u/Jabre7

I'm playing on the Legacy Collection, and I honestly don't like how brutal the levels can be. I love challenging boss fights so I turn Rookie Hunter off for the bosses, but I have a large backlog of like, most of the Megaman games so I really just want to get through them. Is there any shame in using Rookie Hunter mode since I kinda suck ass at the levels?

The only time I turn Rookie Hunter off for the main stage is when I'm doing Buster Only, but that's because Buster Only actually makes it fun for me. There's nothing wrong with this I hope?

I'm not saying this is universally the case, some sadists(be they secretly sadistic or overtly) absolutely understand what they're doing and yet get off to it because they're just that evil.

But in most cases, their sadism is because they believe it's justified and good for the person in question, or good for themselves to inflict it. These people are emotionally dumb, have low EQ, whatever you want to call it. They don't understand that such ideas of justice or fairness are not actually fair or just, and only hurt people even more without fixing much of anything. I speak of people making mistakes and then one person bullies them for it. Of someone who's wronged and then becomes obsessed with degrading, denigrating or making said person suffer nonstop. This does tie in, as well, to my last post on "policing behavior".

Now if you struggle with these tendencies this is not an indictment against you. If anything it's only human nature to respond in such a way. But it still is something that if one truly understood how their own emotions worked and how to handle them, and how people really work internally, they would realize this is bad for people and solves nothing, and a more understanding and compassionate answer would solve things better for everyone in most cases.

That's just my 2 cents on the issue, feel free to comment your thoughts.

Astro Boy Omega Factor is often praised as one of the best games on the GBA, but what do you all think of it? I personally have it in my top 5 beat em ups of all time as well as my favorite Gameboy Advance game(sorry Drill Dozer), personally considering it better than alot of modern ones.

Omega Factor has its own canon and continuity going on, but the characters seem to be based off the 80s series mainly. It even has cameos from all sorts of characters from other Tezuka series. Overall it's an amazing experience I recommend to anyone if possible.

I was talking to a Christian friend of mine on Discord. When I brought up that Jesus' resurrection would be known historical fact if it really happened, he claimed that we do have records of early Christian testimony of the resurrection(who seemed truly convinced it was true), via Tacitus Josephus and also secular records of Paul's letter to the Corrinthians.

What do you make of this? I'm not convinced by it, after all Tacticus would surely record the dead supposedly raised alongside Jesus if any of this was true right?

And I mean this Once Upon a Katamari has consistently, through it's entirety, been the hardest Katamari experience I've ever had. I've played through all of Damacy, We Love, and Forever, and this game takes the cake in terms of both consistent and peak difficulty. And i'm only like halfway through the game! What the hell???

It is so much harder to figure out and to achieve the goal than in any other game. Why did they crank the difficulty so much? I mean I don't mean to complain but it would be nice if the game just chilled out a bit lol. Even the items don't make it that much easier imo.

I mean mainly Protestant teaching and beliefs on spirituality. When I say psychological truths I don't mean therapy practices or beliefs, I mean known psychological and neurological workings and general scientifically proven truths in the field of how the mind and brain work that common Protestant teaching/doctrine contradicts and baselessly claims are false.

This is for the purpose of my deconstruction, so input is appreciated.

Christians like to take failed prophecy like the Nile River drying up, Damascus being left uninhabited, Egypt being conquered by Nebuchadnezzar, ect. As symbolic or metaphorical prophecies regarding the end time, and things like "Egypt" or "Nebuchadnezzar" actually being hidden metaphors for other, modern day things. Is this really reasonable to claim though? I don't think so. There's nothing in the text hinting at this being a secret "this will actually mean something else far in the future", and it's generally agreed by Bible teachers from what I understand that these did have an immediate and literal meaning at the very least.

What do you think though? Is this just another case of "holy spirit drunkenness" where they have some sudden trip on "holy revelation" just to justify their texts?

Edit: In the original Hebrew, the earliest known manuscripts of the Nebuchadnezzar and Egypt prophecy literally state that Egypt will be destroyed and utterly conquered, and that failed to come to pass. The interpretation of him merely invading and looting Egypt briefly or taking one town from them was a later version of that script after the fact of what actually happened, clearly saving face/reinterpreting after the prophecy failed. If that's not a caught-red-handed case of failed prophecy in the historical timeline, I don't know what is.

For me personally, I believe in Heaven after this life, and also possibly a Hell. But I believe if there's a god they understand eternal hell in the sense Christians or Muslims believe in is unjust. If there's a Hell, I believe it's likely meant as a kind of purgatory before certain souls can enter Heaven, with some serving longer and more severe sentances than others, though with a focus on rehabilitation rather than purely punishment.

Call it cringe but I believe that's the most logical outcome if whatever god there is had something planned for us after this life. What's your personal belief?

Ive come to realize I can't blame myself for the mental spiraling or the "problematic coping" for the most part. To rage and make invisible enemies in my mind to destroy was my mind's defense mechanism after traumatic experiences, because I felt threatened by the memory of things or by ideas I associated with it.

Like a cornered animal lashing out basically, it was primal fear instinct, and It was what my mind and spirit did to survive the memory of such things. It was a "fight" response more than anything, but I truly felt I had no other choice. I truly felt there was no escape otherwise and that these things "desevred it", but that was all just a broken mind and spirit trying to cope with traumatic events that now felt like monsters encroaching on me at any moment, especially after my religion told me these percieved abominations plauging me were "sinful temptations".

I would destroy the thought any way I could, even if it hurt me to do so and made me spiral even more. But perhaps no one was to blame for all this. I feel much freer and happier already without the fear of becoming a monster just by fighting off the monsters in my head.

From what I understand Pro-Life argues that a fetus is just as much alive as a fully born baby, and thus killing it must be equally bad as killing a baby/human. But that quickly devolves into blurry semantics on at what point is the fetus or embryo considered "alive" rather than any objective discussion.

So what's the best ethical argument? Most pro choicers I know say abortion should be within the first trimester if it's done because the baby can't really be considered "alive" in the same sense a fetus can at that stage. I personally agree with this currently, as I see no reason to believe a near fully formed fetus isn't alive in the same sense a baby is, arbitrarily until it's birthed.

Also, cases of rape I think should be allowed to be aborted regardless, as that's just far more ethical and mentally safe for the mother in any case than forcing a baby to be born at the cost of the mother's mental and emotional state for life when she doesn't want to carry her assaulter's child(a 1st trimester one would be preferable here too, but i think the fully grown adult's wellbeing still takes priority if that's not possible).

I have some things to confess. I did NOT recover after leaving this place. I didn't even try.

I was so consumed by rage after my moral OCD and confusion over issues I don't want to talk about made me accept things that I should have known were wrong all for a sense of moral purity and cleanliness, I didn't even want to recover anymore, I just wanted revenge.

I would come up with horrific insults towards ideas and my thoughts, I would slander and debase them with the most disgusting, vile, slurful words. I would imagine some imaginary character representing them and torture them in my mind nonstop, for hours on end.

I don't know how to move on from this. I feel completely "broken" into this state of revenge spirals and more dissociative spiraling over moral issues and terror over these thoughts. I don't know what to do anymore.

Christians often try to excuse the idea of eternal hell being just because all sin is against God, who's an "infinite, transcendant being" compared to us finite beings, and also that he is unbound by space and time so any offense is as if it just happened to him.

But if that's the case, he is omniscient as well and understands the finite nature of the evil to an infinite and absolute degree, plus to him some sins are worse than others and thus sin is still finite to him, so what's the excuse for an infinite and eternal punishment on his end? Does anyone else have problem with this "infinite being" argument?

I hear that Parler or whatever the Convervative Twitter alternative was, had the Jan 6 White House incident be planned for months in advance on its forums. But does anyone know what the planning was like, was anyone on there to see it? Was it planned to be a violent insurrection or just a peaceful protest? The right likes to paint it as being a peaceful protest until the authorities "unfairly incited violence against the protesters" or that the raid was taken out of context.