I am genuinely curious to see responses to this, and note this is NOT to stir political diress or trigger anyone on both sides of the argument. I just want to see where belief lies in the subject.
I've been watching a lot of stuff on "Christian nationalism" as it goes to the Republican party and it's current leader presenting himself as "one for God" etc. it very much to me seems that, given what the Bible says about the anti-christ, Trump fits that bill to a T. I'm curious to see where "Christianity" lies on the subject, and why you believe what you believe. Is Trump (as some have said) the Messiah or close to it, or is he the anti-christ, presenting falsehoods in the name of God? Please be respectful in your response. Again this is not to cause a fight. I'm hoping for a genuine adult conversation about this. (Plus, I'm a Satanist so my opinion is almost invalid on the subject)

The tensions with Opposing Empire have gone beyond mere mutual enmity. This is a conflict of economies, ideologies, and clandestine efforts, fought across our empires in the hearts and minds of our citizens. With some carelessness, or perhaps deliberate actions, it could quickly become a full-fledged military conflict.
^{(Note: this is a sneak peak into a larger Diplomacy DLC concept I am designing. Also disclaimer: I am not a game designer, I intentionally did not provide numbers, just ideas! Feel free to suggest or criticize.})
When two empires are Rivals a while, both sides will have the option to escalate the Rivalry into a Cold War, which costs Influence. If either side does this, a Situation that is shared and progressed by both sides is created. This situation is intended to provide more RP and mechanical freedom for empires to either diplomatically mend relations, prepare a leadup to war, or perhaps make gains without resorting to warfare.
Cold Wars, like many situations currently in the game, operate on a line between two endpoints, representing the tensions between the two empires: Reconciliation (-100) to War (100).
By default, the Situation will start at 0 and remain stagnant in the middle. Both sides will have access to four Approaches which have different bonuses and effects on the Situation:

• Seek De-Escalation: costs Unity to upkeep. Increases Opinion of the opposing empire, and progresses the Situation towards Reconciliation. (Our simmering conflict with Opposing Empire must be reconsidered. We will extend diplomatic tendrils in hopes of reducing tensions and reconciling our two empires.)
• Maintain Status Quo: costs no upkeep, has no effect. (The current friction with Opposing Empire works to our advantage. We will focus on our own affairs.)
• Clandestine Effort: costs low Energy Creds to upkeep. Moderately decreases the cost of running Spy Operations in the target empire and slightly increases their effectiveness. Slowly progresses the Situation towards War. (We have no desire for a large scale armed conflict with Opposing Empire at this time- instead, we will use... other methods to improve our position.)
• Prepare for Hostilities: costs more Energy Creds to upkeep. Increases Military Ship and Defense Platform build speed, and more quickly progresses the Situation towards War. (We have had enough of the thinly veiled hostilities with Opposing Empire. War is inevitable- and we will lay the groundwork for victory!)

Progress: there are also other factors which will influence the progress of this situation:

• Either side being Militarist or Xenophobe will add base progress towards War, increased if Fanatic.
• Insults will bump the scale towards War.
• Military buildup/border friction, as well as the currently existing Conduct Fleet Exercises event, will move the scale towards War.
• The opinion of either side decreasing further (ex. Harm Relations) will move the scale towards War- this also means a 3rd party could use Spy operations, like the existing Diplomatic Incident or Smear Campaign, to push the outbreak of hostilities!
• New Cassus Belli gained by either side against the other will push the scale towards War- for example, taking a Civic that grants CB, or becoming a Hegemon. So will Declaring War on a Vassal or Ally (provided this doesn't immediately pull the empire in).
• HOWEVER:
• Either side being Pacifist or Xenophile will add base progress towards Reconciliation, increased if Fanatic.
• Cassus Belli becoming invalid will push the scale towards Reconciliation- for example, Impose Ideology becomes invalid if the target adopts matching Ethics.
• Improving Relations by any means will move the scale towards Reconciliation. Eventually, Embassies and other Diplomatic actions can end the Cold War.
• De-Escalation can be traded under Actions- normally, Rival AI empires will never be willing to trade, but an exception can be made here, to for example allow one side to Trade systems, resources, etc as concessions in exchange for X progress towards De-Escalation. The AI may offer such deals if Inferior or Pathetic, and may request concessions to reduce tensions if Superior or Overwhelming.

Events: as with most Situations, the Cold War could feature various events for RP and mechanical purposes. Here are some examples I thought up:

• Fraternization with the Enemy (either empire is some degree of Spiritualist, Xenophile or Pacifist): Despite the tensions with Opposing Empire, news reports and viral videos have recently been circulating of groups of both Our Species and Their Species activists united in song and demonstration on multiple planets. Apparently, these individuals seek an end to the hostility between our empires.
  • [Support these noble and righteous souls.] - bumps the scale towards Reconciliation. Gain temporary Ethics attraction for the corresponding Ethic.
  • [Ignore these misguided fools.] - situation does not change. Gain temporary Happiness debuff for pops of the the responsible Ethic.
  • (Militarist, Xenophobe, or Authoritarian) - [Arrest as many of the wicked traitors as we can identify!] - costs Influence, bumps the scale towards War. Gain temporary Ethics attraction for the Ethic you used to take this choice.
• Arms Race Breakthrough (is currently using the Prepare for Hostilities approach, increased chance if Materialist or Technocracy): Amidst the large-scale preparations for possible conflict with Opposing Empire, a small team of scientists has independently developed a new military technology and presented it to our government for use.
  • [Excellent.] - bumps the scale towards War, and gain a low-mid tier military tech that was not yet researched. If no valid options, gain some Engineering research instead.
• Pro-War Rally (has any Xenophobe or Militarist leader): Recently, in front of massive crowds on Planet Name, Leader Name delivered a rousing speech extolling the glorious virtues of Our Empire and denouncing the horrific threat presented by Opposing Empire. It would seem many have been swept up in this pro-war fervor and are demanding action from our government. However, foreign emissaries and more moderate elements have cautioned against supporting such explosive, radical rhetoric.
  • [We stand with Leader Name! To war!] - bumps the scale towards War, changes our approach to Prepare for Hostilities if it isn't already, and gain Unity and temporary Ethics Attraction to Leader Name's Ethics. BUT reduces the Opinion of Opposing Empire and any empires Cordial or friendlier to them.
  • [Heads must be kept cool, and Leader Name must be reprimanded.] - costs Influence, but the situation does not change.

And now, for the conclusions of the situation:
Reconciliation Finisher (or if empires somehow become overlord/vassal or allies via external circumstances)
Both Empires get the Event: De-Escalation Successful
In a significant diplomatic achievement, the heated tensions with Opposing Empire have been comprehensively defused! Perhaps this will pave the way for friendlier relations and better days ahead.
If the Situation reaches Reconciliation, the Cold War and Rivalry will immediately be ended, with all their bonuses and effects. Both empires will gain a moderate lump sum of Influence and Unity, as well as a small burst of increased Opinion for each other.

• [That was a close one.] - default option, overwritten by others if applicable
• (Pacifist or Xenophile) [A glorious day!] - the rewards are increased
• (Militarist or Xenophobe) [Disappointing.] - the rewards are decreased

War Finisher (or if empires are pulled in by other factors)
Both Empires get the Event: Cold War Turns Hot
The heated tensions with Opposing Empire have ignited! Negotiations have broken down, and fierce border skirmishes have erupted. The truth is now undeniable: we are at war.
If the Situation reaches War, the Cold War and Rivalry will transform into an actual, normal war. Both empires will gain a small lump sum of Influence and Unity and will have a window to pick from their available Cassus Belli and call in allies before the battle begins.

• [To battle stations!] - default option, overwritten by others if applicable
• (Pacifist or Xenophile) [Well, we tried...] - the rewards are decreased
• (Militarist or Xenophobe) [Long have we waited for this moment!] - the rewards are increased

And that's all I've got for you all today. Thanks for reading and please send any suggestions or feedback! Here's a bonus: a new achievement based on the irl Soviet Colonel who may have saved the world
Legacy of S'tann Pet'rovv: De-Escalate a Cold War after tensions had at one point reached 95 or higher.

Introduction

In this post, we'll be discussing something called "Virtue Ethics." This is a normative theory of ethics that's most associated with Aristotle, though has in recent times experienced a resurgence of sorts from modern philosophers, some of whom have tweaked and modified it, and in doing so have created different branches on this tree of moral theory. We will be comparing these different flavors of Virtue Ethics to that of the New Testament's, pointing out where they're similar, as well as highlighting where the NT differs (and is actually superior) from the heathens' views.
I want to preface all this with a verse and a warning:

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."-Colossians 2:8

The entire Bible, over and over again, warns against syncretism. It's a running theme throughout to condemn the practice, with this verse being one of the more explicit ones to do so.
Mapping the ideas of Pagans (and especially Greek philosophers) onto the Scriptures has always resulted in people severely misinterpreting the Bible, as looking at the Word of God through a Hellenistic lens is and always has been extremely innapropiate to the author's original intent.
Whenever Greek philosophy or ideas are referenced, they're always portrayed in a bad light or otherwise used to make a point. Examples of the latter could be found in the apostle Paul's writings, as he was a fully educated Roman citizen of his day, and so he made use of known Hellenestic philosophy and literature (that he would have been familiar with) by redefining their terms and ideas in a way that would be consistent with the theology of his own religion. The apostle Peter did the same within his own epistles whenever he mentioned "Tartarus," the abyss/prison for certain disobedient angels that rebelled against God, despite the fact that the word has its roots in Greek mythology and not Hebrew religion (though, the belief that there were a group of spiritual beings that rebelled against the highest authority in the heavens was one technically shared between the two ancient cultures; even if the parties involved were vastly different, as well as the contexts of the rebellion itself).
The affect Hellenstic philosophy has had on the way people think (even subconsciously) can still be felt to this day, and can be seen in the confusion modern "Christianity" has brought on through its adoption of Gnostic teachings such as Dualism or the inherently fatalistic views that many unknowingly hold due to the error of Classical Theism.
While yes, I will be commending the heathen (unbeliever) whenever they are right with their ideas as pertaining to this subject, I will also show where they are wrong.
Let's begin.

"What Is Virtue Ethics?"

First, we need to define some terms and point out the differences between this view and others within the larger debate of normative ethics.
There are three major approaches in normative ethics, those being: Consequentalism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics. The following are definitions of the terms:
Consequentialism – a class of normative, teleological ethical theories that holds that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for judgement about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.
Deontology – theories where an action is considered morally good because of some characteristic of the action itself, not because the product of the action is good. Deontological ethics holds that at least some acts are morally obligatory regardless of their consequences for human welfare.
Virtue Ethics – theories that emphasize the role of character and virtue in moral philosophy rather than either doing one’s duty or acting in order to bring about good consequences. The virtue ethicist would argue that actions themselves, while important, aren't as important as the character behind them. To the virtue ethicist, consequences are also important, but they would say that good consequences ultimately flow from a virtuous character who has made virtuous decisions. Theories of virtue ethics do not aim primarily to identify universal principles that can be applied in any moral situation, instead teaching that the best decisions can vary based on context, and that there are only some actions that would be universally evil, only because those actions could never flow from a virtuous character in the first place (e.g., rape).
Aristotle's idea of ethics is in an important respect different from most people's, especially today. Heirs as we are to Kant’s idea of duty – there is a right thing that one ought to do, as rational beings who respect other persons – and to Mill’s idea of utility – the right thing to do is that which produces the greatest good for the greatest number – most of us see ethics as concerned with actions. "The function of ethics is to help me see what I ought to do in a given situation," the modern says. Aristotle’s approach was different. His ethic is not so much concerned about helping us to see what we ought to do, as about what sort of person we ought to be.
Aristotle was concerned with character, and with the things that go to make up good and bad character; virtues and vices. His sort of ethic does not look at our action to see if it fulfils our duty, or produces a certain outcome, such as the greatest good of the greatest number, and therefore merits approval. Instead, it looks at us; at the character behind the actions, to see whether we merit approval.
Comparing Virtue Ethics with philosophies such as Deontology and Consequentialism, we are able to divide ethical theories into two kinds; act-centered theories and agent-centered theories. Kant’s (Deontological) and Mill’s (Utilitarian) approaches are act-centered, because they concern themselves with our actions, whilst Aristotle’s is agent-centered because it concerns itself with the character of a person, which in his view was ourselves and our own dispositions that prompt our actions.
Both approaches have ardent present-day advocates, and so both are alive and well. Virtue Ethicists are dissatisfied with the answers ‘modern’ act-centered philosophy offers, and look for a more flexible, person-centered approach that takes more account of the subtle varieties of human motivation. Those in this camp see ethics as being about people – moral agents – rather than merely about actions. Of course, your actions matter. But, for Aristotle and his present day advocates alike, they matter as expressions of the kind of person you are. They indicate such qualities as kindness, fairness, compassion, and so on, and it is these qualities and their corresponding vices that it is the business of ethics to approve or disapprove.
All this seems simple and uncontroversial; there are two ways of looking at an action to evaluate it morally. You can take the action in isolation and judge it, or take the agent and judge him or her.
Virtue ethicists argue that act-centered ethics are narrow and bloodless. What is needed is a richer moral vocabulary than just ‘right and wrong’. There are subtle but important differences between actions that are good because they are kind and those that are good because they are generous, and those that are good because they are just. Likewise, there are subtle but important differences between actions that are bad because they are selfish and those that are bad because they are cruel and those that are bad because they are unfair. These, and many other, distinctions are lost when we talk simply about doing one’s duty, or promoting utility. Questions of motive and of character are lost, in these asceptic terms. Modern moral philosophy won’t do: it is cold, technical and insensitive to the many kinds and degrees of value expressed in human actions. Ethics is more than just thought experiments and hypotheticals about what would be the right course of action to take in any given situation we might conjure up from the comfort of our armchair. Ethics is about doing, and about context and character.

The Different Kinds of "Virtue Ethics"

Virtue Ethics has has been developed in two main directions: Eudaimonism, and agent-based theories.
Eudaimonism (Aristotle's view) bases virtues in human flourishing, where flourishing is equated with performing one’s distinctive function well. In the case of humans, Aristotle argued that our distinctive function is reasoning, and so the life “worth living” is one which we reason well. He also believed that only free men in the upper classes of society (i.e., the aristocrats) could excel in virtue and eschew vice, being that such men had greater access to the means in accomplishing this task as they had the wealth and resources to better perform their distinctive function of 'reasoning,' and thus "live well." For the Eudaimonian, inner dispositions are what one ought to focus on in order to cultivate virtuous traits, and thus a virtuous character.
In contrast, an agent-based theory emphasizes that virtues are determined by common-sense intuitions that we as observers judge to be admirable traits in other people. There are a variety of human traits that we find admirable, such as benevolence, kindness, compassion, etc., and we can identify these by looking at the people we admire, our moral exemplars. Agent-based theories also state that the motivations and intentions behind an action are ultimately what determine whether or not said action is actually virtuous. Whereas Eudaimonism understands the moral life in terms of inner dispositions or proclivities to act in certain ways (whether righteous or wicked, just or unjust, kind or cruel, etc.), agent-based theories are more radical in that their evaluation of actions is dependent on ethical judgments about the inner life of the agents who perform those actions, that is, what the motivations and intents are of a person.
[Note: While both Eudaimonism and agent-based theories are both agent-centered, Eudaimonism is not to be confused with an agent-based theory. Both branches concern themselves more with agents rather than acts themselves, but Eudamonism focuses on the self to improve whereas the agent-based theory focuses on others to improve.]

Common Critcisims Toward Secular Forms of Virtue Ethics

Firstly, Eudaimonism provides a self-centered conception of ethics because "human flourishing" (here defined as simply fulfilling our base function as humans, which is "reason" according to this view) is seen as an end in itself and does not sufficiently consider the extent to which our actions affect other people. Morality requires us to consider others for their own sake and not because they may benefit us. There seems to be something wrong with aiming to behave compassionately, kindly, and honestly merely because this will make oneself happier or "reason well."
Secondly, both Eudaimonism and agent-based theories also don't provide guidance on how we should act, as there are no clear principles for guiding action other than “act as a virtuous person would act given the situation.” Who is a virtuous person? Who is the first or universal exemplar?
Lastly, the ability to cultivate the right virtues will be affected by a number of different factors beyond a person’s control due to education, society, friends and family. If moral character is so reliant on luck, what role does this leave for appropriate praise and blame of the person? For the Eudaimonian, one ought to be born into a status of privilege if they wish to excel in being virtuous. For the proponent of an agent-based theory, one ought to be born into a society or family with good role models and preferably be raised by such, else they have no moral exemplars to emulate.

The New Testament's Virtue Ethic

The New Testament authors didn’t sit down and do a self-consciously philosophical exercise, for this was not what they were concerned with. They were concerned with giving practical instruction to disciples of the faith, and merely trying to express the ethical implications of their spiritual experience. That being said, we know the apostle Paul was familiar with the writings of Aristotle. We can actually identify places where Paul displays knowledge of Aristotle and incorporates some of the philosopher's ideas into his own epistles. Before we do this, however, it's important we refute common misnomers about what the Bible teaches concerning ethics in general.
You probably have heard many attack the ethics of the New Testament as being primitive and simplistic. "God dictates universal commands to follow: 'do not lie,' do 'not divorce,' 'do not insult.' And the only motivating factor is escaping hellfire and obtaining the reward of eternal pleasure." But in reality, this is a gross misrepresentation of the ethics laid out in the NT. I will argue the NT advocates for a form of virtue ethics, instead of claiming the NT contains a form of deontic ethics, as it is so often assumed.
Elizabeth Anscombe was one of the most influential virtue ethicists of the 20th century. Her work helped to revive virtue ethics in the modern era, however she also criticized the ethics of the Bible for promoting a form of ethics different than what Aristotle promoted:
"...between aristotle and us came Christianity, with its law conception of ethics. For Christianity derived its ethical notions from the Torah. (One might be inclined to think that a law conception of ethics could arise only among people who accepted an allegedly divine positive law..." (Modern Moral Philosophy, vol. 33, no. 124, 1-19)
We've already dealt with the issue of the Torah in another post. The Torah is not laying down moral laws, but describing justice in the form of ancient Near Eastern wisdom literature. But does the New Testament teach a deontic form of ethics? Anscombe might appear justified in her claim, as some "Christian" theologians have explicitly taught the ethics of the NT is deontic.
However, other theologians have argued the ethics of the NT is best characterized as a form of virtue ethics. In a study of the NT, we'll support this notion. As noted earlier, one of the central features of this approach to ethics is that the aim of ethics should be on living a virtuous life. Other forms of ethics focus on directing actions when confronted with a moral dilemma, but for virtue ethics every action is a moral or immoral action because all of our actions contribute or do not contribute to living a virtuous life. In other words, for a virtue ethicist, everything we do will contribute to living a fulfilled life. Now, the NT promotes a similar idea with a slight modification. The NT changes the distinctictive function and purpose for man in Eudaimonism from "reasoning" to loving God and others instead, and thus "living well" is changed from self-centered 'flourshing' (as defined by Aristotle) to glorifying God instead. The apostles taught everything we do contributes to living a life that glorifies God:

"Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God."-1 Corinthians 10:31
"And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him."-Colossians 3:17

So we see the same idea in Paul, that everything we do can be seen as a moral or immoral action. Everything we do should be seen as contributing to living a life that glorifies god or not. As a believer, the aim is not just doing good actions to avoid punishments, but to see everything we do as glorifying God. On secular virtue ethics, all our actions are either advancing a good life or not: nourishing your body contributes to living a good life. In a Biblical context: taking the time to properly dress contributes to living a good life, and not giving into the sin of sloth. So all our actions can be moral actions in this context, and so likewise for Paul and Jesus, all we do can contribute to living a life that glorifies God.
Since God made our bodies to thrive and enjoy life, we should nourish our bodies so we can thrive as God intended for our bodies to do, thus ultimately glorifying Him. Since we were created to experience and feel enjoyment, laughing and enjoying things throughout life glorifies God as well since we're experiencing emotions that God created to be experienced. Everything we do should be to glorify God, and often all that is is living our lives in the way that they were intended to be lived. Biblical ethics is very much more than merely performing right actions, but living a virtuous life that brings glory to God.
As Jesus said:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind."-Matthew 22:37b

It is also important to focus on what it means to love, which is an important aspect of what it means to be a believer. Paul makes the radical claim that to love is the entirety of the law of God:

"For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."-Galatians 5:14

Jesus also taught that to love God and love others were the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-31, Matt. 22:34-40). He also extends the commandment to love beyond one's brethren, and to love our enemies (Matt. 5:44). Loving those around us is central to what it means to be a believer (John 13:34; 15:12-17, Rom. 12:10; 13:8, 1 Cor. 13:1-8; 16:14, 2 Cor. 8:8, Eph. 4:2; 5:2, Phili. 1:9, Heb. 10:24, Jam. 2:8, 1 Pet. 1:22, 1 John 2:10; 3:23).
One might suggest this is no different than the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do to you," or a Kantian rule: "I ought never to act except in such a way that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law." In other words, "to live well is to perform good deeds or actions and nothing more." But an important point about loving someone is it cannot be done through actions alone. For example, one could buy a gift for their spouse to cheer them up. However, one could perform this action merely because they value performing right actions without any love for the person. One could donate to charity because it is the right thing to do, and not because she cares for the people who would benefit. In such scenarios, they can be seen as idolizing moral laws, not necessarily caring about helping others.
But to love someone requires more than merely performing right actions. You cannot love someone and not care about who they are as a person and where they are heading in life. To love is to will the good of the other. Jesus chastised the Pharisees of his day for only performing right actions, but not loving their brethren in their hearts. His criticism follows Matthew chapter 22, where Jesus says the greatest commandments are to love. The implication is the Pharisees perform proper actions, but have the wrong motivations for doing so. James Keenan puts it like this:
"Essential to understanding this command is that we love our neighbors not as objects of our devotion, but rather as subjects; that is, as persons. Thus, we cannot love others only because God wants us to do so, since then we would love them as means or as objects and not as persons. We can only love one another as subjects, just as God loves us." (Jesus and Virtue Ethics: Building Bridges Between New Testament Studies and Moral Theology, pg. 86)
A critic may bring up that verses of the NT are still phrased as commands, and therefore the structure implies duties were the central aspect of Christian ethics. But the importance of duties is not foreign to Virtue Ethics. Instead of being central to the ethical framework, duties flow from a virtuous character. Virtues are active and have certain demands for which a person must fulfill in their active behavior.
According to Aristotle, knowledge of the virtues gives us practical wisdom in how to properly act. Duties flow from the understanding of the demands of virtues. To put it another way, for virtues to manifest in persons, they have certain demands that must be fulfilled. For the believer, the command of love flows from being virtuous and aligning oneself with the character of God. Commitment to the character of Christ, who perfectly carried out the will of the Father, allows us to perform right and proper actions.
The NT also contains lists of virtues the believer ought to emulate, the most famous of these is in Galatians chapter 5:
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." (vss. 22-23)
Now, the connection with Aristotle cannot be more pronounced. The Greek phrase "against such there is no law" is almost identical to what we find in Aristotle's politics (3.13.1284a). It seems clear Paul is teaching a similar ethical framework to what Aristotle advocated for. Paul is teaching that the believing community ought to be persons who display key virtues, and that their conduct would not need to be regulated by a law. Instead, their character should be the standard others can measure themselves by. Romans chapter 2 is also a place we see references to Aristotle, where Paul notes that when Gentiles do what the law requires, they are "a law unto themselves" (vss. 14-15). In other words, they do not need to be told to act a certain way. They have the proper virtuous character that directs their actions, to do the good the law requires. Paul is advocating in Galatians that believers should think in a similar way.
So in Galatians 5, we have affinity with the teachings of Aristotle, and in other lists of virtues throughout the NT we see a similar idea, which is that Christians were meant to display virtues primarily (Rom. 5:3-5, 1 Cor. 13:1-8, Col. 3:12-17, 1 Tim. 3:2-3; 4:7-8, Jam. 3:17-18, 2 Pet. 1:5-8). From that, good deeds will properly manifest in our actions.
Anscombe made a great point on what the focus of ethics should be:
"It would be a great improvement if, instead of 'morally wrong', one always named a genus such as 'untruthful', 'unchaste', 'unjust'. We should no longer ask whether doing something was 'wrong', passing directly from some description of an action to this notion; we should ask whether, e.g., it was unjust; and the answer would sometimes be clear at once." (Modern Moral Philosophy, vol. 33, no. 124, 1-19)
Interestingly enough, Paul lays out a similar idea in explaining Christian ethics:

"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you."-Philippians 4:8-9

In other words, the central aspect on living a Christian life was on what is virtuous, not on what is lawfully right or wrong. Right actions flow from whatever is honorable, true, and pure. Correlating with this is how Paul responds to the Corinthians who claimed that "all was lawful." Paul reminded them the emphasis is not on what is lawful, but on what is good for building a virtuous character:

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."-1 Corinthians 10:23

One's main focus ought to be on what is good, not on laws that dictate behavior.
One of the key aspects of Virtue Ethics is the idea we ought to learn from virtuous teachers and imitate them. A virtuous character is obtained by imitating what a virtuous person does. This parallels a key aspect of Christian ethics. Imitating Christ was (and still is) crucial to living a virtuous life:

"For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:"-1 Peter 2:21

Paul says in Romans 8:29 that Christians were predestined "to be conformed to the image of his Son." Jesus often taught his followers to do as he does (Matt. 16:24, Mark 8:34, Luke 6:40; 9:23, John 13:15, 34). Paul says in 1st Corinthians 11: Be ye followers [i.e., imitators] of me, even as I also am of Christ" (vs. 1). Hebrews 13:7 says to imitate the faith of the patriarchs. 1st Thessalonians 2:14 says to imitate each other. And jesus taught to imitate the good Samaritan from his parable (Luke 10:37). Imitating virtuous teachers was key for Christian ethics.
Aristotle tended to compare acquiring virtues with that of learning a practical skill, like playing an instrument or learning how to become a builder. Such practical skills are best picked up when trained by a master of that particular skill, because a teacher can always provide more insight through lessons they learn from experience. For example, an expert salesman can provide examples from his experience of what works with specific customers that a sales textbook could never provide. Many professions today require on-the-job training or experience before even hiring an applicant. The reason is: experience is key to learning a profession. Merely acquiring knowledge from a textbook or an instruction manual is often insufficient to master a skill, so why would mastering the skill of virtue be any different?
In the NT, a believer is to see the world through the eyes of Christ and to love as he loved. One cannot learn how to be a virtuous person without knowing what that life would look like. A key component of Christian theology is that the Messiah perfectly represented the Father and His will on earth, to show us how to properly live as God intended for man. This central tenet of the NT aligns well with agent-based theories of Virtue Ethics, and modifies it so that the person of Jesus Christ is the universal exemplar that one is meant to emulate. We are called to imitate him through our actions, thoughts, and desires, and to conform ourselves to the way he lived. As Paul said:

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."-Galatians 2:20

If learning from Christ is key, we should briefly take a look at the Sermon on the Mount, which is said to be one of Jesus' most important series of teachings. Daniel Harrington notes:
"The sermon begins with nine 'beatitudes' (see 5:3–12) in which Jesus declares as 'happy' or 'blessed' those who practice certain virtues, and promises them an eternal reward and the fullness of God's kingdom." (Jesus and Virtue Ethics: Building Bridges Between New Testament Studies and Moral Theology, pg. 62)
Jesus laid out what a life for those that follow him look like in detail. One ought to be merciful, pure in heart, a peacemaker, thirst for righteousness, etcetera (Matt. 5:2-10). The Sermon does not merely include what right actions are, but includes sections on proper desires. Not only is it wrong to murder, but it is wrong to desire to murder or wish ill on someone (Matt. 5:22). Avoiding adultery is good, but one also should not covet after another man's woman in their heart (Matt. 5:28). In other words, merely avoiding immoral actions is not enough. One must also not desire vices. A believer is called to desire what is good.
The Sermon is not necessarily laying down universal moral commands. For example, Matthew 5:9 says, "Blessed are the peacemakers," but this doesn't imply absolute Pacifism, as it would contradict passages in the Old Testament where it explicitly says there is a time for war (Ecc. 3:8). The point of the Sermon is to teach what a virtuous life ought to look like. A follower of Christ ought to use reason to know what is proper to do in various circumstances. For example, in Matthew chapter 6, Jesus offers guidance on how one ought to pray by presenting the Lord's prayer (vss. 9-15). This is a model of how to pray. It's not a command for followers to always pray in this exact way.
In reality, the Sermon on the Mount mixes in exhortations, parables, hyperbole, declarations, commands, etc. It is best understood as displaying what a virtuous life ought to look like. It's not a law code. Building on this, it's important to understand a proper action is context sensitive. Under Virtue Ethics, one should not necessarily apply a universal maxim to every situation. Sometimes the proper action will depend on what is at stake, who is involved, what is the background, etc. Aristotle advocated against the idea there were fixed universal laws that dictate actions, and instead he argued the right action would depend on the circumstances one finds themselves in. Although the ethics of the NT may be a bit more strict, it still places an emphasis on being sensitive to the context of situations.
In 1st Corinthians chapter 8, Paul lays out instructions on how to deal with meat that has been sacrificed to Pagan idols. Instead of stating an absolute prohibition against meat sacrificed to idols, Paul instructed Christians to use reason to come to the proper ethical decision based on context. In other words, the right action is not determined only by a law. Instead, the Christian had to make the proper decision based on the context: if eating caused another to stumble, then you ought to abstain; if not, then there's no harm done. The value of the action depends on the context.
A Deontologist might reply that there's still a universal law given here: that one should always abstain if it's going to cause another to stumble. This objection can be addressed by asking: how are we to know if eating the meat will cause another believer to stumble? To answer such a question, one must be sensitive to the context, which in this case would be knowledge of the fellow believer and your relation to him. It is the context that determines the right action, not a universal law. Moreover, Paul states that the primary goal for the believer should be to love (1 Cor. 13). The first consideration is once again not the rightness of action, but having love for one another. From this, knowledge of the proper action will follow.
Paul often explains that living a proper life as a believer will take work and practice. He reminded Timothy to attend readings, practice what these things mean, and keep a close watch on himself (1 Tim. 4:13-14). Elsewhere, he directs that all believers must work on their faith (Phili. 2:12). Beyond this, he also noted that not all Christians would have the same gifts, and to accept that this was normal (1 Cor. 12). For some, certain things may be a hindrance, whereas for others it is acceptable (Rom. 14:2-4). What matters is that we love and build one another up (1 Thess. 5:11). Right actions flow from love and knowledge of virtue. Rules are not the primary motives that dictate our actions; rules are secondary in this regard.
An interesting case can be studied with regards to divorce in the Gospels. Jesus preaches against divorce (Mark 10:7-9) and it is often interpreted to mean "divorce is always wrong, regardless of circumstances." However, it should be noted the prohibition on divorce is not a universal law. The context can affect whether or not a divorce is permissible. Jesus says that one can divorce over sexual immorality. Paul also has a situation where divorce is permissible, namely if one spouse is an unbeliever and wishes to leave (1 Cor. 7:15). The implication one can derive is divorce is not ideal, but there are circumstances where it may be the proper action to take. Given the other features of Christian Virtue Ethics we already covered, the proper action to take will depend on the circumstances and what the virtuous agent thinks is the most loving thing to do. A universal prohibition on divorce is not a Christian ethic. Instead, one ought to discern the proper action from circumstances. However, it's clear in most cases divorce would not be the virtuous thing to do.
Building on this, it's important to note that within NT ethics, certain acts are always wrong. For example, idolatry and sexual immorality are always wrong (1 Cor. 10:14, Col. 3:15, 1 Pet. 4:13). There are no possible scenarios where it would be okay to rape, because such an act would never flow from a virtuous character. But this concept is not foreign to theories of Virtue Ethics. Aristotle noted that for some actions, no qualifications could make them virtuous. Actions such as rape or murder are always wrong, because they would never flow from a virtuous character. So it's not as if a Virtue Ethicist cannot claim that some actions are always wrong. They simply are qualified as being unable to flow from virtue, whereas actions like lying or waging war could be considered virtuous for the right reason.
Now, despite Christian Virtue Ethics having many similarities with Eudaimonism (Aristotelian ethics), there are also numerous differences beyond what we've already noted. One of the deficiencies of how Aristotle lays out his ethical theory is that it is essentially an all-boys club. Aristotle writes mainly to aristocratic men, excluding women and slaves. In his view, women were inferior to men and slaves lacked the necessary rational faculty. But the Christians rejected this mentality, as the teachings of Christ and the apostles were available to all (Matt. 28:19). Paul said, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). Peter wrote that all Christians were part of the priesthood of Christ (1 Pet. 2:5). Jesus had women followers (Luke 8:2-3), and they were entrusted with delivering revelation (Mark 15:40–16:8). What we find throughout the NT is a radical change to how women were viewed in the ancient world. Paul is also likely building on Aristotle's household structure and refining it. David deSilva says the household codes of the NT are "...following the pairs laid out as early as Aristotle to such a degree as to suggest that these were standard topics in ethical instruction" (Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity, pg. 231). But Paul adds an important preface: submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ (Eph. 5:20-21). DeSilva says:
"...husbands, we cannot then ignore the distinctively Christian addition they bring to this arrangement; husbands are to be subject to their wives as well." (Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity, pg. 233)
Thus Paul doesn't break down the traditional perspective on the structure of the family, but he does add the idea that we all must submit to each other in reverence, love, unity, and cooperation because all are equal before God. There is no explicit mention in the NT calling for the abolishment of slavery, but it should be noted that Paul taught that slaves should be seen as equals. In the letter to Philemon, Paul is clear that his slave is no longer "as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved" (vs. 16). Thus, within Christian ethics class distinctions were supposed to evaporate. All were brothers and sisters of one family.
An important aspect of Christian ethics is that it wasn't a standalone ethical theory. It's embedded in the larger Christian worldview. The ethical framework is dependent on Christian doctrines. For Aristotle, his ethical theory is for men who were raised well. This is why these specific men desire to be virtuous and perform right actions. As for why the believer does good and desires to be virtuous, it's not because one was raised well, but because they have been activated by the power of God's Spirit (John 3:6, 1 Cor. 12:13). For believers, the reason as to why we desire to be good and virtuous is because the Spirit of God has regenerated us. He loves us so we can love others (1 John 4:19). One is meant to look to the life of Christ and what he has done by dying on the cross, to know that we are loved and forgiven. This in turn is meant to activate a good life, having seen what we have gained and been forgiven of. He calls and activates us to do similar to those around us. This is a more open system for people of all groups and classes. One only has to call upon the name of the Lord to be included. It does not require a specific gender or to be raised a certain way.
The goal of Aristotelian ethics is to achieve 'eudaimonia.' However, within the Bible the goal is as the Westminster Shorter Catechism puts it: "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy Him forever." Since the central aspect of Biblical Eschatology is that humans will continue on forever in resurrected bodies, the aim of ethics is more than living a good life presently. Living a good life now is important, but it was only one aspect in the Christian worldview. Humans are meant to live beyond this life, so the aim is also about building virtuous souls that will continue on. The importance of this is more crucial than it may seem at first. Paul said that we must all appear before judgment, so that "every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad" (2 Cor. 15:10).
Being a virtuous person requires integrity, because one will still have to answer to God after death. If one can commit an evil act and no one finds out, then from the outside perspective he or she may still appear virtuous. Culturally speaking, the ancient world was very different from our own. All wrongdoings centered around public honor and shame. One did good to receive public honor, and one did not do what was bad to receive public shame. Right and wrong were connected to one's public honor and shame in the ancient Greco-Roman world. Thus good and evil were public ideas, not personal ideas. Ethical demands were grounded in the community in one's public appearance
The Biblical idea of an omniscient God who cared about our ethical status laid a foundation for integrity and personal guilt to emerge. Now one ought to do good because he is beholden to God, not just the community. Believers are to remain focused on God's approval and on the actions that lead them, regardless of the world's response. This lays down fertile ground for integrity to emerge. So the Biblical worldview has another important element built in that encourages ethical behavior, regardless of the honor it brings. One ought to do good because of a commitment to God not, because it might bring honor to one's name publicly.

Implications for Preterists

Paul believed that the Second Coming would happen in his generation, and prescribed certain things in the NT on the basis of that belief. An example of an exhortation that would no longer apppy to us today would be 1st Corinthians 7:24-29, where Paul argues that the times him and his fellow Christians were in called for celibacy, being that the Lord was fast approaching. It wasn't a sin if you did get married, of course; it was just harder to serve the Lord in this context if you had a family to worry about. Thus, Paul encouraged being single.
So, we need to be careful when reading the NT and determining what prohibitions or exhortations are still applicable to us today. Context is key.

Hello fellow redditors,
I am looking to name my cat! She is mostly grey with white parts and has a white „scar“ across her face. I intended to name her Skadi, the goddess of hunters, but would love to give her a second name such as „Skadi Snurrelson“.
I was thinking of the Norse words for ash, sky (because she is grey and white), snow etc, but couldn’t come up with anything cool so far!

I know this can be a bigdeal to many but no affence i dont give a shit if your an atheist or whatever i have spent time researching about religions and found out that God is just a title and every religion seems to have a God so was curious what are your thoughts on the Christian God and what do you think His name might be?? And Has he ever answered you on any occasion? Cmon guys lets be real and not involve emotions

Opinions are cool. I like all the albums. The trendy album tier posts are so weakly relative imo. 8 album is dope. This whole community is a nom de guerre just a bunch of screen names- grist for the mill. Enjoy incubus

So firstly I take this on faith, I know him to be the Truth for reasons that are beyond material explanation but for the doubters show me how this is not evidence. I'm just posting this on my profile due to most subs being controlled, so all you that watch my profile I invite you to give a good explanation to this.
Isaiah 53 1 Who will believe our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?
2 But he shall grow up before him as a branch, and as a root out of a dry ground; he hath neither form nor beauty: when we shall see him, there shall be no form that we should desire him.
3 He is despised and rejected of men: he is a man full of sorrows, and hath experience of infirmities: we hid as it were our faces from him: he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely, he hath born our infirmities, and carried our sorrows, yet we did judge him as plagued and smitten of God, and humbled.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions: he was broken for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes are we healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray: we have turned every one to his own way, and the Lord hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet did he not open his mouth: he is brought as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearer is dumb, so he opened not his mouth.
8 He was taken out from prison, and from judgment: and who shall declare his age? for he was cut out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he plagued.
9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no wickedness, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet the Lord would break him and make him subject to infirmities: when he shall make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed and shall prolong his days, and the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many: for he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I give him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he hath poured out his soul unto death; and he was counted with the transgressors, and he bare the sin of many, and prayed for the trespassers.

• I assume anyone who reads this has a decent enough knowledge of the Gospels but if not then read them and you will see this is prophecy of Jesus Christ. This is estimated to be written between 740 and 700 BCE and the earliest surviving manuscript was found in the dead sea scrolls written between 140 and 100 BCE. So it is definitely over 100 years before the birth of Christ. Now look at Tacitus' account of who he referred to as Christus.

"But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind."
"Scholars such as Bruce Chilton, Craig Evans, Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd agree with John Meier's statement that "Despite some feeble attempts to show that this text is a Christian interpolation in Tacitus, the passage is obviously genuine"."
Show me any evidence this strong for the other 2 so called Abrahamic Religions. You can't and never will yet Christianity receives the most doubt. Why? Because it is not religion, it is the written Truth and the events described in Revelations will occur.

masterwork items are losing their special names. why? please keep the special names, they are really cool. the tech already exists and all riot has to do is to come up with new interesting names, which is not that hard.
p.s. if you don't know what I'm talking about, see this

This story was written and emailed to me by an anonymous source. And it’s one of the craziest most bizarre stories I’ve ever read. Ever! 😆 Enjoy the read. It’s long and ridiculously wild. ☘️ Also, in advance, no one can use this story. These stories are written and emailed to me for me to turn into a Video Narrative for my YouTube & TikTok channels. But I would like to share their tales as reading material as well. Thank you for understanding.
I hope you enjoy. 🫶
Story by - “Alex” & “Shane”
Okay so…
I went on vacation to Ireland with my brother last year. And had the most wildest experience of my life there.
Or should I say, we both had the most…wildest experience.
But More so me. And to Tell you the truth, I don’t think I’ll ever go back again after what happened.
As a matter of fact, no, I won’t go back.
So, it’s a Sunday night and it was pretty much our last day of vacationing.
My older brother Shane, wanted to go out… And I’m quoting him - “let’s get fuckin wasted tonight!”
So… We’re on vacation right? Why not? We had rented an Airbnb for the week, we had a rental car - we had a great week so far and we were having…
A proper vacation.
He was already dressed up and ready to go. I wanted to take a quick shower and shave so I told him to head out and I’d call him when I was ready for him to pick me up.
He says cool. He leaves, and I jump in the shower. He’s the one that knows the hot spots in Ireland better than I do. I mean, this was my first time ever coming here. So…
I take a shower, shave, and I get dressed. As I’m about to call my brother, the front door to our Airbnb opens up.
And Its my brother with two bad ass Irish women! They both jump on the couch and they’re laughing their asses off and my brother is just standing there looking at me with a sly grin on his face.
He looks over at the ladies and says - “Give me a minute please” walks over to me, puts his arm over my shoulder and walks me to the bathroom. He then whips out a bag of mushrooms and smiles. Ya know… The psychedelic kind.
I look down at the bag and I shake my head.
He says to me - “come on bro. We got two hotties out there who are trippin and they want to party. Don’t be a flake. This is our last night. Let’s make it special.”
I don’t like disappointing my brother but I was kind of hesitant.
I opened the bathroom door and take a look at these gorgeous women who were both sitting upright now and both looking at me as I opened the door. Both smiling. I smiled back. Closed the door… I looked at my brother and said - “Alright dood fuck it! Let’s do it!”
He gives me a huge hug, kisses me on the forehead, pours me a handful of shrooms and does the same for himself.
We both looked at each other to see who would go first. He counted to three and down the hatch they went. But they were the most unpleasant tasting mushrooms I’ve ever eaten in my life. They were disgusting.
I ran to the fridge and grabbed a bottle of juice because I was having a hard time chewing these nasty things.
But my brother Shane? No, he’s a pro. You give that guy a barrel of hay and he’ll eat it faster than a horse. The guy can eat anything.
40 minutes go by and I’m still straight as a pin. However, my brother on the other hand? He’s already trippin.
I think he had already taken some beforehand.
But in the next 10 minutes… These shrooms hit me like a ton of bricks! It was like this intense wave of cool and hot went completely through my body.
And I’ve taken mushrooms quite a few times but have never felt anything like this before. It was so sudden!
And I feel fantastic!
The next hour went by so fast because we were having so much fun! And these Irish girls? Man… I had the sexiest one! A beautiful Redhead by the name of Katrina.
She was kind of short though. About 5’1” maybe? But good things come in small packages, right? Well, not really. And you’ll know why soon enough.
I don’t recall anything else that happened for the rest of the night after my brother left with the other girl. And before I continue with the rest of the story. My brother’s name is really not Shane. And the redhead girl I was with is not named Katrina.
You see I had to make up these names to protect me and my brother. Because what happened during the rest of the night? I don’t remember. But also, I’ll never forget either.
Okay so, let's get back to the story…
I do remember my brother leaving with… Let's just call her Gloria, Katrina’s friend? And me and Katrina, the redhead, stood behind. I do remember us making out in the bathroom together, but…Everything else after that? There’s nothing there. Nothing. I don’t recall anything from that point forward no matter how badly I try to remember.
This is what my brother told me he witnessed as he arrived back at the Airbnb five hours later with Gloria.
And until this day, I still don’t want to believe this happened. But according to my brother…
It truly did happen.
My brother is going to write this part of the story because he’s the one that has this locked in his memory for life. And for the sake of the story, my name will be Alex.
Here is my brother Shane’s point of view - his perspective on what he witnessed that crazy night. Wow man… This is so fucking nuts. So buckle up and be prepared. I understand you don’t know who I am, but I swear, I’m not a bad person. Okay.

• “Shane’s” story on what he witnessed.

Yeah so, I guess I’m Shane now. Unreal…
Okay. Here we go. Meat and potatoes.
We arrive back at the Airbnb and I see Alex outside in the front of the house wearing only socks and he’s running around on top of the grass like an animal yanking out handfuls of grass from underneath him.
I look at Gloria and we’re both baffled at what we just saw.
First thing I said was - “Oh yeah! This dood is off his rocker right about now - as I parked the car.
We both hop out of the car and walk up to the front door. I slide the key into the door, it unlocks, but there’s a chair behind the door and it’s tipped over blocking the entry way and only leaving enough space for a crack. We both awkwardly look at one another and as I’m about to call out for my brother, I hear someone sprinting towards the door and bang!
The fuckin idiot shuts the door on us.
I then knock on the door softly because It’s almost 1 in the morning as I don’t want to make too much noise. God only knows what this kid has been doing since me and Gloria left.
After I knock on the door a few times, I hear the chair getting pushed to the side and my brother slightly opens the door. I take a peek inside, and his nose is broken, lips are bubbled up and his left eye is completely shut, black and blue and swollen.
He then drops to his knees, and begins crying but no sound is coming out of him! You know… Like when you get smacked by your parents when you’re a kid and it shocks the soul of you? Yeah, that kind of cry.
I don’t react to what he’s doing to not scare the shit out of Gloria, because she’s right beside me. So I push the door open and tell Gloria to hang on a second and shut the door and lock it.
I pick his busted ass up and sit him on the couch. I look around the house and it’s in complete shambles. Our clothes are everywhere, there’s food all over the fuckin walls. It was chaotic. And my brother is now sitting up breathing frantically.
I ask him - “what in the fuck happened?”
He looks at me. Face looking like he got into a boxing match with Rocky Marciano and whispers to me.
“Dood… There’s a leprechaun in the bathroom.”
“A fuckin what now?” - I said with the most bewildered look on my face. I mean I must have… I wish I would have taken a picture of my face at that very moment. I should have taken pictures of everything so this idiot could see the havoc he wreaked on that night.
My imbecile brother continues - “I’m telling you. There’s a fuckin leprechaun in the fuckin bathroom and this little lucky charms motherfucker won’t tell me where he hid the gold!”
“A leprechaun in the bathroom. What the fuck happened to you?” I said as I felt my blood beginning to boil.
The Imbecile then says - “Don’t worry. Don’t worry! I hogtied that little bitch and stuffed my underwear in its mouth. It’s in the bathtub. But don’t go in there. Don’t go in there. This thing fucked me up!”
And now I can hear someone fumbling in the bathroom moaning very softly. I looked at my brother and said - “What in the fuck did you do Alex?”
He replies - “I’m telling you. It’s a fucking leprechaun.”
“Okay. Okay.” - I said. “Stay right here and just, don’t move. Don’t do anything. Just keep still.
His eyes were so huge and dilated. He was so fuckin high. He had heartbeat pulses pumping from the top of his head.
I rushed back over to the front door and told Gloria that my brother got into a fight with a couple of guys at a pub while me and her were out and that her friend Katrina left because she got scared. She told me that was the first time she met that girl tonight so she really didn’t care and shrugged it off. Which was a huge relief to me. I told her thank you for a wonderful night. She understood. W said our goodbyes. I shut the door. And now… What the fuck is in the bathroom? Or better yet, who, is in the bathroom? Because let’s face it. This motherfucker did not find and fight with a leprechaun tonight. No way. There’s just no fuckin way.
I rush over to the bathroom and my brother leaps at my legs, and he’s holding onto me for dear life, begging me!
He says - “Please don’t untie it! It’s got magical powers! PLEASE!!!
Now, at this very moment? I am sort of hesitant about opening the bathroom door. But I snap out of it and open it. What the fuck. A leprechaun? No, I don’t think so.
I open the door…
“Holy shit.” - I said while covering my hands with my mouth. The floor was smeared in blood as if someone was dragged, leading to the huge cast iron tub. Smeared bloody handprints were all over the tub. And now I hear the faint moan coming from the tub. My legs are shaking and feel like they’re ready to give out on me. I was scared shitless.
“What did my brother do? Who is in that bathtub? I pray to God Katrina isn’t in there right now.” - I said to myself completely freaked out.
I slowly walk up to the bathtub…
And sure enough, there is a hogtied person lying in it with my brother's underwear stuffed in their mouth with a ripped t-shirt tied around their head and mouth, but… It’s not Katrina.
It’s a little person. You know, a dwarf? And… He’s literally dressed up in a leprechaun costume…
And how, on God's green earth did he end up here?
He has no idea I’m standing above him. I reach down to begin untying him but he begins squirming and screaming. I told him to relax and that I was here to help him.
And then My imbecile brother Alex, rushes into the bathroom and tackles me down. Stands up and begins shouting at this poor bastard hogtied in the tub - “Tell me where it is you greedy little fuck! Tell me!!!
I jumped to my feet and slapped my brother back to his childhood. Grabbed him by the throat, tripped him and threw him to the ground and said - “are you fuckin crazy? Do you want to go to prison for kidnapping? What in the fuck is the matter with you? You dumb fuck!!”
He then looks up at me with this pessimistic look on his face and says - “It’s a fucking leprechaun dood. A leprechaun.”
I was absolutely dumbfounded and furious at this point. I have this stranger in my Airbnb rental, hogtied and gagged and squirming and screaming and my brother thinks that he’s a leprechaun…
I can’t make this shit up.
He was so fucking high on those mushrooms. He was absolutely convinced that this man was a leprechaun. So… I had to play the game.
It was the only way to help this poor son of a bitch that my brother had kidnapped and hogtied in our Airbnb rental.
I calmly whispered and told him to please leave the bathroom so I could interrogate the leprechaun and find out where he was hiding the pot of gold.
My brother slowly stood up to his feet, face busted up, his cock and balls all shriveled and tight, looked at the man dressed up as a leprechaun, smiled at him with an evil grin and just, walked away…
And as he walked away, I told him to go and please put some clothes on, lay down in bed, and that I would handle the leprechaun. That I, would find out where the gold was hidden…
And that’s all I’m saying. I’m giving the computer back to my dumbass of a brother to finish off whatever else he wants to write.

• Back to “Alex”

Pretty outlandish right? I know. I know. You must think that I’m bat shit crazy huh? Okay so, to make the rest of this long story short, my brother Shane never told me what he did with the poor guy I hogtied and, well… i don’t remember how this guy came to be in my possession. I really don’t.
The only thing my brother Shane told me was that he ungagged him, untied him, and that he was extremely pissed off. And that he had compensated him for his troubles.
Man, I felt so horrible. I felt so horrible…
What I do remember though is waking up that following afternoon with my face all fucked up. Dehydrated with a tremendous splitting headache. I had no clue as to why I looked and felt the way I did. It was terrifying.
All of our luggage was packed and my brother was just sitting there, legs crossed and his arms folded.
Hey man… Take it from me. Don’t do fuckin drugs.
Regards, “Alex” & “Shane”
Disclaimer- This story may not be used for anything other than reading, sharing your thoughts and enjoying it. It is now protected by the United States Library of Congress/Copyright Office. Thank you. ☘️

So I kind of just never legally changed my name, but I usually go by Lily or Lilith to people I meet that aren't the government or my bank. First name that I ever thought of, and now it's time to actually make a decision.
Some thoughts on these names would be cool, I sort of want it to be compatible with a gothy/edgelord style, but obviously I'm not going to call myself something dumb and inherently edgy, just something that wouldn't hurt that aesthetic.
My birth period: early-mid 2000s
Lily Lilith Madeline Bella (I really like this one, but idk) or Bell Jane Elizabeth

Hey guys! I am sure some of you might know me. I made a post about 4-5 days ago about wanting to join Vought and I expressed my wish to work with Homelander, and then I was reached out by the other Ashley and now I've been hired as an intern. Today was my 4th day working at VoughtHQ.
To recap, I am 17 and my superpowers are testicle inflation (I can't control this one for some reason, idk but it started a while ago and they've gotten kinda big rn, the doctors said that a different name for this superpower is tumor apparently but idk), and SIMP (super intense minecraft powers).
Today Homelander seemed really pissed, I am not sure why but he was. Anyway, apparently Soldier Boy the greatest hero of the time before whatever time it is rn has been seen walking around in the city? I am not sure if that's true but that's so cool!!!!
Do you think Soldier Boy might have something to do with Homelander's bad mood?
Oh and if someone's wondering, no I didn't see Homelander drink his magic potion from the nursing bottle again.

These are the rules for the sub, if you don't read this and post something that ends up getting removed, this is why.

1. Story openly paints a community in a negative light, for example, an openly Anti-LGBTQ story, Anti-religion, etc
   
2. Politics that CANNOT be seen as funny, this sub is here to make people laugh, not to spread your ideology, look at the goddamn name.
   
3. Moving away from what you can and can't post, don't be a dickhead to others, seriously, it's not cool to be a bigot
   
4. THE STORIES MUST BE VERIFIABLE, NO BS
   

For starters, this should be applicable to anyone who has the misfortune of owning anything by NordicTrack that has the ifit app installed. Ultimately, these are all powered by slightly different variants of the same android control board. So similar even, that if you crack open any of them, the boards have the same shape, mount points and locations of all the primary components and connectors. They all have the same design flaw.
All that being said, I've fixed a bike and two treadmill boards so far by re-flowing them. The problem wasn't the screen. It wasn't an issue of the board not getting power, etc. The issue was cold solder joints.
One of them had to be reflowed twice, but...again, I've got a pretty good track record going, and am now convinced that these are just cheaply made "not even half as good as an Amazon Fire" tablets with cold solder joints. If you don't know what a cold solder joint is, it's simply areas on the board where the board was not heated enough during production, resulting in poor joints that crack and fail overtime. It would be kind of like if all the important nerves in your nervous system just started breaking. You'd stop working too. Fortunately, there's usually ways to fix this on circuit boards.
If you have a multi-meter, you can poke the 12v power header into the tablet to confirm that it's getting 11 to 13v power. If it is (and assuming it's also getting 2 amps then), you're probably looking at cold solder joints. If you don't have a multi-meter, but you're mechanically inclined, you can pick one up for under $10 USD. Takes about 10 minutes to learn how to use on on Youtube. If you want to test if it's a screen issue....well, short of visible, physical damage, screens *and* the touch overlays don't just die at the same time. So even if the screen was totally failed, the touch overlay should still let you poke around if you know exactly where to click to make *something* happen. (You could also hook the screen up to a laptop if you have a large format screen with a 30 pin connector, but that seems overkill when, overwhelmingly, it's likely cold solder joints on the PCB in the tablet)
Also, it's worth nothing that cold solder joints don't always result in being dead in the water right away. While I would try *everything* else from a software perspective first to fix instability issues, constant crashing and reboots, completely frozen screens, inability to fully boot, or error messages preventing boot can all be related to this, too. For my own treadmill, it started with freezing after a couple workouts, and quickly (over a day) progressed to a boot loop where it never would fully load. For kicks, I let it torture itself and when I came back the next day, it was completely dead.
Anyway, fixing this is pretty much the same as what everyone used to do to XBOX 360's that had the red ring of death...cook the PCB until the solider melts again, but also try not to cook it so far that the components on the board literally burn and become unusable again.
Also, it's worth noting that if you're lucky enough to still be under warranty, you should pursue that first. And don't discredit looking at what credit card you bought your machine with, if you're the original owner. Some credit cards double warranties, so that 2 year warranty on the tablet could very well be turned into a four year warranty by your credit card company. This is actually a surprisingly common, but not well known, benefit of major cards.
To get started, unplug the unit from the wall. The last thing you need is to end up electrocuting yourself or blowing something out on your machine because power was still being applied to it.
Ok, so onto the actual repair.....to do this, you'll need to unplug the four cables going into the back of the tablet. On some machines, like my 9.5s, you might have to take a back cover off the whole unit to actually reach the back of the tablet, and its connectors. Once that's taken care of, you'll need to take out the (likely) 3 screws on each side that hold the tablet mount into the upper assembly that the tablet itself is mounted in. From here, the tablet should be freely removable from the unit.
Now you need to undo the screws in the back of the tablet to separate it from the touchscreen front. Warning: There are delicate ribbon cables going from the screen in front, to the board in the tablet. Damage one of them, and you may as well just buy a new tablet for the few hundred bucks NordicTrack will shake you down for.
Once you've exposed the board, you should be able to pull out the wire connectors and flip the pressure fit levers on the ribbon cable connectors for the tablet to remove the camera and touchscreen ribbon cables. Note that the wifi antenna is also relatively delicate, and should be pulled as upward as possible. You also need to be careful when reinstalling it, or you can crush the connector, and then....either you're good at incredibly small soldering by hand, or again, you're buying a new tablet with half the power and build quality of the cheapest Amazon Fire at quadruple the price.
Next, remove the screws securing the board to the inside of the tablet, and you should be able to freely remove it with ease. Now comes the Really delicate part.

THE ACTUAL FIX ITSELF

Ideally, you would be doing this in a precision controlled re-flow oven with a profile that walks the board through exact temperature changes....but you can get 90% of the way there, and have pretty excellent chances of fixing your board, nontheless. You just need an oven and a thermometer you can read from inside the oven.
Before prepping the board to go in the oven, remove the large metal RF shield covering the back of the board. Not the one that's postage stamps sized, but the one that's about the much larger one, about the size of two human thumbs. You can discard this - it's an RF shield and honestly it does nothing but trap heat that really shouldn't be trapped, in my opinion.
Using the "toaster oven method" to reflow a PCB, you will want to make a few loose (not very compacted) foil balls. Set them on a plate in a way where you can press the board into them, connectors side facing up. You should have the board be as level as possible - re-flowing a board at an angle can make the chips fall out of alignment, and then you pretty much have a dead, now-un-repairable board.
Once the board is level, put a thermometer you can read on the plate with the board and pop it in the oven. Set the oven to bake at 230C (About 445F) and once the oven has actually reached this temperature, count off two minutes. That is how long you want to let the board bake before you remove it. You don't have to be exact with this, but don't leave it in for only a minute and don't forget about it and come back after it's been cooking for 5 or 10 minutes. Try to be within a few seconds of that 2 minute mark. And the temperature gauge on the plate is so you can know that it really is within a few degrees of 230F. The temp gauge on stoves often lies, and if the board is below 220 it won't really re-flow, and above 240 you run the risk of cooking it to death.
Anyway, the final, and arguably most delicate part, is removing the board. You want to be as gentle as possible. No bumps, no jerky motions, and setting it down with great care once it's out of the oven. Also, set it down *away* from the oven so that the board can cool off faster. Don't put it in the fridge or anything, but let it sit undisturbed for about 15 minutes before trying to do anything with it. After that amount of time, it should be cool enough to touch. Once all of this is done, screw the board back into the tablet shell, but ONLY put the screws in along the two sides that have connectors coming out of them. This means you should have three of the four corners screwed down, and one or two additional screws along those two sides. Leave the fourth corner undone since it gives the board some wiggle room without constant straining & flexing. (The best option would be making silicone bushings to mount the tablet board to, much like portable had drives have, but that's just me trying to get as much life out of my tablet & treadmill as I can).
Now, reattach all the connectors. My preferred order for ease is: Camera cable, microphone cable, touch screen cable, wifi antenna, display cable (the largest flat ribbon cable in there). Then close up the two halves of the tablet, pop a couple screws in the corners, and reattach the four external cables to the tablet. Don't bother screwing it all back in yet because we're just testing to make sure it works at this point. You should be able to lay the tablet down, plug the machine in, and have the tablet power up. It should respond to touch and work just like it used to. If it works again, congrats! Now unplug it once more and finish reinstalling the tablet, plastic pieces, and screws.
If it didn't work, there's no harm in trying to reflow the board again. In fact, if the issue happens again later on, you can just try reflowing the board once more. That said, there's only so many times you can re-melt the solder holding everything together before the board will just plain out be toast. Usually it's somewhere around 3 or 4 times, but you could be unlucky and have 0 or 1, or be incredibly lucky and get away with it a dozen times over many more years of life from your machine, if you even need to.
All that being said, if anyone needs help with this, just reply here. I'm not on Reddit often anymore, but I'll try to get back to you within a week, and I'm much more responsive once we've started on a conversation.
Again, to date, I've fixed three NordicTrack devices doing this, and many MANY other PCBs in similar fashion. What's alarming to me here is that the units I've fixed all have usage times of under 100 hours for the machines. Honestly, I'm amazed this hasn't come up yet and that NordicTrack hasn't been litigated into free replacements like Apple and Microsoft have from similar mass failures out of warranty due to poor build quality. (Xbox 360, iPhone battery & back glass issues, etc...) I'm even more amazed that they'll sell the tablet for most models, but *not* the PCB....though, I guess that just goes to show that whatever lowest-bidder factory cranked these out for them, NordicTrack as a company has never even seen component level parts like that - just finished tablets, so it's not even something they *can* offer their ~~hostages~~ customers.
OH! And final word of advice! Put your units on a smart outlet that turns off after whatever the max time you use your equipment would be! Not only will it prolong the equipment life, but it actually makes it easier to use! For example, instead of waiting for the treadmill to wake up, I just say "Alexa, turn on the treadmill" and by the time I'm at it, it's happily waiting for me to click my name and go. And then if I forget to turn it off, the smart plug is programmed to shut it down after 2 hours anyway, so it won't be sitting there idly chewing away at the new life ~~breathed~~ baked into it.
If you want to make sure the temp if your oven is hot enough, but not going to fry something, try taking an old remote that you know works but that you don't care about. Disassemble it, reflow it, and make sure it still works when you put it all back together again. Now do it again and see if, once it reached temp in the oven, you can scrape parts off the board with relative ease. This will destroy the remote, but it's a good way to get comfortable with baking boards.
Anyway, that's about all. I wish I'd though to record videos of this process, but I hope this guide is enough to get most people back in business. And if you've already been through swapping the whole tablet and have a dead one you'd like to donate to seeing if my theory continues to hold true, I'd be happy to pay shipping to get it from you, or have you pay shipping if you want me to just take a crack at fixing it and sending it back to you.
If you're already skilled in these areas, it should take about 20 minutes to do, excluding actual bake and cooling time. If you're totally new at this but you can follow instructions with care and precision, you can probably have it done in under 2 hours. And hey - short of burning or electrocuting yourself (again, unplug before working on the equipment!) ....if you already have a dead board, the only thing you really have to lose by trying this is some of your time. =)

Atheists, Ex-muslims, christians jews even muslims themselves.
i looked up "muslim" in reddit and most of them were freaking P0RN.
and others talk about us in horrific ways.
that its a barbaric religion, that Muhammed (PBUH) was a ped0 (they ignore the fact how many religions also excuse marriage with kids + this was 1400 years ago and even people they adore used to do it, and it was normal in that time) and that its sexist (Islam highly respects a woman but they still wont shut up) and old-fashioned (to this day we can use it in our day to day lives) and how fake it is (scientific revolutions line up perfectly with Islam and Islam discovered this 1400 years before them) and they just go on and on and on about us
why wont they leave us alone? its horrifying on reddit here. i literally answered someones question on Islam (asking about the take of the buried infants and how they were mentioned in Quran) AND GOT -10 VOTES FOR WHAT??
its all "respect all beliefs!" "they have the right to do what they want!" till it comes to Islam. what the hell? its all hypocrites.
and the more annoying ones is the "Muslim" people who taint our name, like oppressive families using religion as an excuse to be abusive and so on.
why wont they leave us alone? im scared. im so so scared.
especially with whats happening in Palestine (May Allah help them).
theyre ENJOYING it. theyre SUPPORTING it. and they dare mock us for it?? and they think they're sooo right.
im TERRIFIED that they'd cheer and celebrate muslims being tortured. its just like what they did to the Sahabi long ago. NOTHING CHANGED. NOTHING CHANGED!!!! THEY TALK ABOUT HOW TIMES CHANGED AND HOW MODERN THE WORLD IS AND HOW ISLAM IS OUTDATED. NOTHING. CHANGED.

Since maybe 3 months ago i started seeing minor things in shadows like eyes, and hearing people i know say my name when i know they didnt. over the last week it has really gotten worse, i see shadow people moving in my peripheral vision, and ive been hearing scary stuff like footsteps when no-one is around, and the bell in my kitchen going off 3 times in a row randomly even though i live alone and i checked-no one else is in my house. I also just heard my phone notification sound even though i didnt get a notification and have silent mode on. i have a unique sound too. idk what this is, im getting fine sleep so idk whats going on any advice would be cool 👍

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm surprised nobody has made a mod that adds a the stuff from education edition to regular java Minecraft yet
I mean it sounds boring but there was a lot of cool stuff with education edition and imagine all the other cool stuff you could add not being shackled by needing to actually teach children
New villager that sells the items
The little helper Golam could still be used either with still coding with scratch or something else
Drugs and bombs, you could do a lot with adding chemical stuff without the restraint of needing to actually teach children
I imagine a good name for it would be "LEARN to play"

I was watching this video by youtuber Wallieb26, and at the 8:28 mark, he plays a song over a photo montage. I think its a really cool song, but he didn't give any credits for it, so does anyone know what the songs called? I already tried things like Shazam and Autotag.info, no luck. I looked through the comments to see if someone named the song, no luck. I tried typing the lyrics into Google, also no luck. Let me know if you have any ideas, thanks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDil7yKT3fQ&list=PLj80Vffq0bHIcaKwhQ_WJHlaDCX3T3wAQ&index=9

I'm American, currently living in the Middle East. I am an introvert (ISTP); hobbies mostly center around casual PC gaming (mostly single player and co-op). There are a few franchises that I'm really into, namely the Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, and the Witcher for video games, then there's Star Wars (pre-disney), the Big Bang Theory, and Dragon Ball (RIP Toriyama) for shows/anime. I do like some other animes, probably too many to list here. I really enjoy ancient history, specifically Roman and Byzantine. I'm very handy, having built computers and fixed certain appliances in the past.
Physically, I am white, about 170cm with blue eyes. I wear glasses constantly, and usually have a short beard.
I like to live my life at a slower pace, and usually am pretty relaxed. I prefer to stay in most nights, but enjoy going out too.
I'm looking for a girl between the ages of 20 and 36, give or take. I'm not too picky about location, but close-ish is preferred. Christian, preferably Orthodox or Catholic. Dating to marry, wants a family, and doesn't mind long distance for a while and eventually relocating. A fellow introvert, and fellow gamer or interested in gaming. Bonus points if you're tall and/or very thin. Also bonus points for the shy bookworm type.
If any of this appeals to you, and you'd like to get to know me, send me a chat or DM. Thanks for reading!

Hi all,
I'm in a dispute with Three and could really use some external help to make sure my argument in the dispute is watertight.
Context:
I ordered some broadband from Three around 2 months ago, the router was delivered to a neighbour in my block of flats. It was "signed for" under my name and a proof of delivery photograph featuring a headless woman was the evidence. All the doors and carpets in my building look the same so there was no distinguishing features to give an indication of who it was.
I asked around the neighbours over the next few days and everyone said they hadn't received a parcel. I also sent a letter around giving whoever had the parcel an ultimatum to leave it in front of my door before I opened an investigation and no one came forward - so clearly someone was lying.
I contacted Three about this and they said they'd look into it, a week later they said they looked into it and the device was confirmed delivered - to which I said that it was delivered ot the wrong address - their reply was that there was GPS evidence, to which I replied that the GPS evidence could represent any one of the 25 flats in this building and that the photographic evidence of someone recieving the parcel was someone who was not me.
I offered to give further evidnce, via proof of signature, a picture of myself to show that it was not me who had signed for the parcel which Three refused to accept reiterating that their position was that the parcel had been delivered.
At this point I escalated the case to the Ombudsman.
After closing heir internal complaint Three then began to aggressively pursue payment from me, despite me contacting them numerous times to tell them that the issue is with the Ombudsman and I wouldn't be paying for anything as the contract terms hadn't been met.
Three's argument:
Now in the Ombudsman investigation Three's claims are:

• The GPS info and delivery photo is evidence that confirms that the router was delivered
• None of the neighbours have said they have the device
• This needs to be disputed with DPD directly for them to complete an investigation with the driver
• I am liable for paying for the service until I can give evidence that the device was not received -They've confirmed that there's no useage on the device or the mobile number

My counter argument:
My counter argument would be:

• Three has a responsibility as the sender to ensure the goods I undertook a contract for were delivered, any issues between DPD and Three before the item was delivered to me have nothing to do with me and are a seperate issue between Three and DPD, which Three is currently using as an excuse to not fulfill the contract.
• Three has repeatedly refused to give any avenue to prove that the individual represented in the claimed photographic evidence is not me, including any photographs of myself and my signature
• The notion of "giving evidence that the device has not been recieved" does not make any sense as I'm being asked to prove a negative - what could this evidence even look like if the device is not in my possession? The only evidence is already possesed by Three, which is an image of the device being delivered to someone who clearly isn't me, and they've confirmed that the device hasn't been used, neither has the mobile number.
• Three has repeatedly harrassed me for payments and given complaint updates on my account, even if I had wanted to manage the payments or read these notes I wouldn't be able to as to log into the Three customer portal one needs the mobile number of the account, which I don't have.
• I cannot identify any possible motive that Three could think I have. If I had any intentions of cancelling the contract after recieving the device, I could have done so within the cooling off period, but I called Three about the undelivered item well before this period ended. The device itself has little to no monetary value and is useless without a Three broadband contract which Three themselves have confirmed has not been made use of. -I've repeatedly given Three the opportunity to remedy the situation to no avail
• The terms and conditions state that Three is responsible for supplying me the equipment, which they have failed to do so, hence holding me liable whilst failing to uphold their own terms makes no sense.