason and why the one that responded to you considered himself Portuguese because of that cultural marker left. I feel your denial has more to it than simple facts. I believe we are in the most part agreed, but our timelines are not in sync as to what happened when. The Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 and Act of Suppression of Slave Trade in 1839 were British implementations against slavery ending on the seas and enforced it as the dominant navy force. I think once again we are getting lines crossed and your assumptions getting ahead of you. Britain was the largest participant and was also ending it. What more can you expect from those that start something than finishing it when popular favor turns against it? You think I'm wagging a finger at Portugal alone, but their part was notable in history and as I said before, pirates from there were the last to give it up because of how lucrative it was in that area. However, it would stand to reason the context if it favored Portugal, it did so for Brazil too, but they were a colony of the greater power. Brazilians pirates used Portuguese ships and flags to hide their slave trading, to which the latter act addressed. It should be understood by all that no one's hands were clean in slavery as it was a natural part of the world and I still feel it so, though it adapted to the times in many ways, but still exists in primitive form. Brazil was last to stop in entirety, yes, but they were not a major player in the slave trade. It was an industry for a handful of nations big enough to enforce it and Portugal was in maritime trade, slavery being part of that as for other countries, as it was lucrative.
    1
  641. 1
  642. 1
  643. 1
  644. 1
  645. 1
  646. 1
  647. 1
  648. 1
  649. 1
  650.  @brianmannion7097  Religion is based on faith, not evidence. You can have a degree of evidence such as archaeological or facts presented in text are either known or demonstrable in some way. The Bible had thermodynamics, said the world was a sphere when man said it was flat, and evolutionary scientists have had to admit they were wrong when they dug up civilizations they said never existed, but the Bible or another text did. I'm sure you've researched a degree of that, and if not, you obviously don't actually care if there is evidence or not, right? Evolution is a humanists creation story. It is not testable nor demonstrable, but it is believed to have occurred based not on nature (as nature would not exist without individual components/organisms supporting one another to exist and genetic building blocks contradicted the order out of chaos assumption of evolution). Evolution had to be modified in light of biology showing what Darwin didn't know, so it requires just as much faith to believe in a developing theory as does extraordinary claims believed by spiritual people. Lets not forget there is paranormal and extraterritorial claims that have existed for centuries, far too many to be discounted as it occurs continually by every culture and belief spectrum. Things that are still being explored in science and evolution cannot account for. The common origins of religions and other similar stories prove that they all stemmed from one point in time. When they divided, the stories spread and modified to the cultures; how else did dragons make it on the Chinese zodiac, they supposed mythical creature among common animals we know exist? Every culture in the world has recordings or stories and illustrations of them throughout history, so it is not some fabrications or massive conspiracy theory spanning time. Marco Polo wrote of them, Alexander the Great and other prominent figures in history, though they varied in size and shape; just another creature hunted to extinction. Pagan religion is based on the observable nature and human characteristics. They are allegorical or speak to that specific culture and its values. That is how you know it cannot be true or speak beyond its boundaries when conceived. As for Judaism/Judeo-Christianity and Islam, they were unique in that they spoke to a single God that was above nature and not confined to it. Islam deviated in that it put value on a cultural identity of a people, whereas the Hebrew religion was meant for all peoples to begin with, it was not confined to one group as that one group was meant to spread the religion and not keep it to themselves. And you also have to realize when you don't actually study any of these texts, you will believe lies or misconceptions that are convenient to believe. Roman Catholicism incorporated paganism, that paganism carried on into Protestantism, so a lot of common beliefs that are said to be in the Bible actually are not. No eternal hell is mentioned in the Bible. If Satan was not supposed to be tortured forever, he was supposed to be destroyed when his time was up. If you studied that ONE fact, you would could say you put some honest effort into your disbelief. However, you come off as someone that has never read Lord of the Rings, brings up a common misconception because word-of-mouth, and turns out to be wrong. If you only looked into it, you would know better. Human beings need to believe in something. Ourselves, money, religion, scientific theories, occultism because we are hard-wired for it. Not even you can deny this, something has to be our foundation in life for life to make sense or we are typically in despair over existence. So faith is indeed necessity, even for you, you just put it into something different...like every other person in the world.
    1
  651. 1
  652. 1
  653. 1
  654. 1
  655. 1
  656. 1
  657. 1
  658. 1
  659. 1
  660. 1
  661. 1
  662. 1
  663. 1
  664. 1
  665. 1
  666. 1
  667. 1
  668. 1
  669. 1
  670. 1
  671. 1
  672. 1
  673. 1
  674. 1
  675. 1
  676. 1
  677.  @darkswords147  Of course, that's never going to change no matter what country you go to. The only thing that determines it again like any other place is job demand in that field in a country, in that location/area you move to. If Tokyo, expect it to be just as hard as if in New York or any major city. Second factor is if the employer wants to hire a foreigner over a natural-born unless the job is oriented toward foreigners like foreign language. A lot of people move to Japan with that, or want to do manga; they may work a 9-5 every day trying to achieve that goal or as a side job, so many struggle for the aesthetic of living there. Third is luck and connections, another basic truth in landing certain jobs. I'd imagine unless your career goal is high-income, a job catering toward a foreigner and you realize you might struggle more in different ways than a natural Japanese you have realistic expectations of living there. Some jobs require travel, so they end up going back and forth throughout the year, like a translator. Teaching some do, but again, I don't believe a high paying job so you might need another to supplement. There are places where foreigners live in close proximity, so there are obvious advantageous to that if you don't have connections/friends/family in Japan already. I have an aunt that travels back and forth half the year, but hasn't since the Covid thing started. I'd imagine I'd have the advantage of being hosted/staying with her possibly over funding a trip or finding a place of residence (and deal with housing discrimination of foreigners at the same time).
    1
  678. 1
  679. 1
  680. 1
  681. 1
  682. 1
  683. 1
  684. 1
  685. 1
  686. 1
  687. 1
  688. 1
  689. 1
  690. 1
  691. 1
  692. 1
  693. 1
  694. 1
  695. 1
  696. 1
  697. This actually isn't that unusual. You can find other interviews or YouTube channels presenting similar and convincing personalities. I was on a mental health forum for years and you will find alike, if not very colourful representations of DID. Color-coded, calling out at will (without triggers or conflict). Most try and represent DID as normal and while it is nothing like how the media portrays, there are reasons why professionals are skeptical or there is too much faking to actual be sure. One thing to consider is the more personalities you have, the more broken you are; think of a shattered mirror. This does not mean you have to be unstable, but it means the more work has to be done and merging is necessary. You want to merge at some point, despite how all may feel about it. Also, non-human alters create a bigger issue in how to approach, believability in what DID is and works. In a time where acceptance of a lot of things is being pushed, it's going to be very hard to actually diagnose this without the more fantastical representations found by majority out there. I understand the skepticism because of this, but those that actually do have this disorder are going to have a much harder time finding help. I think there are more with DID than is known, but half or more that are don't actually have it, either. You can find many vids of people officially diagnosed treat it like it's a badge of individuality and act very flamboyant with it. Psychiatrists also can influence an individual to believe they have this, so both sides can be a problem. For all eleven personalities to be stable and normal is unique, with no reflection from severity of abuse. From what I know to, children should be the hardest to come forth/coax out because said to be most vulnerable, closest to childhood abuse. A protector typically comes forward, so I'm 50/50 with this. I believe this woman was dating a YouTube personality at some point as well.
    1
  698. 1
  699. 1
  700. 1
  701. 1
  702. 1
  703. 1
  704. 1
  705. 1
  706. 1
  707. 1
  708. 1
  709. 1
  710. 1
  711. 1
  712. 1
  713. 1
  714. 1
  715. 1
  716. 1
  717. 1
  718. 1
  719. 1
  720. 1
  721. 1
  722. 1
  723. 1
  724. 1
  725. 1
  726. 1
  727. 1
  728. 1
  729. 1
  730. 1
  731. 1
  732. 1
  733. 1
  734. 1
  735. 1
  736. 1
  737. 1
  738. Eh, it depends on the woman that is working that entry level job. If looking down on that in general, then that's saying men need to get with career women, the worst kind and we know how that goes. Men don't care usually what the wife does for work, they want a wife. Now if that wife does do wrong and came from that background, it's incredibly stupid not to realize after how many years that is what's waiting for you. That's why majority of the time women do get half in divorces to enable the delusion of feminism and keep men and women adversarial. At the same time men aren't stupid and realize the women they marry majority of the time. Shallow people get with shallow people; marry for looks, their equal ambition, so on and it's not a mystery how that likely won't hold up. A guy who is average yet has money should know immediately why a 8-10 in his book is interested in him and act accordingly. The modern dating scene is messed up and has been messed up for quite awhile. Men took for granted their wives, hurt many, cheated, played dozens of women and those go on to be bitter and try and do the same to every man after. Again, not all of these people were going to be marriage material, but when the shoe goes on the other foot, spoiled, comfortable people of society will act and behave like children. This of course refers to Western society and where we see all of these problems emerge. Marriage has no point because a religious institution to people that aren't religious yet want a social contract of mutual exchange. That says all there needs to be said. Be honest about having crap values and expect that or if you get with someone that has better, shape up.
    1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752. 1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. 1
  760. 1
  761. 1
  762. 1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766. 1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769. 1
  770. 1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788. 1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. Actually...you might want to take back the rock/music thing because many a veteran rocker and those in the music industry have said 1) occultism had a lot to do with their music being produced and aimed at causing a reaction and mindset in listeners, 2) There are psychologists and people in curious positions in the music industry that have contributed to algorithms purposefully made to cause a specific reaction out of the listener. Now there is the saying "you become what you behold and there are extreme occult/mind-control experiments, if not tortures, devised to alter the mindset. Much of it focuses on repetition of behavior; the stereotypical viewing something over and over we see in some films. The subtle form is viewing something over a lifetime, which typically only produces desensitization. Violence is harder to break the threshold into reality because it has immediate consequence or big negative. But we do see sex, drugs, gambling and consumerism and other behavior mimicked based on continued exposure to the point it's normalized behavior. For very few, the mentally unwell for whatever reason find outlets in violence, but typically there are venues taken to satisfy any violent urge. I do believe domestic violence has increased, and narcissism, which typically indicates sociopathic tendencies in developed nations, and abuse victims typically stay quiet or there are missing pets....so no, videogames don't cause violence, they attract people already that way or filtering through it. Same as how pedophiles find fictional underage content to subdue their urges, if exposure to it did not lead to becoming hooked on it.
    1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804. 1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807. 1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810.  @kitalalaris  Only half true. Social engineering took place in both countries. When one group, this being race, takes over through economic advantage or conquest, you need to find a way to keep the other from rising up economically and otherwise. It has long been declassified in the US with Planned Parenthood, drugs, guns and gangs being pushed and funded by government and agencies. Ghettos are formed for a group to live in, not something after the fact to accommodate. Look at the Irish and other groups in Europe in how they were treated and when they came to the US as immigrants. To a lesser extent Italians. Prejudice leads to not allowing the same advantages as the in-group, thus the outsider having to struggle more to get to the same level. They value what they have more and may excel far more than those that are used to prosperity, but when you have a demoralized group, psychology dictates many will not rise above and why it's an effective tool. When you have your culture manufactured to be self-destructive, don't expect many to make it out and only respond at the level expected. That doesn't erase the responsibility to one self, but to pretend no other factors were at play for a very long time is disingenuous and shows ignorance. Considering how even the same is being applied to white people should make this far more pronounced just how effective social engineering is. How else would so many middle-class and above youth be indoctrinated so easily in schools and turn on their parents and peers for a bias they understand well, but destroying things instead of fixing them. People need to admit human beings have a problem with wanting to lord over another. Slavery wouldn't exist throughout history if not true. The more different you are, the easier it is to "other" that person and treat less than human. If the tables are turned, seldom is the lesson learned and getting even ensues. People want things to go back to how they were, not actually fix problems. Trying to resort back to controlling another group might as well be declaring war.
    1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. I really don't see the logic in your argument. Disney has bought up a bunch of studios, yet they burned it all down with their policies and politics. Microsoft has always had more money than Sony, yet that means what exactly? Why not buy Nintendo or more correctly, buy up their stocks? Because competition and they can't legally without challenges. And it doesn't matter how much value you have if you don't have games people want to play. Sony has exclusives, Japanese developed games and focus on indie games. Nintendo has their exclusives and adding some indies to their roster. The fact that Nintendo has been hanging in there with just a few games shows just how much games matter, not just business strategy. Everyone has been able to afford games during the pandemic, so how many are actually hurting? To me, Microsoft needs to buy other studios and offer more than games because that is their weakest area...in a market about gaming. Buying Bethesda is going to change Bethesda? Those guy's egos are so massive they haven't taken a hint for decades, so I'd imagine they'd need to replace them as no cash injection will steer their greed first, half-ass all else mentality. Let's not forget that Microsoft also shuts down just as many studios as they gain. I REALLY don't understand your thinking here at all. Games have always been the determining factor when consoles are involved. I've always deferred to Playstation mainly, Nintendo for their handhelds. PC for a little of both (emulation) and all else. I've liked some XBox games in the past, but they were shooters and multiplayer, which aren't my fav. You can't completely own a company that dominates in both the West and the East, sorry. The only thing that will hurt Sony is the Western branch (which terrifyingly enough has taken control) censoring games from Japan. I would think the situation in Cali has changed some things given that switch happened before the pandemic.
    1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817. 1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. Well, this certainly solidified the fact God is merciful in using fire instead of the water next time around. Definitely never going never the ocean more than I never planned to. As a biblically minded person, and if believing the Earth is not so dramatically old that no one can disprove it, giant lizards (later called dinosaurs) and giant sea creatures certainly did exist according to historical accounts. I believe it was...Marco Polo? He wrote a book about his travels and seeing them, an account in Rome of soldiers killing one, the man that started museums called to look at a small one in someone's garden and Marco saying China had tamed some ferocious ones. I firmly believe the scientific community is founded on lies at a certain point in the last 200 years when individuals started plotting the control the course of history, anything validating The Bible was done away with, especially once Darwinism and evolution came along. Most certainly once careers and livelihoods were attached to it, the active suppression of aspects of history and even evidence contradicting evolution were put away or destroyed. Every account already out there couldn't be tucked away, so it was discredited despite everything else about these historical figures being accepted. Giants lizards, even ones that flew and appear in every culture was just a fluke of stupidity (even though these are the same people that founded science and invention). Even in very recent time there are sightings of what shouldn't even exist after supposed millions of years, yet quickly brushed off by an institution long compromised by governments and private individuals and institutions. If Biblical accounts can be believed, it makes sense we still see them as they existed alongside mankind when everything was much larger, even us. On another note, if ghosts existed, the world would be overflowing with them compared to those alive. There wouldn't be space enough to not detect them. If the story of the Witch of Endor is to be believed, these are demons pretending to be loved ones or the deceased in order deceive. Reason being once people start believing in ghosts, it is the gate that leads into occultism and spiritualism. So to me, that is more alarming than ghosts, as fallen angels are capable of illusions and even more, if God allows or they are not under his protection, so even the elements are at their command and more. It's an interesting angle that in a secular society will never be explored even humored, because it is so against this one religion having plausibility.
    1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1
  834. 1
  835. 1
  836. 1
  837. 1
  838. 1
  839. 1
  840. 1
  841. 1
  842. 1
  843. 1
  844. 1
  845. 1
  846. 1
  847. 1
  848. 1
  849. 1
  850. 1
  851. 1
  852. 1
  853. 1
  854. 1
  855. 1
  856. 1
  857. 1
  858. 1
  859. 1
  860. 1
  861. 1
  862. 1
  863. 1
  864. 1
  865. ​ [Who Was Balaam’s God: YHWH El? Or Bull El? Stele of El. From James Prictchard, Ancient Near Eastern Pictures Relating to the Old Testament (1969). Courtesy of Bruce K. Satterfield The Torah Portion of Balaam “Who wrote the Bible?” This is not only the title of a best-selling popular book about the documentary hypothesis[1] but an old question addressed already by the rabbis in the Talmud (b. Bava Batra 14b): משה כתב ספרו, ופרשת בלעם, ואיוב. Moses wrote ‘his book,’ the Portion of Balaam, and (the Book of) Job. Explaining the odd line about the portion of Balaam being an independent composition, Rashi writes: ופרשת בלעם – נבואתו ומשליו אף על פי שאינן צורכי משה ותורתו וסדר מעשיו And the portion of Balaam – his prophecies and proverbs, even though they do not reflect the purposes of Moses, nor his Torah nor the narratives of his deeds. Even though Rashi, explaining the Talmud, maintains the traditional view that Moshe wrote the prophecies and proverbs of Balaam and placed them in the Torah, he still views these statements and proverbs of Balaam as originating independently of both the opening narrative of the parasha as well of the rest of the Torah. This approach to the proverbs of Balaam has its advocates among contemporary academic scholars as well. In his Anchor Bible Numbers commentary, Professor Baruch Levine concludes, “[W]hat is eminently clear is that the poems speak for themselves, and that the narratives are predicated upon a different casting of Balaam.”[2] Following Levine and Rashi, this piece will focus on the understanding Balaam’s poems as independent and foreign to the larger narrative context and uncovering their meaning. God and El For the purpose of this exercise, let’s focus on a single verse, a refrain, actually, that occurs twice in our parasha (Num. 23:22; repeated in Num. 24:8, albeit with a small variation): אֵל מוֹצִיאָם מִמִּצְרָיִם כְּתוֹעֲפֹת רְאֵם לוֹ. God who freed them from Egypt is for them like the horns of the wild ox (NJPS). The traditional understanding of the word אל in the poem as a reference to God, i.e, “the One True God.” This is hardly surprising; that is the general meaning of the word in the Bible. However, biblical scholars have long understood that אל is also the proper name of the old chief god in the ancient Canaanite pantheon, El (or Il). The name “Yisra-El” actually contains the theophoric (divine) element, El, which strongly implies that the people of Israel worshiped El during their formative period. Thus, it is highly likely that, in its original context, the verses we have selected did not look to the generic “God” as the author of Israel’s Exodus from Egyptian slavery, but the god El.[3] If this is correct, we ought to translate our verse as “El brought them/him out of Egypt; like the horns of a wild ox does he have!” Particularly noteworthy is the fact that El’s general epithet was “Bull.” The Bible itself repeatedly demonstrates that ancient Israelites either acknowledged the existence of, or outright worshipped, more than one god/God, and that, eventually, some of these gods coalesced in the minds of the Israelites into the one God of Israel familiar from the Bible and later Judaism.[4]] If you understand any of that, and remember that when Moses brought them out of Egypt, they had forgotten god from all those years in Egypt and worshipped pagan gods, gods they had to be broken from during their time wandering. It's surprising where I pulled the quotes from that they never mention this. It's why they built that bull of bronze (see how that ties in?) and Moses cast down the commandments in anger because they made a pagan idol. Also know that Abraham had been called out of Canaan by God, away from the culture and to create a new nation that worshipped Him. How can you say it copied another when it didn't take any of the same practices with it and why they were opposed to and opposed by other nations around them? Every mention of pagan worship by the Hebrew nation is mentioned and even in New Testament when in the churches, so it was never disguised when an influence was present during a time period. You don't make distinctions if they are the same or bare semblances. Your claim is false, simply put, unless you can find a verse that shows the same practices and customs of the pagan nations around them at any point in time.
    1
  866. 1
  867.  @pelasgianskeleton  Who Was Balaam’s God: YHWH El? Or Bull El? Stele of El. From James Prictchard, Ancient Near Eastern Pictures Relating to the Old Testament (1969). Courtesy of Bruce K. Satterfield The Torah Portion of Balaam “Who wrote the Bible?” This is not only the title of a best-selling popular book about the documentary hypothesis[1] but an old question addressed already by the rabbis in the Talmud (b. Bava Batra 14b): משה כתב ספרו, ופרשת בלעם, ואיוב. Moses wrote ‘his book,’ the Portion of Balaam, and (the Book of) Job. Explaining the odd line about the portion of Balaam being an independent composition, Rashi writes: ופרשת בלעם – נבואתו ומשליו אף על פי שאינן צורכי משה ותורתו וסדר מעשיו And the portion of Balaam – his prophecies and proverbs, even though they do not reflect the purposes of Moses, nor his Torah nor the narratives of his deeds. Even though Rashi, explaining the Talmud, maintains the traditional view that Moshe wrote the prophecies and proverbs of Balaam and placed them in the Torah, he still views these statements and proverbs of Balaam as originating independently of both the opening narrative of the parasha as well of the rest of the Torah. This approach to the proverbs of Balaam has its advocates among contemporary academic scholars as well. In his Anchor Bible Numbers commentary, Professor Baruch Levine concludes, “[W]hat is eminently clear is that the poems speak for themselves, and that the narratives are predicated upon a different casting of Balaam.”[2] Following Levine and Rashi, this piece will focus on the understanding Balaam’s poems as independent and foreign to the larger narrative context and uncovering their meaning. God and El For the purpose of this exercise, let’s focus on a single verse, a refrain, actually, that occurs twice in our parasha (Num. 23:22; repeated in Num. 24:8, albeit with a small variation): אֵל מוֹצִיאָם מִמִּצְרָיִם כְּתוֹעֲפֹת רְאֵם לוֹ. God who freed them from Egypt is for them like the horns of the wild ox (NJPS). The traditional understanding of the word אל in the poem as a reference to God, i.e, “the One True God.” This is hardly surprising; that is the general meaning of the word in the Bible. However, biblical scholars have long understood that אל is also the proper name of the old chief god in the ancient Canaanite pantheon, El (or Il). The name “Yisra-El” actually contains the theophoric (divine) element, El, which strongly implies that the people of Israel worshiped El during their formative period. Thus, it is highly likely that, in its original context, the verses we have selected did not look to the generic “God” as the author of Israel’s Exodus from Egyptian slavery, but the god El.[3] If this is correct, we ought to translate our verse as “El brought them/him out of Egypt; like the horns of a wild ox does he have!” Particularly noteworthy is the fact that El’s general epithet was “Bull.” The Bible itself repeatedly demonstrates that ancient Israelites either acknowledged the existence of, or outright worshipped, more than one god/God, and that, eventually, some of these gods coalesced in the minds of the Israelites into the one God of Israel familiar from the Bible and later Judaism.[4] They weren't the same God, but the common origin of the people mire them together in certain respects. That didn't make them the same and why we see Moses break the commandments, otherwise the bull idol would have been accepted if symbolized the same God. that's irrefutable proof and likely why that is in part recorded. El was not the Hebrew God, otherwise what customs did they hold that were held for El? None, because the worship, lifestyle of the Hebrew nation were distinct from all others around them down to the clothes that they wore and food that they ate. This was deliberately done so that culturally they wouldn't blend in or have similarities that would make it easy to adopt foreign gods and in retrospect, points to no similar worship or culture was the same.
    1
  868. 1
  869. 1
  870. 1
  871. 1
  872. 1
  873. 1
  874. 1
  875. 1
  876. 1
  877. 1
  878. I'm fairly certain that historically we even see the multicultural groups of Egypt in artwork if not see the history of how many times one group overthrew another over those centuries. To think one group, especially ethnically, controlled such a cultural center all that time doesn't make sense when looking at what we know. It's a lot of this Afro-centric BS and revisionist history being spread by people 1) Insecure in themselves and 2) Aren't even from Africa nor know anything about it. Granted, Africa does have it's debates going on about who rule what based on ethnic groups and skin color. I'm not sure why so many want to claim royal lineage as that seems to be what it surrounds. Most royal lines were inbred and weren't the greatest of people. They were nobility, no different than what we see from the affluent today in basic respects. If not that, it's the globalization of the world trying to erase cultures so it's easier to compact societies to where they are easier to control like tuna in a can. If it's not race, it's class used. And calling a Italian "white" is ironic considering they were hated more than black people back in the day in America. They had colorful words for them and even included the same used for blacks. Basing things on how one looks is the most simplistic and ignorant thing, especially those thinking they are science minded that anyone exposed to the sun biologically is disposed to turning dark when not one Greek, Italian or a generation in South Africa has shown the slightest sign of change.
    1
  879. 1
  880. 1
  881. 1
  882.  @Rabbithole8  The time relevant to what I was discussing. You seem to be on quite the tangent. When Darwin came up with the evolutionary theory, what were his associations, thinking and influences in which helped develop it? One can look to the French Progressive thinkers and others as academic elites and adjacent had the same goal if they weren't under the banner of Marxism. One only need examine the goals written by Marxism and other atheistic think tanks that their first listed goal was to remove religion (Christianity because the West) from society. This is known if one has cursory knowledge of it. It presents the first challenge to manipulating free thinkers because their views have a basis and foundation on immutable ground beyond one's own will and views. Those are easy to dismantle, but not against a belief that historically couldn't be stamped out even through force. Many warned the West against allowing certain individuals, groups and thinking in, one notable person recent to me is Yuri Bezmenov. We know for fact seeing how our politics, academia, military, entertainment, media and more have been infected with Communists and Marxists. This is no exaggeration given the fact it's admitted, advertised, sponsored by such activist groups, unions and those within aforementioned entities. We know from history it happened in China, Soviet Union, Africa and areas of Asia. With that explanation given, we have why science is so fortified against any other theory contending with evolution despite it's many issues and iterations it's faced with the discoveries in other areas of science. There are a bit more academics that speak out against how corrupt the institution is and knowingly peddles lies, yet as Metatron points out many times, appeal to authority and bias toward academia pervades common thinking. With how emboldened professors and students became in the past years due to ideological and political divide it's far more obvious academia is taken over and only accepts one course. We saw science be weaponized during Covid and how broken the system truly is when we know science and academia lied through it's teeth. The trust in it was shown to be low as a result. We had so many in science that came out against it and others in their fields be cast out or discredited by the establishment for telling the truth. People went along with it until the truth came out to their shame. No greater example exists of it's current state and it started decades ago if one has done their research into when fields and subjects began entering schools. What belief system do we see promoted by Communists and Marxists? Atheism. We can look at the results of that rule and effect on a society, but it's not primarily exclusive to that. Any authoritarian control will result near the same as seen with Catholic rule for over a thousand years. Didn't destroy Europe like the aforementioned did, so a significant difference. Both still targeted the religious, Christians beyond primary among them. I could go on, but that's a lot said already.
    1
  883. 1
  884. 1
  885. 1
  886. 1
  887. 1
  888. 1
  889. 1
  890. 1
  891. 1
  892. 1
  893. 1
  894. 1
  895. 1
  896. 1
  897. 1
  898. 1
  899. 1
  900. 1
  901. 1
  902. 1
  903. 1
  904. 1
  905. 1
  906. 1
  907. 1
  908. 1
  909. 1
  910. 1
  911. 1
  912. 1
  913. [4:5 The Holy Spirit is represented by the “seven lamps” burning in the heavenly sanctuary. Seven is a figure of completeness or perfection. The Holy Spirit brings light into the lives of God’s people and illuminates the way to salvation. Revelation 5:6 tells us that the seven Spirits of God are the eyes of the Lord, and Zechariah 3:9 and 4:10 tells us that the eyes of the Lord run to and fro in the earth. This is symbolic of God's spirit that works in behalf of men and God's omniscience that sees all things hidden and secret. The Holy Spirit searches constantly throughout the whole world for those whose hearts are perfect toward Him. 2 Chronicles 16:9; Proverbs 15:3] [The “beasts” or living creatures in this scene are similar to the angel cherubim in Ezekiel’s vision. The shapes of the living creatures were symbolic. (In this same vision Jesus was represented as both a lion and a lamb, symbolizing His power and His gentleness.) Similar imagery is used in Ezekiel chapter 1. There are different opinions about the different qualities of each of the living creatures. In general it is believed that the human face symbolizes reason or Jesus’ humanity; the lion’s face, strength; the ox’s willingness to serve or perseverance; and the eagle’s swiftness to obey or perceptiveness. Like the elders, these living creatures ascribe to God praise for having redeemed them from the earth in Revelation 5:9. They therefore belong to the same company and represent a part of the great multitude, who, as already described, have been led up on high from the captivity to death. Ezekiel chapters 1 and 10 seem to indicate that these creatures may be part of God's moveable throne. Another idea is suggested for the meaning of the symbolism of the four living creatures by Roy Allan Anderson in his book Unveiling Daniel and the Revelation: Commentators for centuries have linked these symbols with the four aspects of our Saviour as emphasized particularly in the four Gospels. Matthew writes on the kingly side of our Lord, emphasizing the King and His kingdom. This is well symbolized by the lion, the majestic king of beasts. Mark deals largely with the Saviour as a servant of man, the ox symbolizing service. Luke, the physician, reveals His human aspect as the Son of man, hence the face of a man. John emphasizes His diety—Christ the Eternal Word—who created all things. This phase of our Lord is symbolized by the flying eagle. Though the account of the organization of Israel in the wilderness as given in Numbers 2 does not so state, non-Biblical records indicate that these symbols were used as follows: the section grouped around Judah were under the lion standard; those standing near Ephraim, under the ox; those around Reuben, under the standard of a man; and those around Dan, under the flying eagle.] https://amazingdiscoveries.org/S-deception-Throne-seal-Revelation-4-commentary
    1
  914. 1
  915. 1
  916. 1
  917. 1
  918. 1
  919. 1
  920. 1
  921. 1
  922. 1
  923. 1
  924. 1
  925. 1
  926. 1
  927. 1
  928. 1
  929. 1
  930. 1
  931. 1
  932. 1
  933. 1
  934. 1
  935. 1
  936. 1
  937. 1
  938. 1
  939. 1
  940. 1
  941. 1
  942. 1
  943. 1
  944. 1
  945. 1
  946. 1
  947. 1
  948. 1
  949. The shock that someone not of dark skin was doing something vile to them is funny. I could have sworn the UK prioritized academia over everything else and ended up in the situation it did, manual labor jobs being left to foreigners. It's why there are no skilled laborers in training because for decades it was left to Romanians and lower skill jobs to Indians, though many did excel. It's as if when they were doing what you wanted, immigration was fine. Soon as the rug-pull of losing the benefits and true state of economy reared, the immigrants and politicians get the blame. Ever since the Industrial Revolution you leveled your natural environment with land for sheep, not native there, and imported hordes of fowl only meant for hunting that dominated the rest. You were doing better than the US in ways and the decadence caught up. That's usually the pattern of a society collapsing when they do themselves in, foreigners and slaves/immigrant labor starts to look suspicious and collapse to corruption and invasion. The social issues in regards to assaults on youth didn't start with foreigners as it's been ignored for decades and never has the outcry been this loud until foreigners jumped in; that's disturbing in itself because one can go back to videos years back on exposing it. Vivek had said the same to the US on X. Many were upset that illegal immigration was the issue and not immigration (incompatibility different issue), and people were brought in because of the laziness that came with the comfort of living better than most. Foreigners with less will push harder to achieve and this had been simple truth when immigrants came to America for the "American dream". Get rid of illegals, yes. But it was the false sense of security many in the first world that led to this and ignoring issues at home in society. It will just start over again or be pointed out by Marxists again, because that's how they gained a foothold in the first place; exposing and taking advantage of the issues.
    1
  950. 1
  951. 1
  952.  @kalebkuhn9128  I said to show me what I said, not what you want to believe or twist the meaning to be. Insinuation is not a statement. Let's go into history and dispel your attempt to make Europe sound altruistic in ending slavery. The only honest party were Christians having morally always objected to slavery. It wasn't until near the end of the 19th century did the end of slavery come into effect. When the use of slavery in northern Europe no longer was profitable after it had run it's course and use, that is what lead to the first decline. The only reason Britain stopped was because when it became less profitable since the 1600s, they had built relations with African kings through actual trade of goods instead of slaves. They could do this when America, Spain and Portugal were trying to increase trade to make up for Britain backing out, as Britain was wealthier and had the bigger navy, they used their navy instead to intercept rival ships. it always comes down to money, not altruism, not when it took from the 1600s to just shy of the 1900s to finally end it, or better put, it had served it's purpose and had diminishing returns. The General Act of the Brussels Conference of 1889-1890 is the first time writing was put to intent to end slavery in Europe, then the emancipation in America is what finally ended it. You are speaking for others, you don't read minds, so you can't declare anyone's intent but your own. You can suggest or guess, but not assert with any certainty. I have a problem with someone bringing up something that has nothing to do with context. Bringing it up doesn't change the fact of the matter and there's no point repeating it over and over again. No, they weren't. The OP was responding to what was said in the video, he didn't start any conversation. He brought an element in that didn't have to do with the subject, and I replied that he was deflecting in thinking that Africa's involvement changed anything Portugal did. It wasn't even the only place Portugal took slaves. You jumped in trying to defend and speak for him. You're still doing it and still wrong. I said you defended his bringing up Africa into the matter, I can't tell if you're confused or trying to be confusing in hopes what we are debating is lost. It hasn't worked and if you only are going to repeat yourself in different ways, I see no reason for this to continue.
    1
  953. 1
  954. 1
  955. 1
  956. 1
  957. 1
  958. 1
  959. 1
  960. 1
  961. 1
  962. 1
  963. 1
  964. 1
  965. 1
  966. 1
  967. 1
  968. 1
  969. 1
  970. 1
  971. 1
  972. 1
  973. 1
  974. 1
  975. 1
  976. 1
  977. 1
  978. 1
  979. 1
  980. 1
  981. 1
  982. 1
  983. 1
  984. 1
  985. 1
  986. 1
  987. 1
  988. 1
  989. 1
  990. 1
  991. 1
  992. 1
  993. 1
  994. 1
  995. 1
  996. 1
  997. 1
  998. 1
  999. 1
  1000. 1
  1001. 1
  1002. 1
  1003. 1
  1004. 1
  1005. 1
  1006. 1
  1007. 1
  1008. 1
  1009. 1
  1010. 1
  1011. 1
  1012. 1
  1013. 1
  1014. 1
  1015. 1
  1016. 1
  1017. 1
  1018. 1
  1019. 1
  1020. 1
  1021. 1
  1022. 1
  1023. 1
  1024. 1
  1025. 1
  1026. 1
  1027. 1
  1028. 1
  1029. 1
  1030. 1
  1031. 1
  1032. 1
  1033. 1
  1034. 1
  1035. 1
  1036. 1
  1037. 1
  1038. 1
  1039. 1
  1040. 1
  1041. 1
  1042. 1
  1043. 1
  1044. 1
  1045. 1
  1046. 1
  1047. 1
  1048. 1
  1049. 1
  1050. 1
  1051. What? CIA shot JFK, that's no longer a question. The man wanted to get rid of the intelligence agency, the one that said, "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false" - William J. Casey. He also wanted to get rid of the Federal Reserve, the system that did away with the gold standard for being able to infinitely print money and controlled by the banking system. People talk about Trump, yet JFK truly attempted to change the system and expose conspirators. His brother was assassinated for echoing he'd do the same. No one like Ron Paul was going to get in there, nor did the one lady Trump tried to hire for saying she wanted to get rid of the FR. So if disinformation is the tool of control, what else is controlled? Media? All social media is started by intelligences agencies, so is the media. Obviously if methods of gathering information. We can see clearly with our media now this in sickening display. So is the scientific community controlled? They've caved to social pressure, not scientific facts. How trustworthy is that? They can disprove other theories with resounding clarity or challenge them with facts, but can't disprove what is clearly been understood unless someone is hired to do conflicting research that hasn't been peer reviewed. We should have no faith in any system because money controls all of them and many of these figures have been compromised like political figures. Or you just take the sweet paycheck, much like we see with college professors being arrested for selling information and research to China. You can ask why the Matrix is so appealing? Question absolutely everything? How much can we test for ourselves? How much is dictated to us and are those foundations sure?
    1
  1052. 1
  1053. 1
  1054. 1
  1055. 1
  1056. 1
  1057. 1
  1058. 1
  1059. 1
  1060. 1
  1061. 1
  1062. 1
  1063. 1
  1064. 1
  1065. 1
  1066. 1
  1067. 1
  1068. 1
  1069. 1
  1070. 1
  1071. 1
  1072. 1
  1073. 1
  1074. 1
  1075. 1
  1076. 1
  1077. 1
  1078. 1
  1079. 1
  1080. 1
  1081. 1
  1082. 1
  1083. 1
  1084. 1
  1085. 1
  1086. 1
  1087. 1
  1088. 1
  1089. 1
  1090. 1
  1091. 1
  1092. 1
  1093. 1
  1094. 1
  1095. 1
  1096. 1
  1097. 1
  1098. 1
  1099. 1
  1100. 1
  1101. 1
  1102. 1
  1103. 1
  1104. 1
  1105. 1
  1106. 1
  1107. 1
  1108. 1
  1109. 1
  1110. 1
  1111.  @meisei9185  First of all, if Lockley is a professor in the UK and Japan, I'd imagine his research came from prior sources like the official documents mentioned and already reviewed. If you want to know if he did consultation among others for further information, why haven't YOU looked into it or have much clue about Lockley himself and his credentials? You seem to be another armchair historian with a bias that hasn't done research, ironically. Where did you read Yasuke was "trying to gain territory"? I don't recall typing that. It is given awarded to him by his lord, like every boshi and vassal. He was in line to receive it, a significant difference. What I'm referring to comes from the Maeda Clan document, Kaeko Haraku's book (professor at Historiographical Institute at University of Tokyo) and Lockley's book, both confirming one another. TheShogunate links to a post made by those covering the topic using these sources to confirm what was true of Yasuke. Where did you read I said one promotion had to do with another beyond the fact that I said Nobunaga was known to not adhere to tradition and promoted based on his own intuition. If he did it for a commoner, he would do it for a foreigner that also gained his favor. So given the sources you can go and confirm for yourself now, the information is more than backed up. Whether you personally like it or not doesn't matter, if you truly cared for the facts you'd have searched them out yourself instead of contending with people online if they have the right information. You've presented nothing contrary except disagreement and your own personal feelings on the matter.
    1
  1112. 1
  1113. 1
  1114. If they only knew how right Eddie is lol! The Bible itself points out the Catholic Church as the system (not individual) of antichrist. Anti just means "in the place of", which if you research the doctrines of the church, statements made about the Pope being God on earth, and God adheres to their authority, it's true. Daniel and Revelation talk about the beasts, the beasts symbolic for Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome and finally the United States. The world superpowers signified by the characteristics of each creature in Revelation and by the minerals that made up the construction of the statue. The horned beast and mire and clay feet (concrete) represent the US, as the beast came from the earth not the sea, different from how the other nations formed. I'm not going to go all into as a lot more symbolism, but seven horns/seven hills are mentioned, the scarlet and gold and other characteristics that point to the Roman Church. Every Protestant church's founders believed this and why they split from Rome and the accusation of all the Reformation leaders, the first being Catholics themselves, seeing the corruption and studying the Bible themselves. So Eddie is right the Catholic Church is pagan, most of its elements not Christian were stolen from pagan customs. Supposedly, the Catholic Church will with the aid of the US, bring all religions together and enforce a Sunday law all must worship on (because its best for the world as it is gone crazy as we see now), or you are not able to buy and sell. How they actually go about that seems to look like a social credit system of some kind, something every needs to have that they are part of this new system.
    1
  1115. 1
  1116. 1
  1117. 1
  1118. 1
  1119. 1
  1120. 1
  1121. 1
  1122. 1
  1123. 1
  1124. 1
  1125. 1
  1126. 1
  1127. 1
  1128. 1
  1129. 1
  1130. 1
  1131. 1
  1132. 1
  1133. 1
  1134. 1
  1135. 1
  1136. 1
  1137. 1
  1138. 1
  1139. 1
  1140. 1
  1141. 1
  1142. 1
  1143. 1
  1144. 1
  1145. 1
  1146. 1
  1147. 1
  1148. 1
  1149. 1
  1150. 1
  1151. 1
  1152. 1
  1153. 1
  1154. 1
  1155. 1
  1156. 1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. 1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. 1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. 1
  1185. 1
  1186. 1
  1187. 1
  1188. 1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191. 1
  1192. 1
  1193. 1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1
  1197. 1
  1198. 1
  1199. 1
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202. He wasn't specific, but there would be no women leading a church. They were patriarchal and the church had roles where men lead and women ministered, so I'd really like to know the context which he's speaking. I can't even think of who he might mean, but they were not leading anyone and the church structure didn't take place until after Christ. Third century is when that term appears, so very curious why he described it that way. The only prominent figure before Christ in that time was John the Prophet. And I don't recall paganism being forbidden considering that no one actually got rid of their pagan practices. It's why the Roman Church has so many things taken from it and we know Mithraism and sun worship were part of it. The 'venerable day of the sun' replaced Sabbath worship among Jews and Christians, going from a holiday to becoming the official day of worship. I also don't like how he's framing polytheism as just getting along or having no issues, because clearly that isn't the case. I'm not even sure how you can come to that logical conclusion even with tolerance being a thing. Every religion and belief thinks that their belief is the true one or why even follow it? It's always just stated of monotheism or Christianity when it is true for all. He doesn't mention also that the more they murdered Christians, the more people converted, Roman citizens among them. Was it Tertulliun that said "the blood of Christians is seed"? So if you can't exterminate them, join them, but the Christian belief is that that only resulted in miring the faith with pagan customs and teachings. It was far more effective in assaulting in from the inside that out. Elysium was Paradise to Greeks and Romans. What is he talking about? It's always on subjects of religion that I have the hardest time understanding historians, or most. There' something about their perspective that just can't grasp concepts surrounding it or the mentality. People died for their beliefs or a good death in battle was rewarded, how more important could it be to them?
    1
  1203. 1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. 1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. 1
  1222. 1
  1223. 1
  1224. 1
  1225. 1