People ruminate on the past, who’s wronged them, and the things that are absent from their lives. People imagine past events as though they are still happening now. They use who they were in the past to define their future.
The issue with defining oneself in the present from your past is that it keeps you bound to the past. This self-imposed limitation asserts that everything about your past determines how you will behave in the future. Your future hasn't been written yet. The decisions you make will continue to shape who you can be.
When you are a child of an alcoholic, you learn from a very young age the signs to look for so you aren’t in the line of fire when the next violent episode occurs. And the feared incident always happens. Consequently, you become conditioned to react to these indications.
As an adult, you see evidence that because bad things have happened in the past doesn’t mean more bad things will happen. Not every slurred speech or stumbling from another person will cause harm. Therefore, you can determine that the past doesn’t have to repeat itself.
Although this may take time to realize, it doesn’t have to. You’re shaped by your past. The good news is, you aren’t bound to it. You can move beyond the difficulties of the past and into something far better. The main reason you don’t have to repeat the past is because you can learn from it.

While we cannot predict the future, we will most surely live it. Every action and decision we take - or don't - ripples into the future. ~ Jacque Fresco

Your Mindset Determines Your Future

You often have feelings and attachments to the past. The past can be hard to let go of, and it affects you emotionally. Yet you have a choice to make, an option to choose a different outlook, a growth mindset instead of a fixed mindset.
The fixed mindset is the idea that you believe your attributes and abilities are inherently fixed and can’t be changed. For example, you may think that you’re as smart as you’ll ever be and therefore, that thought process causes you not to even try to learn new things. Since you don’t believe your intelligence can grow with time and experience, then you can’t change, and your future will be the same.
A growth mindset is the exact opposite. This mindset is founded on the conviction that your basic abilities can be cultivated and are malleable. This allows one to grow with enthusiasm, time, and a commitment to improving, learning, and becoming greater than before. With a growth mindset, failures are short-term setbacks, and the process is usually more important than the outcome. So, with a growth mindset, your future is never predetermined. It’s boundless.
The fixed mindset is the most common mindset and the most harmful. So, you need to know which mindset you favor so you can learn from the past and then choose a different future. You can change your mindset just by thinking it through.

The past cannot be changed. The future is yet in your power. ~ Mary Pickford

Reframing Your Past To Better Serve You

Your world is the one you make through your decisions. So is the one you remember from your past. Change the significance of the experiences if what you remember is difficult or negative. Examine the experiences that are preventing you from moving forward and try to see them from a more positive perspective. Reframe your rejection, to believe it was a sign from the Universe directing you to a better place. If you have ever failed at something, consider it a lesson in building resilience for a better future.

Accepting your history serves as a springboard and a means of getting ready for the future once you can no longer imagine a better ending for it. The way you identify who you have been and how you envision who you will be next, combine to form who you are today. Take care of the narratives you accept and write about yourself. Take deliberate steps to embrace the lessons learned from the past and the opportunities that lie ahead. 

These are the components of who you are right now. The gifts that make up your current existence have been your experiences. A clear vision for your life is essential, as you attract what you focus on. Your destiny is entirely within your control. Even if you can't control everything in life, you can still do great things if you accept responsibility, grow from your mistakes, and have a clear vision.

There are times in our lives when we have to realize our past is precisely what it is, and we cannot change it. But we can change the story we tell ourselves about it, and by doing that, we can change the future. ~ Eleanor Brown

Everybody Changes; So The Future Will Differ From The Past

As an adult, you have experienced enough of life to see that one constant is change. You grow, circumstances transform, people develop. All of this is observable. Therefore, if everybody changes, then the past can’t indicate the future.
Even those around you that don’t seem to have the desire to grow still change. They are based on the circumstances that occur in their life and by the choices they make. Not making a choice is still choosing, which impacts one’s life that doesn’t allow things to stay the same. Thus, despite a lack of growth, the future will differ from the past.
As you develop, how you perceive the past is altered and reframed. You learn from the past and determine ways to prevent unwanted situations. You make informed decisions and take responsibility for your choices, so that you can move forward toward the goals and dreams. Thus, validating that you are creating a better future than your past.
My aha moment came when I realized my past was holding me back because I allowed it to. I embraced both the idea that I had total autonomy to decide in the present and the reality that I couldn’t change the past, only reframe it. Then I choose to forgive anyone who had wronged me, as well as myself for my previous missteps. And you can make the same choice.

People underestimate their capacity for change. There is never a right time to do a difficult thing. ~John Porter

Making Your Future Better than Your Past

As you have seen, in order to improve your future than your past, believe that it’s possible. This may take a bit of courage to overcome your fears and move towards a growth mindset. Here are some ways to help you with this process.

1. Find Your Tribe To Create The Future You Desire

You may have to cut ties with those people in your life that keep you fixated on negativity. The girlfriend who’s always teasing you about the mistake you made years ago has no bearing on the present, except that it keeps your ego in a place of embarrassment every time she mentions it. The people who remind you of your failings or missteps are focusing on the negativity of the past. You may need to spend less time with these people.
Instead, focus on those people who are encouraging, the ones who are excited for you to try new ventures or take a class. This is your tribe, the ones who look at your best attributes and speak positively to you. They remind you of the successes you’ve had, to inspire you to keep moving forward. Make new friends in the areas that you are growing. It's helpful to have someone learning with you to discuss and problem solve together.
Releasing those people from your life that have a negative influence on you is an important step to safeguarding that your future doesn’t resemble your past. By ensuring that you have people who are positive and encouraging around, you help yourself enlarge the possibilities of a better and boundless future.

When we think we have been hurt by someone in the past, we build up defenses to protect ourselves from being hurt in the future. So the fearful past causes a fearful future and the past and future become one. ~ Gerald G. Jampolsky

2. Let Go Of The Past And Its Attachments

Fear of loss is a common concern, like the anxiety of losing your job and the grief of losing a friend. The harsh reality is that you will lose things and loved ones. It’s the natural course of life. Nonetheless, being anxious about the future or worried about the past does nothing but keep you from being fully present and working towards your goals.
The fear of loss can cause many to stay in a mode of indecision and procrastination throughout the course of their lives. People grow attached to the stuff in their lives. Things like their profession, their prominence, their income, their lifestyle, etc. To pursue a change would mean relinquishing some or these things that are now associated as part of your life. Because of this aversion to loss, many people choose to put their dreams on hold — continuously.
By becoming less attached to the things in your life, you overcome the fear of loss. This enables you to move forward towards your goals and build a better future for yourself.

Attachment leads to jealousy. The shadow of greed, that is. Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose. ~ Yoda

3. Accepting What Is Stops The Struggling

By learning to be thankful for your current situation, one changes the focus from lack to having enough. This is important from a universal perspective. Acceptance for what is allows peace to enter your life instead of feeling you are fighting just to get by.
Part of acceptance is gratitude for everything you have, which includes any hardships, as they’re there for you to learn something. The fastest way through adversity is to ask the Universe what lesson are you to glean from the experience. Then, you have to get quiet and discern how this situation can teach you something about yourself or how you relate to the world around you.
One of the best ways to help you see all the good in your life is a gratitude journal. It’s easy to write a few items each evening that happened during your day, which you are grateful for. They can be things like the beautiful sunrise you witnessed while driving into work or your child passed their math test even though he struggled with the homework. You have things in your life to appreciate, and this is where you need to focus your attention in order to shape the vision you have for your future.

Acceptance doesn’t mean resignation; it means understanding that something is what it is and that there’s got to be a way through it. ~ Michael J. Fox

4. Small Steps Towards A Better Future

Growth and development don’t happen overnight. It takes time. And you want things to happen quickly as you are impatient with yourself. But you need to be kind, give a little self-care and self-love. Pay attention to the incremental steps you take as you grow.
It took me over two years before I could meditate daily. I wanted to, but I had to overcome obstacles within myself in order to accomplish this goal. First, I set the intention to meditate daily, but I had focus issues. So, I had to work on being able to quiet my mind so that I could focus. Once I accomplished that step, I added meditation to my calendar, because if it’s on my calendar, I do it. This entire process could be frustrating, but I focused on each incremental step, not the end result. Now, I wouldn’t begin my day without first meditating.
So, whatever you are trying to accomplish, set up steps along the path so you can have minor victories along the way. This ensures you will continue to move forward even if you run into a time of struggle. Being able to see that you overcame previous difficulties encourages you to continue until you accomplish the goal.

You need to be content with small steps. That's all life is. Small steps that you take every day, so when you look back down the road, it all adds up and you know you covered some distance. ~ Katie Kacvinsky

Remember, You Are Wiser Now

It’s unnecessary for you to continue suffering just because you were taken advantage of or mistreated by others, often by those closest to you. You have the power to decide to quit mentally reliving the past. Actually, more anguish is frequently caused by your mind continuously playing back an awful experience from the past than by the actual incident.
You are no longer required to assume the victim's role. You're a survivor. And you can determine how you interpret negative experiences from your past. It’s the key to your freedom.
Unlike what some people think, you can be remorseful without always punishing yourself for past transgressions. Make the adjustments and move on. I can attest to the liberating nature of forgiveness, having extended forgiveness to my abusive mother. You don't choose to be forgiving of others in order to excuse or justify their actions. You choose to be free through forgiveness.
It's also important for you to accept responsibility for your own missteps. Since nobody is perfect. You don't have to serve a life sentence that you put on yourself in order to make up for the wrongs you did or the poor decisions you made. Treat yourself with self-compassion.
You can choose to see your past as quicksand or a launching pad. It’s up to you to make use of your experiences as a tool or allow them to be used against you.

Close the door on the past. Don’t try to forget the mistakes, but don't dwell on them. You don’t let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space. ~ Johnny Cash

Moving Forward Believing In A Better Future

You have the freedom to decide how much control you wish to have over your present life, regardless of what has happened in the past. Although it’s impossible to undo the past, you can reframe it and decide how to respond to it.
Belief is paramount to being able to do anything. Confidence in your abilities, conviction in your resolve to constantly move forward, and faith that all your work will make your dreams a reality. Maintaining this belief is important, which is why you need to take pride in the victories along the way.
Every disappointment that you overcame, each circumstance you seized, and the individuals that arrived along the way that you recognized were there to help you. All the success along the way helps you maintain the belief that the future is going to be better than your past, because you are creating it every day.
No matter how awful it was, your past does not indicate your future. The decisions and deeds you commit to today will ultimately shape who you become in the future. Decide to take what you've learned from the past and use it in the present to live the life that was meant for you.

Change your life today. Don’t gamble on the future, act now, without delay. ~ Simone de Beauvoir

Yo peeps, I have a question and hope I can find some clarity about my following subject:
Can I upload my beats with Vocals I took both out of the big grime acapellas folder, everybody knows or nowadays I merely using stem extraction with the AI Moises App - put them on my beats and on the cover I put a disclaimer with the message I didn't want to annoy anyone with the remix and that I've made it for the love of grime, arts and as homage to the artist, and will erase it in case of any issues?
I've asked a very few Artists on IG if I may use their vocals.
But they didn't read it yet.
On yt I see so called unofficial remixes done with acapellas taken from the grime acapellas folder e.g. Next Hype. Here it's declared a unofficial remix in some tracks. Does that mean unofficial implicates there's no official permission of the artist that got sampled or remixed.
I hope I can help here. I want to come further and must know if I shall be cool and easily upload my unofficial remix.
Some of the acapellas are free for remixers. Artists officially gave a.global permission to use them.
Tempa T Next Hype. I think I could upload a remix without a permission of Tempa T and put it as bootleg.
But Moises. The App brings me into a higher state remixing. Today every Track is quickly separated in stems. So I can make acapellas from tracks that artists not officially gave free.
I think here I shall be as careful as possible with copyright infringement.
Additionaly with Moises I can extract the vocals from a live Set when the MC ( in my example Tempa T) is spitting freestyle. Here isn't any specific track where questions of copyright are associated.
I'd be so thankful if someone read my text to this far point😅🔥
And I'd appreciate if you can help me.

Some great examples I can think of are IVE's Switch era and aespa's Armageddon era. I love the Sailor Moon-esque theme, they've truly upgraded this era. No more of those boring album covers and packaging! Their past concepts weren't bad at all either, I also loved their Love Dive era concept.
And aespa, wow. Don't even know how to start about their Armageddon album. All the teasers they've released are so freaking cool, they even made an interactive website just for this concept. People are saying it reminds them of what y2k is really about, which is fear and mass hysteria because people thought the world was ending in the year 2000.
It's just so satisfying to see when teasers come out and you can see that the concept is cohesive and not rushed or uninspired. Even better when the music and the concept match each other perfectly! I love it when there is a clear theme, sometimes there's even lore and I love that more groups are doing it.

When you sign up, your account is credited with a free $1.25 credit, which can be worth up to 500MB of data (for example in Europe).
When you sign up, you get a free $1.25 credit on your account. Then you get another $5 bonus credit when you top up your account with $20 for your first purchase. If you sign up and top up with a referral code, both you and your friend will get $3 credit.
So if you sign up with the code and top up your account with $20 20$ + 1.25$ (when you sign up) + 3$ (referral code: GFNX2) 5$ (for your first top-up of 20$ or more) = $29.25 credit.
Best Features: No Data Expiration: Your data will not expire and the eSIM only needs to be installed once. In-app Call: In-app calling is available. Simple to Use: Top up your account and use it for roaming in all covered countries. No need for new eSIMs every time. Reasonable Rates: Data rates of $2.45 per GB in Europe and $3.25 per GB in the US are ideal for low-volume travel.
Some Cons: Limited Country Coverage: Coverage is still limited, especially in Asia. There is currently no coverage in Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea and Hong Kong.
https://roamless.com/

I am not even talking about scriptural problems within the bible, You don't have to open a single bible to start seeing the problems,
1-) The Problem of Salvation and Faith (Why the plan of salvation is ridiculous, and has failed)
I.The ridiculousness of the plan
A. Demanding blood for remission of sins Heb 9:22 - Why is this the terms that god insists upon? Isn't he the architect of the parameters regarding sin, punishment, and forgiveness? Is he not able to forgive sin without blood sacrifice? Can he not say, “No blood sacrifice necessary, I just forgive you?”
B. God sacrificing himself to himself to save us from himself by creating a loophole in the architecture for condemnation he engineered in the first place? This is your solution for a problem in which you yourself are the problem. It’s like a doctor stabbing people to be able to operate and save them.
C. Dying for someone else's crime does not equal justice in any court.
D. The sacrifice was not a sacrifice at all :

1. Jesus is said to be eternal
2. He spent a few days in misery out of his billions of years plus of existence
3. He spent a minutiae of a fraction of his existence suffering knowing he would be resurrected after the ordeal and spend eternity in divine luxury, and that somehow provides him justification to sentence us to trillions of years of eternity suffering without end?
4. Jesus is a supernatural immortal who suffered temporary mortal punishment and then sentences mortals to supernatural eternal punishment if they do not receive his sacrifice.
5. Why is three days of punishment followed by eternity in glory sufficient for all the horrible deeds any man has ever committed, but billions of years suffered in hell by a good moral person who does not believe due to lack of evidence is not sufficient?

2-) Nature of The Christian god
I. He is supposed to be an all Powerful and All mighty being and yet he died on a cross by his own creation (If you see someone claiming to be god and then you saw him hie before your very eyes, How on earth are you supposed to conclude anything else other than "This guy is a liar"?)
Modern Christians would respond to this saying "Only the Human part died, The Divine part wasn't affected"
Which again, doesn't make any sense :
A. Even when assuming a human sacrifice is somehow necessary for salvation, The sacrifice of 1 Human being can never be Enough to atone for the sins of all of mankind since Adam and Eve till the return of jesus.
I found a Coptic pope explaining this issue in detail, Here is a link to his book, https://st-takla.org/books/en/pope-shenouda-iii/nature-of-christ/propitiation-and-redemption.html
Quoting from it : "The belief in the One Nature of the Incarnate Logos is essential, necessary and fundamental for redemption. Redemption requires unlimited propitiation sufficient for the forgiveness of the unlimited sins of all the people through all ages. There was no solution other than the Incarnation of God the Logos to offer this through His Divine Power.
Thus, if we mention two natures and say that the human nature alone performed the act of redemption, it would have been entirely impossible to achieve unlimited propitiation for man's salvation. Hence comes the danger of speaking of two natures, each having its own specific tasks. In such case, the death of the human nature alone is insufficient."
It's very clear that saying only the human part died doesn't make any sense, Even according to the Christian theology itself.
B. The Trinity is based on a false idea
I know, It's a classic Argument against Christianity but you can't deny that it's an actual damning argument against the Christian theology.

1. God is all knowing but Jesus wasn't all knowing (mark 13:32)
2. Jesus is supposed to be god, but he is praying to himself to save himself with cries and tears?? (Luke 22:41-44)
3. Jesus is god but we can't say he is good because only god is good?? (Luke 18:18-19)
4. God can't be tempted by evil (James 1:13) but yet jesus was tempted by satan?? (Matthew 4:1)
5. Jesus is god but he can't do a thing on his own?? (John 5:31) 6.Jesus is supposed to be the same as the father, But their teachings are different? (John 7:16)

And so many more, Throught the bible i can't help but notice the intense number of verses which clearly states Jesus can't be god.
3-) The Problem of a Historical Jesus (Why we don’t know the actual historical Jesus)
I. No contemporary historical evidence,
A. No historian alive during Jesus day wrote about Jesus despite ample opportunity

1. The kings coming to his birth
2. Herod’s slaughter of baby boys
3. The overthrowing of money changers
4. Jesus triumphant entry into Jerusalem where he is declared king by the whole town.
5. Darkness covering the whole earth for hours on Jesus’ Death
6. The earthquakes at Jesus’ death
7. The rending of the temple veil at Jesus’ Death
8. The resurrection of Jesus that was seen by 500 witnesses.(Only Paul claims that, even tho he never met jesus)

II. The Gospels are contradicting, late hearsay accounts
A. Mark, the earliest gospel, was written at least after 70 A.D. (referencing fall of temple) by a non-eyewitness, and makes numerous cultural and geographical errors that a Jewish writer would not have made such as locations of rivers, cultural customs regarding divorce, locations of towns or Jesus quoting from the greek Septuagint etc. (see geographical and historical errors in this link, https://holtz.org/Library/Philosophy/Metaphysics/Theology/Christianity/Criticism/Bible%20Problems%20by%20Packham%201998.htm#ERRORS )
B. The other gospels all copied from Mark. Luke and Matthew contain over 70% of Mark and mainly make changes in attempts to fix blatant errors made in Mark and to correct Mark’s poor grammar.The writer of Luke even reveals to us in Luke 1:2 that he was not an eyewitness, but that the story has been passed down to him.
C. Four where chosen by the church father Iraeneus because he believed the earth was founded on four pillars and so too, should the gospels be founded by only four accounts.
Iraenus also revealed the names of the Gospels in the late second century, without any reason to assume they where the authentic authors - no one knows who actually wrote them!
D. John was initially considered heretical by the early church because of its variation from the synoptic but was overwhelmingly popular amongst Christians and so was included.
E. The book of Revelations was also considered heretical by many :
For centuries The Revelation was a rejected book. In the 4th century, St.John Chrysostom and other bishops argued against it. Christians in Syria also reject it. The Synod of Laodicea: c. 363, rejected The Revelation. In the late 380s, Gregory of Nazianus produced a canon omitting The Revelation. Bishop Amphilocus of Iconium, in his poem Iambics for Seleucus written some time after 394, rejects The Revelation. When St.Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, producing the Vulgate bible c. 400, he argued for the Veritas Hebraica, meaning the truth of the Jewish Bible over the Septuagint translation. At the insistence of the Pope, however, he added existing translations for what he considered doubtful books: among them The Revelation. The Church in the East never included the Revelation.
4-) The early church did not seem to know anything about a historical Jesus. Huge amounts of disagreement over Jesus in the first hundred years :

1. Some churches didn’t even believe he had a physical body, prompting Paul to write about that very issue.
   
2. There was an enormous debate between all the major early churches as to whether Jesus was divine or not, this was settled at the council of Nicea by the Roman Emperor Constantine.
   

5-) Which Bible?
A. Over 450 English versions of the bible All are translated using different methods and from entirely different manuscripts
B. Thousands of manuscripts disagreeing with each other wildly in what verses and even books they contain.
C. Different translations teach entirely different things in places, some often leaving out entire chapters and verses or containing footnotes warning of possible error due to uncertainty about the reliability of the numerous manuscripts.
Take a look at this example, 1- Revised standard version 2- Revised standard version Catholic edition 3- NEW revised standard version Updated edition 4- NEW revised standard version Catholic edition 5- NEW revised standard version, Anglicised 6- NEW revised standard version, Anglicised Catholic edition
How many attempts would it take to finally get it right ?!
6-) The Morality of the bible
I don't like using Morality as an argument because i believe it's a subjective thing, But I cannot help but notice how the morals of the OT and the NT are completely contradictory
In the OT god was Angry, Vengeful, Demands war, order genocides, Ordered the killing of children and even the ripping open of pregnant women.
But in the NT he somehow became loving, a father figure, saying if anyone hits you you shouldn't even respond back.

• In Conclusion: I don't think Christianity can be accepted as the truth by any logical person (Even most convert stories i heard were basically "I saw jesus in a dream" or "The holy spirit held my hand")

There is so many Theological confusion, A salvation idea that makes 0 sense, Lack of any form of historical critirea of knowing what is true manuscripts and what is hearsays (The authors of the gospels are all Anynomous),
There is even disagreement within Christianity itself about what stories go into the bible (Many stories have been found out to be false like John 8:1-11 and Mark 16:18)
https://textandcanon.org/does-the-woman-caught-in-adultery-belong-in-the-bible/
The lack of consistency on literally everything makes it one of the least convincing religion in my opinion.

TW: discussion of ED Please note that this is my own (rambly) personal experience; I’m putting it out there in hopes it resonates with others. I am also not discussing any specifics of my ED.
Lately, I’ve become aware of the impact my Mothers shaming has had on my development. I (F19) recently started seeing someone, and they met my Mother. I’ve seen people in the past, but this is the first time that I genuinely feel there is good potential, and they were the one to ask to meet my Mother which I happily obliged too. At various intervals throughout their dialogue, my Mother put me down. It was nothing serious, but little comments; for example she had just come back from the supermarket and started unpacking. As she unpacked, she made comments along the lines of me eating most of it, and just generally being unhealthy. Now, the guy I’m seeing appeared unfazed by all this (which makes sense because why would he care about the exact foods I am eating) but I was deeply uncomfortable. I am now recovered but have a history of insecurity regarding food and body image, culminating in about 2 years of ana. This dialogue got me thinking about my Mothers propensity for putting me down around others.
Another recent example not related to body image is I’m interested in solo travelling, albeit just in the research stage. My Mother brings this up to most new people we meet in a negative light, even when it is completely irrelevant to the topics at stake.
This same kind of propensity occurred throughout when I had ana. She would brag to family members about her current diet, slim shakes, whatever she was taking, and within moments comment on the meal plan I was on in an attempt to recover.
When I had ana, other people’s perception of me was the worst part. I didn’t want to be perceived as skinnier, so much so I would wear baggy clothing and avoid situations such as sport where more revealing clothing would be required. I didn’t want people to be concerned; I was deeply insecure about taking up space in general. I believe she was frustrated with this; and drew attention to my issues in hopes that would make me get over them.
Thinking about this stuff made me go back further. To when little me, initially oblivious to my appearance, started covering up. And I thought about why that was. And I remember that my entire life, around strangers, she was always commenting something. When I was a kid and she’d joke about my arms being chubby. So I started wearing bomber jackets, even during summer, to cover up. I believe she was the biggest cause of my ED.
For as long as I can remember, when I am around strangers, or I am introducing my mother to new friends, she makes comments like this. Not just related to food, but generally small comments aimed at diminishing my presence. But, I notice that around old friends she doesn’t feel the need to act out in this way.
What all these things have in common is they are not so individually significant as to be abusive, but when they pile up they are exhausting. As a result, I was painfully shy as a kid in fear of being judged. For a long time I lived with so much internalised hatred of myself.
Looking at the big picture; it’s because of this behaviour I don’t unhealthily crave external validation. Unlike other friends whose parents brag about them and I notice fish for complements, I don’t feel the need to draw attention to myself in an excessive way. I am able to hold myself accountable and go after realistic goals. If I’m sick of tired I continue working hard (for better or worse). In the long run, I think it’s instilled me with resilience and a level headed outlook.
But I still struggle with introducing her to new people because of this. I’m aware that most people aren’t aware of my insecurities, and likely don’t pay attention to her comments. I also know that anyone truely right for me will see me well enough to know these comments are not a reflection of who I am.
I have this self awareness, but it doesn’t change that in the moment, her behaviour is exhausting. When I have confronted her about this in the past respectfully, I’ve been met with gaslighting and a complete lack of accountability on her part.
I apologise for the ranty nature of this all. In many ways saying it openly is therapeutic. I hope that if you’re in a similar situation you understand their behaviour is not a reflection of who you are; and those that care about you know that.

Potassium nitrate mix is one of the easiest ways, to make the chased influenced by a chemical that can be gaseous, in closed spaces.
Ever had a situation when you knew the chased was in the room, but you did not know where exactly? You know they are hiding in one of the corners, but which? If you search the wrong one, they will escape the room. You could wait outside, but you might not have the privilege to wait. So your best way is to make it harder for them to stay hidden or even just run. Druging them with gas is ideal.
Potassium nitrate is ideal for smoke bombs. An recepie is concluded down below in the post for a normal smoke bomb. Smoke bombs with potassium nitrate can be mixed with some compounds that are NOT from 16 or 1 group ( you will make an explosive possibly). Other than that , you might want to avoid group 2 as well. Other stuff should be safer. Use organic compounds and block d oxides for low hazard poisonous gasses. They should be alright. Examples of such stuff would benzene (aromatic groups are more hazardous for lungs than normal carbon chains) or CuO. Remember that elements with higher atomic number than Pb might stop cell mitosis and be harder to treat, so preferably don't use during practice anything higher than Pb. Such example is U which would be used in form of UO2. Smoke bombs should cover a good area, be visible ( so you can avoid the cloud) and stay in the air for long but short enough periods to clean up the room. later you can look for the chased if they don't go out or run. Don't lick the walls after such a smoke bomb. Remember to wait a minute or two after some clears., if you want to enter contaminated area. Wear safety googles and heat proof gloves when you make the product for safety.
Use responsibly.
So... If you want to be a Scrooge, you can make a fuse out of animal hair, wool or protein fibres. Do not use plant based stuff. It won't burn. You can also use bird guano to get potassium nitrate. But it takes some time, as it needs to be filtered out in hot water until you get crystals.
Recepie
Open your soup can, empty, and clean it out. Do not disregard the top. Mix together 3 parts potassium nitrate, and 2 parts granulated sugar. Bring your frying pan to a low heat and add your mixture from Step 2. Continue mixing with a plastic whisk until the powdered mixture fully liquefies. While waiting for the mixture to liquefy grab your soup can top, drill five circles an 1/8th of an inch in from the edge and one in the center. Pour the mixture into the soup can place the top of the soup can on top of the can. Insert your fuse through the center hole until it reaches the bottom, trim excess according to desired time to ignite. With the lid off allow 6-8 hours to fully harden. After the mixture has hardened put the can top back on threading the fuse through the center, and seal to the can with a 1/16th in bead of silicone.

"Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross?"

The main reason Jesus died on the cross was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory (e.g., Recapitulation, Moral Influence, etc.).
This understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. But, what exactly was Christ victorious from, and why? To find out the answers to these questions, we have to turn to the Old Testament, as that's what the apostles would often allude to in order to properly teach their audience the message they were trying to convey (Rom. 15:4).
The OT is full of conflict between the Father (YHVH) and false gods, between YHVH and cosmic forces of chaos. The Psalms speak of this conflict between YHVH and water monsters of the deeps (an ancient image for chaos) (Psa. 29:3-4; 74:10-14; 77:16, 19; 89:9-10; 104:2-9, etc).
The liberation of Israel from Egypt wasn’t just a conflict between Pharaoh and Moses. It was really between YHVH and the false gods of Egypt.
Regardless of whether you think the aforementioned descriptions are literal or metaphorical, the reality that the Old Testament describes is that humanity lived in a “cosmic war zone.”
The Christus Victor motif is about Christ reigning victorious over wicked principalities and Satan's kingdom, and is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came to drive out "the prince of this world” (John 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8), to “destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14) and to “put all enemies under his feet” (1 Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who held the world in bondage and worked with his Church to plunder his "palace" (Luke 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal, and to kill, and to destroy” the life YHVH intended for us (John 10:10). Jesus came and died on the cross to disarm “the principalities and powers” and make a “shew of them openly [i.e., public spectacle]” by “triumphing over them in [the cross]” (Col. 2:15).
Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaimed that Jesus in principle conquered all YHVH's enemies (Acts 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all YHVH’s opponents. (Psalm 110 is quoted or alluded to in Matthew 22:41-45; 26:64, Mark 12:35-37; 14:62, Luke 20:41-44; 22:69, Acts 5:31; 7:55-56, Romans 8:34, 1st Corinthians 15:22-25, Ephesians 1:20, Hebrews 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15, 17, 21; 8:1; 10:12-13, 1st Peter 3:22, and Revelation 3:21.) According to New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.”
Because of man's rebellion, the Messiah's coming involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness.
Since YHVH is a God of love who gives genuine “say-so” to both angels and humans, YHVH rarely accomplishes His providential plans through coercion. YHVH relies on His infinite wisdom to achieve His goals. Nowhere is YHVH's wisdom put more on display than in the manner in which He outsmarted Satan and the powers of evil, using their own evil to bring about their defeat.
Most readers probably know the famous story from ancient Greece about the Trojan Horse. To recap the story, Troy and Greece had been locked in a ten-year-long vicious war when, according to Homer and Virgil, the Greeks came up with a brilliant idea. They built an enormous wooden horse, hid soldiers inside and offered it to the Trojans as a gift, claiming they were conceding defeat and going home. The delighted Trojans accepted the gift and proceeded to celebrate by drinking themselves into a drunken stupor. When night came and the Trojan warriors were too wasted to fight, the Greeks exited the horse, unlocked the city gates to quietly let all their compatriots in, and easily conquered the city, thus winning the war.
Historians debate whether any of this actually happened. But either way, as military strategies go, it’s brilliant.
Now, there are five clues in the New Testament that suggest YHVH was using something like this Trojan Horse strategy against the powers when he sent Jesus into the world:
1) The Bible tells us that YHVH's victory over the powers of darkness was achieved by the employment of YHVH’s wisdom, and was centered on that wisdom having become reality in Jesus Christ (Rom. 16:25, 1 Cor. 2:7, Eph. 3:9-10, Col. 1:26). It also tells us that, for some reason, this Christ-centered wisdom was kept “secret and hidden” throughout the ages. It’s clear from this that YHVH's strategy was to outsmart and surprise the powers by sending Jesus.
2) While humans don’t generally know Jesus’ true identity during his ministry, demons do. They recognize Jesus as the Son of God, the Messiah, but, interestingly enough, they have no idea what he’s doing (Mark 1:24; 3:11; 5:7, Luke 8:21). Again, the wisdom of YHVH in sending Jesus was hidden from them.
3) We’re told that, while humans certainly share in the responsibility for the crucifixion, Satan and the powers were working behind the scenes to bring it about (John 13:27 cf. 1 Cor. 2:6-8). These forces of evil helped orchestrate the crucifixion.
4) We’re taught that if the “princes of this world [age]” had understood the secret wisdom of YHVH, “they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor 2:8 cf. vss 6-7). Apparently, Satan and the powers regretted orchestrating Christ’s crucifixion once they learned of the wisdom of YHVH that was behind it.
5) Finally, we can begin to understand why the powers came to regret crucifying “the Lord of glory” when we read that it was by means of the crucifixion that the “handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us [i.e., the charge of our legal indebtedness]” was “[taken] out of the way [i.e., canceled]” as the powers were disarmed. In this way Christ “triumph[ed] over” the powers by "his cross” and even “made a shew of them openly” (Col. 2:14-15). Through Christ’s death and resurrection YHVH's enemies were vanquished and placed under his Messiah's feet, and ultimately His own in the end (1 Cor. 15:23-28).
Putting these five clues together, we can discern YHVH's Trojan Horse strategy in sending Jesus.
The powers couldn’t discern why Jesus came because YHVH's wisdom was hidden from them. YHVH's wisdom was motivated by unfathomable love, and since Satan and the other powers were evil, they lacked the capacity to understand it. Their evil hearts prevented them from suspecting what YHVH was up to.
What the powers did understand was that Jesus was mortal. This meant he was killable. Lacking the capacity to understand that this was the means by which YHVH would ultimately bring about the defeat of death (and thus, pave the road for the resurrection itself), they never suspected that making Jesus vulnerable to their evil might actually be part of YHVH's infinitely wise plan.
And so they took the bait (or "ransom"; Matt. 20:28, Mark 10:45, 1 Tim. 2:5-6). Utilizing Judas and other willing human agents, the powers played right into YHVH’s secret plan and orchestrated the crucifixion of the Messiah (Acts 2:22-23; 4:28). YHVH thus brilliantly used the self-inflicted incapacity of evil to understand love against itself. And, like light dispelling darkness, the unfathomably beautiful act of YHVH's love in sending the willing Messiah as a "ransom" to these blood-thirsty powers defeated them. The whole creation was in principle freed and reconciled to YHVH, while everything written against us humans was nailed to the cross, thus robbing the powers of the only legal claim they had on us. They were “spoiled [i.e., disempowered]” (Col. 2:14-15).
As happened to the Trojans in accepting the gift from the Greeks, in seizing on Christ’s vulnerability and orchestrating his crucifixion, the powers unwittingly cooperated with YHVH to unleash the one power in the world that dispels all evil and sets captives free. It’s the power of self-sacrificial love.

Why Penal Substitution Is Unbiblical

For the sake of keeping this already lengthy post as short as possible I'm not going to spend too much time on why exactly PSA (Penal Substitutionary Atonement) is inconsistent with Scripture, but I'll go ahead and point out the main reasons why I believe this is so, and let the reader look further into this subject by themselves, being that there are many resources out there which have devoted much more time than I ever could here in supporting this premise.

"Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:"-1 Corinthians 5:7

The Passover is one of the two most prominent images in the New Testament given as a comparison to Christ's atonement and what it accomplished, (the other most common image being the Day of Atonement sacrifice).
In the Passover, the blood of the lamb on the door posts of the Hebrews in the book of Exodus was meant to mark out those who were YHVH's, not be a symbol of PSA, as the lamb itself was not being punished by God in place of the Hebrews, but rather the kingdom of Egypt (and thus, allegorically speaking, the kingdom of darkness which opposed YHVH) was what was being judged and punished, because those who were not "covered" by the blood of the lamb could be easily identified as not part of God's kingdom/covenant and liberated people.
Looking at the Day of Atonement sacrifice (which, again, Christ's death is repeatedly compared to throughout the New Testament), this ritual required a ram, a bull, and two goats (Lev. 16:3-5). The ram was for a burnt offering intended to please God (Lev. 16:3-4). The bull served as a sin offering for Aaron, the high priest, and his family. In this case, the sin offering restored the priest to ritual purity, allowing him to occupy sacred space and be near YHVH’s presence. Two goats taken from "the congregation” were needed for the single sin offering for the people (Lev. 16:5). So why two goats?
The high priest would cast lots over the two goats, with one chosen as a sacrifice “for the Lord” (Lev. 16:8). The blood of that goat would purify the people. The second goat was not sacrificed or designated “for the Lord.” On the contrary, this goat—the one that symbolically carried the sins away from the camp of Israel into the wilderness—was “for Azazel” (Lev. 16:8-10).
What—or who—is Azazel?
The Hebrew term azazel (עזאזל) occurs four times in Leviticus 16 but nowhere else in most people's canon of the Bible, (and I say "most people's canon," because some people do include 1 Enoch in their canon of Scripture, which of course goes into great detail about this "Azazel" figure). Many translations prefer to translate the term as a phrase, “the goat that goes away,” which is the same idea conveyed in the King James Version’s “scapegoat.” Other translations treat the word as a name: Azazel. The “scapegoat” option is possible, but since the phrase “for Azazel” parallels the phrase “for YHVH” (“for the Lord”), the wording suggests that two divine figures are being contrasted by the two goats.
A strong case can be made for translating the term as the name Azazel. Ancient Jewish texts show that Azazel was understood as a demonic figure associated with the wilderness. The Mishnah (ca. AD 200; Yoma 6:6) records that the goat for Azazel was led to a cliff and pushed over, ensuring it would not return with its death. This association of the wilderness with evil is also evident in the New Testament, as this was where Jesus met the devil (Matt. 4:1). Also, in Leviticus 17:1-7 we learn that some Israelites had been accustomed to sacrificing offerings to "devils" (alternatively translated as “goat demons”). The Day of Atonement replaced this illegitimate practice.
The second goat was not sent into the wilderness as a sacrifice to a foreign god or demon. The act of sending the live goat out into the wilderness, which was unholy ground, was to send the sins of the people where they belonged—to the demonic domain. With one goat sacrificed to bring purification and access to YHVH and one goat sent to carry the people’s sins to the demonic domain, this annual ritual reinforced the identity of the true God and His mercy and holiness.
When Jesus died on the cross for all of humanity’s sins, he was crucified outside the city, paralleling the sins of the people being cast to the wilderness via the goat to Azazel. Jesus died once for all sinners, negating the need for this ritual.
As previously stated, the goat which had all the sin put on it was sent alive off to the wilderness, while the blood of the goat which was blameless was used to purify the temple and the people. Penal substitution would necessitate the killing of the goat which had the sin put on it.
Mind you, this is the only sacrificial ritual of any kind in the Torah in which sins are placed on an animal. The only time it happens is this, and that animal is not sacrificed. Most PSA proponents unwittingly point to this ritual as evidence of their view, despite it actually serving as evidence to the contrary, because most people don't read their Old Testament and don't familiarize themselves with the "boring parts" like Leviticus (when it's actually rather important to do so, since that book explains how exactly animal offerings were to be carried out and why they were done in the first place).
In the New Testament, Christ's blood was not only meant to mark out those who were his, but also expel the presence of sin and ritual uncleanness so as to make the presence of YHVH manifest in the believer's life. Notice how God's wrath isn't poured out on Christ in our stead on this view, but rather His wrath was poured out on those who weren't covered, and the presence of sin and evil were merely removed by that which is pure and blameless (Christ's blood) for the believer.
All this is the difference between expiation and propitiation.

The Content of Paul's Gospel Message

When the New Testament writers talked about “the gospel,” they referred not to the Protestant doctrine of justification sola fide–the proposition that if we will stop trying to win God’s favor and only just believe that God has exchanged our sin for Christ’s perfect righteousness, then in God’s eyes we will have the perfect righteousness required both for salvation and for assuaging our guilty consciences–but rather they referred to the simple but explosive proposition Kyrios Christos, “Christ is Lord.” That is to say, the gospel was, properly speaking, the royal announcement that Jesus of Nazareth was the God of Israel’s promised Messiah, the King of kings and Lord of lords.
The New Testament writers were not writing in a cultural or linguistic vacuum and their language of euangelion (good news) and euangelizomai would have been understood by their audience in fairly specific ways. Namely, in the Greco-Roman world for which the New Testament authors wrote, euangelion/euangelizomai language typically had to do with either A) the announcement of the accession of a ruler, or B) the announcement of a victory in battle, and would probably have been understood along those lines.
Let’s take the announcements of a new ruler first. The classic example of such a language is the Priene Calendar Inscription, dating to circa 9 BC, which celebrates the rule (and birthday) of Caesar Augustus as follows:
"It was seeming to the Greeks in Asia, in the opinion of the high priest Apollonius of Menophilus Azanitus: Since Providence, which has ordered all things of our life and is very much interested in our life, has ordered things in sending Augustus, whom she filled with virtue for the benefit of men, sending him as a savior [soter] both for us and for those after us, him who would end war and order all things, and since Caesar by his appearance [epiphanein] surpassed the hopes of all those who received the good tidings [euangelia], not only those who were benefactors before him, but even the hope among those who will be left afterward, and the birthday of the god [he genethlios tou theou] was for the world the beginning of the good tidings [euangelion] through him; and Asia resolved it in Smyrna."
The association of the term euangelion with the announcement of Augustus’ rule is clear enough and is typical of how this language is used elsewhere. To give another example, Josephus records that at the news of the accession of the new emperor Vespasian (69 AD) “every city kept festival for the good news (euangelia) and offered sacrifices on his behalf.” (The Jewish War, IV.618). Finally, a papyrus dating to ca. 498 AD begins:
"Since I have become aware of the good news (euangeliou) about the proclamation as Caesar (of Gaius Julius Verus Maximus Augustus)…"
This usage occurs also in the Septuagint, the Greek translations of the Jewish Scriptures. For instance LXX Isaiah 52:7 reads, “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news (euangelizomenou), who publishes peace, who brings good news (euangelizomenos) of salvation, who says to Zion, ‘Your God reigns.'" Similarly, LXX Isaiah 40:9-10 reads:

"…Go up on a high mountain, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos) to Sion; lift up your voice with strength, you who bring good tidings (ho euangelizomenos); lift it up, do not fear; say to the cities of Ioudas, “See your God!” Behold, the Lord comes with strength, and his arm with authority (kyrieias)…."-NETS, Esaias 40:9-10

This consistent close connection between euangelion/euangelizomai language and announcements of rule strongly suggests that many of the initial hearers/readers of the early Christians’ evangelical language would likely have understood that language as the announcement of a new ruler (see, e.g., Acts 17:7), and, unless there is strong NT evidence to the contrary, we should presume that the NT writers probably intended their language to be so understood.
However, the other main way in which euangelion/euangelizomai language was used in the Greco-Roman world was with reference to battle reports, announcements of victory in war. A classic example of this sort of usage can be found in LXX 2 Samuel 18:19ff, where David receives word that his traitorous son, Absalom, has been defeated in battle. Euangelion/euangelizomai is used throughout the passage for the communications from the front.
As already shown throughout this post, the NT speaks of Jesus’s death and resurrection as a great victory over the powers that existed at that time and, most importantly, over death itself. Jesus’ conquest of the principalities and powers was the establishment of his rule and comprehensive authority over heaven and earth, that is, of his Lordship over all things (again, at that time).
This was the content of Paul's gospel message...

Justification, and the "New" Perspective on Paul

The following quotation is from The Gospel Coalition, and I believe it to be a decently accurate summary of the NPP (New Perspective on Paul), despite it being from a source which is in opposition to it:

The New Perspective on Paul, a major scholarly shift that began in the 1980s, argues that the Jewish context of the New Testament has been wrongly understood and that this misunderstand[ing] has led to errors in the traditional-Protestant understanding of justification. According to the New Perspective, the Jewish systems of salvation were not based on works-righteousness but rather on covenantal nomism, the belief that one enters the people of God by grace and stays in through obedience to the covenant. This means that Paul could not have been referring to works-righteousness by his phrase “works of the law”; instead, he was referring to Jewish boundary markers that made clear who was or was not within the people of God. For the New Perspective, this is the issue that Paul opposes in the NT. Thus, justification takes on two aspects for the New Perspective rather than one; initial justification is by faith (grace) and recognizes covenant status (ecclesiology), while final justification is partially by works, albeit works produced by the Spirit.

I believe what's called the "new perspective" is actually rather old, and that the Reformers' view of Paul is what is truly new, being that the Lutheran understanding of Paul is simply not Biblical.
The Reformation perspective understands Paul to be arguing against a legalistic Jewish culture that seeks to earn their salvation through works. However, supporters of the NPP argue that Paul has been misread. We contend he was actually combating Jews who were boasting because they were God's people, the "elect" or the "chosen ones." Their "works," so to speak, were done to show they were God's covenant people and not to earn their salvation.
The key questions involve Paul’s view(s) of the law and the meaning of the controversy in which Paul was engaged. Paul strongly argued that we are “justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law” (Gal. 2:16b). Since the time of Martin Luther, this has been understood as an indictment of legalistic efforts to merit favor before God. Judaism was cast in the role of the medieval "church," and so Paul’s protests became very Lutheran, with traditional-Protestant theology reinforced in all its particulars (along with its limitations) as a result. In hermeneutical terms, then, the historical context of Paul’s debate will answer the questions we have about what exactly the apostle meant by the phrase "works of the law," along with other phrases often used as support by the Reformers for their doctrine of Sola Fide (justification by faith alone), like when Paul mentions "the righteousness of God."
Obviously an in-depth analysis of the Pauline corpus and its place in the context of first-century Judaism would take us far beyond the scope of this brief post. We can, however, quickly survey the topography of Paul’s thought in context, particularly as it has emerged through the efforts of recent scholarship, and note some salient points which may be used as the basis of a refurbished soteriology.
[Note: The more popular scholars associated with the NPP are E.P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N.T. Wright. Dunn was the first to coin the term "The New Perspective" in a 1983 Manson Memorial Lecture, The New Perspective on Paul and the Law.]
Varying authors since the early 1900's have brought up the charge that Paul was misread by those in the tradition of Martin Luther and other Protestant Reformers. Yet, it wasn't until E.P. Sanders' 1977 book, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, that scholars began to pay much attention to the issue. In his book, Sanders argues that the Judaism of Paul's day has been wrongly criticized as a religion of "works-salvation" by those in the Protestant tradition.
A fundamental premise in the NPP is that Judaism was actually a religion of grace. Sander's puts it clearly:
"On the point at which many have found the decisive contrast between Paul and Judaism - grace and works - Paul is in agreement with Palestinian Judaism... Salvation is by grace but judgment is according to works'...God saves by grace, but... within the framework established by grace he rewards good deeds and punishes transgression." (Paul and Palestinian Judaism, p. 543)
N.T. Wright adds that, "we have misjudged early Judaism, especially Pharisaism, if we have thought of it as an early version of Pelagianism," (Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, p. 32).
Sanders has coined a now well-known phrase to describe the character of first-century Palestinian Judaism: “covenantal nomism.” The meaning of “covenantal nomism” is that human obedience is not construed as the means of entering into God’s covenant. That cannot be earned; inclusion within the covenant body is by the grace of God. Rather, obedience is the means of maintaining one’s status within the covenant. And with its emphasis on divine grace and forgiveness, Judaism was never a religion of legalism.
If covenantal nomism was operating as the primary category under which Jews understood the Law, then when Jews spoke of obeying commandments, or when they required strict obedience of themselves and fellow Jews, it was because they were "keeping the covenant," rather than out of legalism.
More recently, N.T. Wright has made a significant contribution in his little book, What Saint Paul Really Said. Wright’s focus is the gospel and the doctrine of justification. With incisive clarity he demonstrates that the core of Paul’s gospel was not justification by faith, but the death and resurrection of Christ and his exaltation as Lord. The proclamation of the gospel was the proclamation of Jesus as Lord, the Messiah who fulfilled Israel’s expectations. Romans 1:3-4, not 1:16-17, is the gospel, contrary to traditional thinking. Justification is not the center of Paul’s thought, but an outworking of it:
"[T]he doctrine of justification by faith is not what Paul means by ‘the gospel’. It is implied by the gospel; when the gospel is proclaimed, people come to faith and so are regarded by God as members of his people. But ‘the gospel’ is not an account of how people get saved. It is, as we saw in an earlier chapter, the proclamation of the lordship of Jesus Christ….Let us be quite clear. ‘The gospel’ is the announcement of Jesus’ lordship, which works with power to bring people into the family of Abraham, now redefined around Jesus Christ and characterized solely by faith in him. ‘Justification’ is the doctrine which insists that all those who have this faith belong as full members of this family, on this basis and no other." (pp. 132, 133)
Wright brings us to this point by showing what “justification” would have meant in Paul’s Jewish context, bound up as it was in law-court terminology, eschatology, and God’s faithfulness to God’s covenant.
Specifically, Wright explodes the myth that the pre-Christian Saul was a pious, proto-Pelagian moralist seeking to earn his individual passage into heaven. Wright capitalizes on Paul’s autobiographical confessions to paint rather a picture of a zealous Jewish nationalist whose driving concern was to cleanse Israel of Gentiles as well as Jews who had lax attitudes toward the Torah. Running the risk of anachronism, Wright points to a contemporary version of the pre-Christian Saul: Yigal Amir, the zealous Torah-loyal Jew who assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for exchanging Israel’s land for peace. Wright writes:
"Jews like Saul of Tarsus were not interested in an abstract, ahistorical system of salvation... They were interested in the salvation which, they believed, the one true God had promised to his people Israel." (pp. 32, 33)
Wright maintains that as a Christian, Paul continued to challenge paganism by taking the moral high ground of the creational monotheist. The doctrine of justification was not what Paul preached to the Gentiles as the main thrust of his gospel message; it was rather “the thing his converts most needed to know in order to be assured that they really were part of God’s people” after they had responded to the gospel message.
Even while taking the gospel to the Gentiles, however, Paul continued to criticize Judaism “from within” even as he had as a zealous Pharisee. But whereas his mission before was to root out those with lax attitudes toward the Torah, now his mission was to demonstrate that God’s covenant faithfulness (righteousness) has already been revealed in Jesus Christ.
At this point Wright carefully documents Paul’s use of the controversial phrase “God’s righteousness” and draws out the implications of his meaning against the background of a Jewish concept of justification. The righteousness of God and the righteousness of the party who is “justified” cannot be confused because the term bears different connotations for the judge than for the plaintiff or defendant. The judge is “righteous” if his or her judgment is fair and impartial; the plaintiff or defendant is “righteous” if the judge rules in his or her favor. Hence:
"If we use the language of the law court, it makes no sense whatsoever to say that the judge imputes, imparts, bequeaths, conveys or otherwise transfers his righteousness to either the plaintiff or the defendant. Righteousness is not an object, a substance or a gas which can be passed across the courtroom. For the judge to be righteous does not mean that the court has found in his favor. For the plaintiff or defendant to be righteous does not mean that he or she has tried the case properly or impartially. To imagine the defendant somehow receiving the judge’s righteousness is simply a category mistake. That is not how the language works." (p. 98)
However, Wright makes the important observation that even with the forensic metaphor, Paul’s theology is not so much about the courtroom as it is about God’s love.
Righteousness is not an impersonal, abstract standard, a measuring-stick or a balancing scale. That was, and still is, a Greek view. Righteousness, Biblically speaking, grows out of covenant relationship. We forgive because we have been forgiven (Matt. 18:21-35); “we love" because God “first loved us” (1 John 4:19). Love is the fulfillment of the law (Rom. 13:8, 10, Gal 5:14, Jam. 2:8). Paul even looked forward to a day when “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; 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. 5:10), and he acknowledged that his clear conscience did not necessarily ensure this verdict (1 Cor. 4:4), but he was confident nevertheless. Paul did in fact testify of his clear conscience: “For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation [i.e., behavior] in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward” (2 Cor. 1:12). He was aware that he had not yet “attained” (Phil. 3:12-14), that he still struggled with the flesh, yet he was confident of the value of his performance (1 Cor. 9:27). These are hardly the convictions of someone who intends to rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed to his or her account.
Wright went on to flesh out the doctrine of justification in Galatians, Philippians, and Romans. The “works of the law” are not proto-Pelagian efforts to earn salvation, but rather “sabbath [keeping], food-laws, circumcision” (p. 132). Considering the controversy in Galatia, Wright writes:
"Despite a long tradition to the contrary, the problem Paul addresses in Galatians is not the question of how precisely someone becomes a Christian, or attains to a relationship with God….The problem he addresses is: should his ex-pagan converts be circumcised or not? Now this question is by no means obviously to do with the questions faced by Augustine and Pelagius, or by Luther and Erasmus. On anyone’s reading, but especially within its first-century context, it has to do quite obviously with the question of how you define the people of God: are they to be defined by the badges of Jewish race, or in some other way? Circumcision is not a ‘moral’ issue; it does not have to do with moral effort, or earning salvation by good deeds. Nor can we simply treat it as a religious ritual, then designate all religious ritual as crypto-Pelagian good works, and so smuggle Pelagius into Galatia as the arch-opponent after all. First-century thought, both Jewish and Christian, simply doesn’t work like that…. [T]he polemic against the Torah in Galatians simply will not work if we ‘translate’ it into polemic either against straightforward self-help moralism or against the more subtle snare of ‘legalism’, as some have suggested. The passages about the law only work — and by ‘work’ I mean they will only make full sense in their contexts, which is what counts in the last analysis — when we take them as references to the Jewish law, the Torah, seen as the national charter of the Jewish race." (pp. 120-122)
The debate about justification, then, “wasn’t so much about soteriology as about ecclesiology; not so much about salvation as about the church.” (p. 119)
To summarize the theology of Paul in his epistles, the apostle mainly spent time arguing to those whom he were sending letters that salvation in Christ was available to all men without distinction. Jews and Gentiles alike may accept the free gift; it was not limited to any one group. Paul was vehement about this, especially in his letter to the Romans. As such, I will finish this post off by summarizing the letter itself, so as to provide Biblical support for the premises of the NPP and for what the scholars I referenced have thus far argued.
After his introduction in the epistle to an already believing and mostly Gentile audience (who would've already been familiar with the gospel proclaimed in verses 3-4), Paul makes a thematic statement in 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” This statement is just one of many key statements littered throughout the book of Romans that give us proper understanding of the point Paul wished to make to the interlocutors of his day, namely, salvation is available to all, whether Jew or Gentile.
In 1:16 Paul sets out a basic theme of his message in the letter to the Romans. All who believed, whether they be Jew or Gentile, were saved by the power of the gospel. The universal nature of salvation was explicitly stated. The gospel saved all without distinction, whether Jew or Greek; salvation was through the gospel of Jesus Christ. Immediately after this thematic declaration, Paul undertakes to show the universal nature of sin and guilt. In 1:18-32 Paul shows how the Gentile is guilty before God. Despite evidence of God and his attributes, which is readily available to all, they have failed to honor YHVH as God and have exchanged His glory for idolatrous worship and self-promotion. As a consequence, God handed them over in judgment (1:18-32). Paul moves to denunciation of those who would judge others while themselves being guilty of the very same offenses (2:1-5) and argues that all will be judged according to their deeds (2:6). This judgment applies to all, namely, Jew and Greek (2:9-10). This section serves as somewhat of a transition in Paul’s argument. He has highlighted the guilt of the Gentiles (1:18ff) and will shortly outline the guilt of the Jew (2:17-24). The universal statement of 2:1-11 sets the stage for Paul’s rebuke of Jewish presumption. It was not possession of the Law which delivered; it was faithful obedience. It is better to have no Law and yet to obey the essence of the Law (2:12-16) than to have the Law and not obey (2:17-3:4). Paul then defends the justice of God’s judgment (3:5-8), which leads to the conclusion that all (Jew and Gentile) are guilty before God (3:9).
Paul argues that it was a mistaken notion to think that salvation was the prerogative of the Jew only. This presumption is wrong for two reasons. First, it leads to the mistaken assumption that only Jews were eligible for this vindication (Paul deals with this misunderstanding in chapter 4 where he demonstrates that Abraham was justified by faith independently of the Law and is therefore the father of all who believe, Jew and Gentile alike). Second, it leads to the equally mistaken conclusion that all who were Jews are guaranteed of vindication. Paul demonstrates how this perspective, which would call God’s integrity into question since Paul was assuming many Jews would not experience this vindication, was misguided. He did this by demonstrating that it was never the case that all physical descendants of Israel (Jacob) were likewise recipients of the promise. In the past (9:6-33) as in the present (at that time; 11:1-10), only a remnant was preserved and only a remnant would experience vindication. Paul also argued that the unbelief of national Israel (the non-remnant) had the purpose of extending the compass of salvation. The unbelief of one group made the universal scope of the gospel possible. This universalism was itself intended to bring about the vindication of the unbelieving group (11:11-16). As a result of faith, all (Jew and Gentile) could be branches of the olive tree (11:17-24). Since faith in Christ was necessary to remain grafted into the tree, no one could boast of his position. All, Jew and Gentile alike, were dependent upon the mercy and grace of God. As a result of God’s mysterious plan, He would bring about the vindication of His people (11:25-27). [Note: It is this author's belief that this vindication occurred around 66-70 AD, with the Parousia of Christ's Church; this author is Full-Preterist in their Eschatology.]

I went through a journey during the past six months that helped me explore a part of myself that I did not know. I feel that I have changed radically since I started following it (I am 17, but I feel that I have become more mature than other adults).
At first I didn't know about Grimes, but I was an obsessive, worshipful Elon Musk fan, interested in his daily habits like working 12 hours and sleeping 7 hours a day (which he lied about), and I stuck my nose into his personal life (like an obsessive K-Pop fan ), I found that most of his previous women were attractive (blonde and very traditional attractiveness) except for Grimes, who I found ugly and witch-like in their first appearance on the Met Gala, so I decided to search for her more (and it was the best work I did in my life), I was I was worried about this woman. I felt that she was a Freemason and belonged to the Illuminati (because of her strange clothes and her album covers) or that she was a witch and cast black magic spells in her songs to enchant her audience and kill them, and I was very afraid.
I had a strange feeling for her and went to her YouTube channel and listened to Oblivion and it seemed like a bad and ugly song the first time (I mean, my taste is bad) and I said to myself that I would never listen to any of her songs again since Oblivion was the most viewed song and I didn't like it (my view was superficial and ridiculous), I went to reddit and found that her fans were praising her playing. I was amazed to know that she produces her own music and melodies unlike other pop stars like Selena or Taylor. I listened to Oblivion again and this time focused on the vocal tracks and Then I listened to Genesis and it sounded like a fortune teller or something like that. I then listened to all of her songs and went to translate them. I was amazed that they did not contain the words of a prostitute girl and cursing, and she rarely sings about love. I was interested in her from that moment on and it went. To watch all of her interviews she seemed so spontaneous and unconventional. I loved that she expressed her political opinions even on unrelated topics (like her talk about challenging societal norms of diet and weight and her controversial talk about being a vegetarian and eating hot dogs). Teens and Kids benefit from interviewing her (even about preferences) unlike other celebrities whose interviews are mostly a waste of time.
I stopped by to watch her other interview with Lex Friedman, found it helpful except for a few points (I wrote down every word she said in the interview in a notebook) and bought those books she recommended like the "Culture Series" and even watched the anime "Totoro" which she recommended for kids. I used to watch podcasts about famous singers and almost the same thing is repeated by most of them and there is no value learned, but for me every interview with Grimes is a big change for my personality.
I finished all of her interviews and went to follow all of her accounts, and I was surprised that she responded to comments (such as her response to a comment about makeup) because I was accustomed to the culture of celebrities who leave thousands of comments without responding. I also compared the comments, as the comments of celebrities are frequent (such as: I love you (You're beautiful, you're sexy, heart and rose emojis...) and the comments on the grimes account are full of mature and creative people and I loved her interactions with fans and the awkward things like her talking to the grimes AI (which they designed to be immortal grimes...), and her tweets Regarding preferences about anime and manga, and her crazy looks that show her asymmetrical artistic body, her embarrassing interviews, and her big nose, all the way to her foolish and controversial opinions, although I do not like many of the stupid things that she says, but I love her frank personality without apology, she says Things she knows lead to her being hated, unlike other stars who flatter and pretend to be nice and kind to get as many obsessed fans as possible.
I've changed a lot during the 6 months I spent looking at anything related to grimes. I've become more confident in myself. Well, I hate something called self-confidence. I'll replace it with: "I've become more embarrassed." I used to be shy about revealing that I'm an otaku, and now I am... I became more frank and more open to declaring the world I had created inside my imagination - Vikings, cards, and science fiction. I became less anxious and considered my very thin, asymmetrical yellow body to be an unconventional standard of beauty. I became open to different cultures, ancient civilizations, and ancient poetry. And history, and I invented unique hair colors instead of blonde, and made my body and face a guinea pig for crazy tricks with liquid eyeliner. They also became more accepting of my damned embarrassing personality instead of searching for silly videos about increasing self-confidence and a strong personality that attracts men. I was obsessed with Elon Musk, but after I learned about his crazy relationship with Grimes, I learned that he is just a fat, narcissistic, sadistic child, and billionaires should not be taken as an example.
I'm not a huge fan of grimes but she is an interesting person and anyone who is trapped in the shell of being obsessed with Taylor Swift (but not limited to) should know about grimes

Believe it or not, offshore bookkeeping offers more than just a scenic backdrop. In today's global economy, businesses are setting sail towards offshore solutions for their financial needs, and the advantages are as vast as the open sea. Therefore, it is essential to know how it can help you achieve your financial goals in life.

Offshore Bookkeeping: What's the Buzz About?

Offshore bookkeeping is when you hire a team in another country to handle your financial record-keeping tasks. Some people might worry about sending financial data abroad, but the benefits often outweigh any concerns.

1. Cost Efficiency

One of the biggest perks of offshore bookkeeping is cost savings. Thus, outsourcing your bookkeeping services to countries with lower labor costs, you can significantly reduce your expenses. It’s like getting top-notch financial assistance without breaking the bank. Here are some sample scenarios:

• Labor Cost Savings. For example, a small consulting firm in Australia can save money by outsourcing bookkeeping to countries like India or the Philippines, where labor costs are lower.
• Reduced Overhead Costs. Offshore outsourcing minimises overhead costs associated with in-house staff, such as office space, equipment, and benefits.
• Access to Specialised Expertise at Lower Costs. Offshore firms provide access to specialised expertise in accounting and specific industries at a fraction of the cost of hiring locally.
• Scalability without Increasing Costs. Offshore bookkeeping allows businesses to scale services according to their needs without incurring additional costs.
• Risk Mitigation. Diversifying service providers geographically reduces the risk of disruptions due to local issues, ensuring continuity in bookkeeping operations.

2. Time Savings

Outsourcing your bookkeeping tasks frees up your time to focus on core business activities. Instead of drowning in spreadsheets and receipts, you can invest your time and energy into growing your business. Therefore, offshore bookkeeping helps you work smarter, not harder.

3. Access to Expertise

When you opt for offshore bookkeeping, you gain access to a pool of skilled professionals who specialise in handling financial matters. These experts are well-versed in the latest accounting standards and technologies, ensuring accurate and efficient bookkeeping help for your business.

4. Scalability

As your business grows, so do your bookkeeping needs. Offshore bookkeeping provides scalability that allows you to expand or scale back your services according to your requirements. Whether you need help with day-to-day transactions or year-end financial reports, offshore bookkeeping has you covered.

5. Enhanced Data Security

Concerned about data security? Offshore bookkeeping firms understand the importance of safeguarding your financial information. They implement robust security measures to protect your data from unauthorised access and cyber threats, giving you peace of mind.

6. Flexibility

Offshore bookkeeping offers flexibility in terms of service options. Whether you need full-time support or occasional assistance, you can customise your bookkeeping services to suit your business needs. It’s like having a financial team that adapts to your schedule, not the other way around.

7. Focus on Core Competencies

By outsourcing your bookkeeping tasks, you can focus on what you do best—running your business. Leave the number crunching to the experts while you concentrate on delivering value to your customers and driving growth.

Offshore Bookkeeping with Alli Accounting

Remeber, offshore bookkeeping isn’t just a trend; it’s a strategic move for businesses looking to streamline their financial operations. With cost savings, time efficiency, access to expertise, and enhanced security, offshore bookkeeping offers a plethora of benefits. So why not explore this option and give your business the bookkeeping help it deserves?
Offshore bookkeeping with Alli Accounting provides businesses with a reliable solution to manage their finances efficiently while reducing operational costs. Our team of experienced professionals ensures accurate recording of financial transactions, including accounts payable and receivable, payroll, and general ledger entries. Reach out to us to learn more!
Believe it or not, offshore bookkeeping offers more than just a scenic backdrop. In today's global economy, businesses are setting sail towards offshore solutions for their financial needs, and the advantages are as vast as the open sea. Therefore, it is essential to know how it can help you achieve your financial goals in life.

Offshore Bookkeeping: What's the Buzz About?

Offshore bookkeeping is when you hire a team in another country to handle your financial record-keeping tasks. Some people might worry about sending financial data abroad, but the benefits often outweigh any concerns.

The Scriptures seem to imply that the kingdom of God isn't exactly synonymous with what is called "the Church." The Church was a temporary eschatological community of believers that existed on earth in preparation of a kingdom where God Himself would reign, and said community had Christ reign over them in the meantime. The head of the Church was Christ, with the Father serving as his head (1 Cor. 11:3). The Scriptures teach that, when all Christ's enemies were to be made his footstool, he was to give back all authority to the Father (Psa. 110:1, 1 Cor. 15:22-28), and it is this page's belief that this happened in 70 AD.
The following quotation is from the above hyperlink:

As for the "1000 years" mentioned in Revelation, they are apocalyptic metaphor for the 40 years Christ "reigned" (triumphed) over his enemies both human and spirit, with the final triumph being the judgement of apostate Jerusalem. The "1000 years" began with his ascension, and ended with this judgement.

Thus, the community to replace the Church on earth was to be the kingdom of God. But, what even is the kingdom of God, and why did God have to reclaim authority of His own creation in the first place?
To be as succinct as possible: man sinned, and so the great level of authority God initially granted us ourselves over the creation was stripped. As a result, the human condition has suffered and it must be redeemed for God to allow us to reign with Him in the way that He originally intended for us. God has always been sovereign, of course, but He seeks the good of man to make us stewards over His world with Him, as that was His original plan and this was His original view of what a kingdom of His truly looks like: a kingdom characterized by man's love for Him and love for others.
A Biblical understanding of Adam's sin, contrary to popular thought, isn't that we are guilty of what he did personally. We simply inherit his fallen nature and a fallen world as a result of his sin, the same way a baby could leave the womb already addicted to certain substances because the mother abused said substances while pregnant. It's not the baby's fault for its condition, it was the parent's. But the baby is born with this condition and enters the world like this nonetheless.
The implication of this is that we are all only guilty of our own sins, and whether or not we ever seek to treat (or possibly cure) our condition in the first place is on us. We were dealt a bad hand due to Adam, sure, but God doesn't hold us responsible for what our forefather did. God only holds us responsible for what we do, and whether or not we seek to be liberated from the dark forces which keep us in bondage to our sinful condition (Gen. 4:6-7, Deut. 24:16, Jer. 31:30, Ezek. 18, Matt. 9:9-13).
The whole Old Testament is essentially a record of God's people constantly breaking their covenant(s) with Him. There are individuals mentioned throughout that were, of course, commended by God and the Biblical authors for their righteousness in honestly pursuing to remain faithful to their covenant with Him. But even the best of these people often faltered and, in fact, did rather heinous things in their lives at one point or another. One of the greatest examples of this is king David, who was literally called by the Scriptures "a man after God's own heart" (1 Sam. 13:14, Acts 13:22). Yet, this same man at one point committed adultery and then murdered the man he stole the wife of to try and cover it up. This was a heinous thing, and David repented of what he did with genuine sorrow and guilt toward God. God ultimately forgave him, but not without a heavy hand of chastisement and earthly consequences for his actions.
All throughout the Old Testament, you see various men of God who were deemed righteous, but these same men were usually shown to have some major flaw that prevented them from living a life that could be characterized as consistent obedience to the commandments to love God and love others as themselves. There is something deeply wrong with man's heart, according to the Bible. Something so wrong, in fact, that a whole prophecy had to be given that promised to address the issue of man's seeming incapability to accomplish fulfilling the commandment to love consistently on their own without some sort of divine help from above:

"A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh."-Ezekiel 36:26

Naturalistic philosophies see the physical world as all that exists. Humans beings are the result of mindless, chance causes and processes. Humans are essentially animals – highly evolved, but no different in significance than any other living thing. Thus naturalistic views demote humans. But this view leaves a lot unexplained. Why do humans practice altruism, benevolence, or acts of heroism? And what explains acts of incredible evil? Sure, naturalistic arguments have been made that true altruism doesn't exist, and that "unconditional love" is really just an illusion that's been disguised very well by our survival instincts that we've developed over a long period of time at certain stages of our evolutionary process. However, many people have found such arguments to be unpersuasive and naive when compared to their actual experience of the world as they mature in their lives and have what they know to be truly meaningful experiences that can't simply be reduced in the way that the naturalist wishes them to be. This realization was ultimately why I transitioned from hard atheism to agnostic spiritualism at one point or another.
On the other extreme of these things, transcendental worldviews and philosophies say that the physical world is illusory. Only the spiritual world is ultimately real. Humans are an expression of the divine spirit that is the essence of all things. If naturalistic views demote humans to the level of animals, transcendental views promote human beings. God is not “out there” somewhere; we are God. God is all, thus God is us. But this view doesn’t explain real evil. Why are people selfish? Why do they hurt others? What accounts for personal acts of evil like rape or terrorism? If we are all truly "God," then why would we ever do such things to what is ultimately "ourself"? And why can't a person who practices the belief that we are all actually "God" be only loving? There are so many people who adopt this view of reality who are constantly, day by day, finding that they struggle to be as truly loving as they wish to be because they will still sometimes find themselves thinking and doing rather evil and selfish things. I can speak from experience here, remembering throwing myself into the New Age movement when I was desperately seeking what I did not know at the time was forgiveness for and redemption from my sins because of who I was as a person up until that point. I was seeking the mythic "ego death" that promised me that I could truly be loving and find the forgiveness and redemption I was searching for, because I thought that if only I truly realized I was "God" all along, I could then accomplish these things all at once and simultaneously. I eventually found even this philosophy unsatisfactory when I came to the aforementioned conclusions concerning our great capacity for evil, and also realized that forgiveness can only exist if there are two parties: forgiver and forgivee. Such a thing is impossible if there is only really one being at play at the bottom of reality, and I knew deep down that forgiving oneself (at least, on its own) will never satisfy one's pursuit for redemption that we all inherently take part in whenever pursuing to mend even our own relationships with each other as humans. Further, love would be an illusion in this philosophy too, being that there is only really one party behind and in all of existence if "everything is God." Such an idea would make true altruism a farce, as well. There would be no such thing as real sacrifice for another, because there is no "another."
The French mathematician and Christian philosopher Blaise Pascal said, “Man’s greatness and wretchedness are so evident that the true religion must necessarily teach both.” Any philosophy that cannot fully account for human greatness and human depravity at the same time should be abandoned because it misses something obvious about the human condition. The religion of the Bible has a valid explanation for human greatness: people are made in God’s image. Thus we have dignity, value, and capacity for good. The Bible also explains human evil: the image of God has been defaced by sin. Our great capacity gets used for the wrong purposes. Our creativity is placed in the service of evil and our best intentions twisted for selfish gain. Something has gone terribly wrong. While other worldviews unduly demote or promote humanity, the Bible gets the tension just right.
Thus, human nature is puzzling and conflicting. Other worldviews—both secular and religious—struggle to account for this enigma, and don't offer satisfying solutions to the problem itself. The Bible, however, explains what happened when it tells us that man rebelled against God in the paradise that was prepared for him called "the Garden of Eden." We fell into temptation and estranged ourselves from God by tarnishing the image we were created in, and now are born with a natural proclivity to do evil, despite our best efforts to do good (that is, to do good consistently).
And so, the Bible promised a solution in the prophet Ezekiel that God will literally change our natural human condition, if we simply choose to humble ourselves before Him in faith to allow for such a change. While as unbelievers our inner disposition towards God is often rebellious, we at least still have the capacity to choose to do the righteous thing in seeking God that He may change us and forgive us if we so let Him. This is one reason why Jesus, (the one who made the fulfillment of Ezekiel's prophecy even possible by his coming, sacrifice, ressurection, and outpouring of the Spirit upon his ascension), said that only faith the size of a mustard seed was required for something so miraculous as moving a mountian to happen, because so little is required from us to allow God to change us into the kind of person He's always wanted us to be, and yet changing the condition of our own heart can be compared to literally moving a mountain if we were to try and do so on our own strength alone. The mustard seed was the smallest of seeds, and yet if one simply planted it and nurtured it, it could become a bush so large that it was comparable to a tree with branches that stretched to the heavens for the very birds of the air to rest on.
It was when I came to these realizations that I prayed to God for the first time again, having been years since I did so, going so far back as to when I was a little child even. I prayed in the dead of night in my room, and asked God to show me the truth and to reveal Himself to me if indeed these things were true, and in an instant I felt His very presence in my room, and my heart was changed. To describe such an experience would be like trying to describe the taste of something to the man born without tastebuds, the color of something to the man born blind, or the sound of something to the man born deaf; there are no words, and it is only something you can know by experiencing it for yourself. Suddenly and all at once, I knew right then and there that Jesus really was who he said he was, that the one true God is the God of the Bible, and that I have been forgiven. As the time of this post, it's been 5 years since then, I'm 23 now, and I'm still walking with God.
My prayer for anyone reading this that may not know God for themselves yet is that one day, you will too.
Back to the topic at hand.
When Adam sinned, we fell under the tyranny of death, corruption, evil heavenly powers, and sin itself. When Jesus came, Jesus was the new and exalted human, the new Adam, through whom humanity could now realize their original destiny that was laid out for them in the Garden of Eden. Because Jesus, being a man, obeyed unto death, he has defeated the powers which held us so long under bondage; we are now promised liberation so long as we simply place our faith in his sacrifice to wash us of our sins and receive the Spirit of God that is also promised to all who exercise this faith.
We often think of ‘the gospel’ as the part that brings the forgiveness of sins (and of course, that is part of the idea), but ‘gospel’ is the announcement that everything has changed in the coming of Jesus and it leads us to a new kind of living.
The gospel Jesus preached and the gospel the apostle Paul preached were different, in that Jesus preached of a kingdom where God reigns directly and with all His faithful subjects as participants in that reign. The gospel Paul preached was about the exaltation and reign of Christ, and because Christ reigned, the consummation of the kingdom of God with earth could now finally take place (Col. 1:12-13). This consummation was put on hold during Christ's "millennial" reign, which transpired between his ascension and his return. However, the consummation has come to full fruition since that return.
We will be arguing for some of these claims by pointing out how central the kingdom of God actually was to Jesus' earthly ministry and message, and demonstrate what Jesus taught about how it actually looks like.
The term 'kingdom' appears 53 times in 42 places in Matthew, 17 times in 13 places in Mark, and 41 times in 29 places in Luke. When the 'kingdom' is qualified, Luke always refers to the 'kingdom of God' (32 times) and Mark follows this pattern (14 times). Matthew, on the other hand, prefers the term "kingdom of heaven" (31 times), using the phrase to refer to the same idea "kingdom of God" only four times: 12:28, 19:24, 21:31, 43.
The Gospel of Luke records an event where Jesus responds to the population that lived near Simon Peter's house who believed in him after he had done his miraculous work there, but saw that he was leaving them:

"And when it was day, he departed and went into a desert place: and the people sought him, and came unto him, and stayed him, that he should not depart from them. And he said unto them, I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also: for therefore [i.e., for this pupose] am I sent." (vss. 42-43)

The Greek word euangelion is often translated as the word “gospel.” In the Bible, this word is always used whenever it concerns the announcement of the reign of a new king. And in the New Testament, the Gospels themselves use this word or the phrase "good news" to summarize all of Jesus’ teachings. They say he went about “preaching the gospel [good news] of the kingdom [of God]” (Matt. 4:23).
There’s this beautiful poem in the Old Testament, and it’s in chapter 52 of the Book of Isaiah. The city of Jerusalem had just been destroyed by Babylon, a great kingdom in the North. Many of the inhabitants of the city have been sent away into exile, but a few remained in the city, and they’re left wondering, "What happened? Has our God abandoned us?" This was because Jerusalem was supposed to be the city where God would reign over the world to bring peace and blessing to everyone.
Now, Isaiah had been saying that Jerusalem’s destruction was a mess of Israel’s own making. They had turned away from their God, become corrupt, and so their city and their temple were destroyed. Everything seemed lost. But the poem goes on. There is a watchman on the city walls, and far out on the hills we see a messenger. He’s running towards the city. He’s running and he’s shouting, “Good news!” And Isaiah says, “How beautiful are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings [news]” (vs. 7a). The feet are beautiful because they’re carrying a beautiful message. And what’s the message? That despite Jerusalem’s destruction, Israel’s God still reigns as king, and that God's presence is going to one day return with His city, take up His throne, and bring peace. And the watchmen sing for joy because of the good news that their God still reigns (vs. 10).
Jesus saw himself as the messenger bringing the news that God reigns. Jesus also claimed to be the Son of man. This was Jesus' favorite self-designation, being used some 80 times in the Gospels. Notice, not just a son of man, but the Son of Man. Jesus was directing our attention to a vision described by the prophet Daniel:

"I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him:"-Daniel 7:13-14a

At Jesus' trial, the Jewish high priest accused Jesus: "Art thou the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed [God]?" His answer left no room for doubt. "I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (Mark 14:61-62). Because Jesus' was rejected and killed for threatening the power the religious authorities had over the people, the consummation of God's kingdom with earth had been put on hold until all of Christ's enemies would be put under his feet after his ressurection and ascension.
But again, what is the kingdom of God? What does it look like exactly?
Well, the way that Jesus described God’s reign surprised everybody. I mean, think about it. A powerful, successful kingdom needs to be strong, able to impose its will, and able to defeat its enemies in physical combat. But Jesus said the greatest person in God’s kingdom was the weakest, the one who loves and who serves the poor (Matt. 23:11-12). He said you live under God’s reign when you respond to evil by loving your enemies, and forgiving them, and seeking peace (Matt. 5). To us, this is an upside-down kingdom. But to God, it's right-side up. This was what God had originally planned for us: a kingdom where God reigns in our hearts.

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."-John 3:3

Jesus was being quite literal here. You can’t see the kingdom until you’re born again and have the life of that kingdom. When you’re born again, you start 'seeing' differently. You see what others don’t see, you hear what others don’t hear, you know what others don’t know. And yet you may be physically in the same earthly location as they.
The kingdom of God is the totality of God’s influence that covers the world and heaven. It’s everywhere, but its manifestation isn’t everywhere. It manifests on earth wherever there are those who are born again and live as if God reigns in their hearts.
Before Jesus, John the Baptist announced to all people, “The kingdom of heaven is at hand!” (Matt. 3:1-2), as he saw a soon coming kingdom of God that would be ushered in by the Messiah. Notice that John the Baptist didn’t say that something “like” the kingdom would come and he didn’t say that the real kingdom might be thousands of years away. He said over and over that THE kingdom was at hand! Do you believe him? Did God inspire him to give a clear and accurate message or a mistaken one? If we dare to believe him, things might become surprisingly clear, simple and exceedingly optimistic.

"Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven."-Matthew 6:10

Jesus taught his followers of his generation to pray that God's kingdom come and that His will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Why pray for something that will just inevitably come by force, unless it was actually through our willing participation? That is, unless God's will is carried out through us "in earth, as it is in heaven"?

"Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel."-Mark 1:14-15

It's very telling that these are the very first words the Gospel of Mark chooses to record Jesus as saying.
The kingdom is NOT something to wait for. Jesus says the kingdom is NOT something visible, and it is NOT something in the sky. The Kingdom Jesus taught is a spiritual reality that comes into the world through us. Considering that Jesus even said the kingdom was in and among the Pharisees in Luke 17, which seems almost offensive to consider, perhaps it is like a spiritual seed that has been planted inside each of us, and that activating faith in God makes it grow.

"Then said he, Unto what is the kingdom of God like? and whereunto shall I resemble it? It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and cast into his garden; and it grew, and waxed a great tree; and the fowls of the air lodged in the branches of it."-Luke 13:18-19

Jesus talked about the kingdom as if it would be a present reality, yet one that was growing in the world like a seed grows into a tree.

"And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom of God? It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened."-Luke 13:20-21

To Jesus, the kingdom was something growing in us like yeast through dough, increasing in effectiveness.

"For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost."-Romans 14:17
"For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power."-1 Corinthians 4:20

Paul says the kingdom isn’t something you taste or touch like physical food. It’s not even saying the right words. But rather the kingdom comes in the realities of righteousness, peace, joy and power that flavor our lives when we live empowered by the Spirit of God and God's Spirit in us.
Since Jesus the Messiah returned only 40 years after his earthly ministry, putting all enemies under his feet, the complete consummation of earth with the kingdom of heaven has finally taken place.
The kingdom of God has come, and it continues to come through us as believers. It makes progress like light shining into the world and dispelling the darkness.

"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."-Matthew 5:14-16

Here is how this thread works:

You're either looking for a clan, or looking for recruits for your own clan. We have two default formats which should cover all the criteria you could ask for. So copy/paste the appropriate format and leave it as a comment below!

Rules

1. If you are recruiting for a clan, please limit clan posts to at most once a week in the main sub and also once a week in this Weekly Clan Recruitment Post. You are welcome to reply to those who may fit into your clan, but please don't reply to everyone in this thread and actually pick those that are relevant.
   
2. The following links are not allowed in this subreddit in any way:
   
   • Twitch
   • Youtube
   • Any other media links
   • Discord server links. Save those for PM's to new recruits.
3. Looking for clan and looking for members posts are still allowed outside of this Megathread (please don't report them), but these types of posts will be much more visible in this thread.
   

Looking for recruits:

• Your clan's name:
• Your system(s):
• Where are most of your clan members located (country/time zones):
• When do you usually play (include times and time zone):
• Tell us more about your clan (ex: how many members, requirements to join if any, focus on PvE/PvP/both, why should people join your clan, how do you communicate/organize events):
• What is the best way to contact your clan (reply in the thread, website, Twitter, etc.)?

Looking for a clan:

• Your system(s):
• Your Gamertag:
• Your country/time zone:
• When do you usually play (include times and time zone):
• Tell us a bit about yourself (ex: experience in Destiny, how many characters, Light Levels, anything else):
• What are you looking for in a clan (for example: PvE, PvP, any special criteria):

Other Clan Recruitment Megathreads

• https://www.reddit.com/Fireteams/search?q=Weekly+Clan+Recruitment+Megathread&sort=new&restrict_sr=on&t=all

Happy hunting!

Hey Reddit fam! 🚀 Struggling to climb the YouTube ranks? I've dove deep into the secrets of optimizing video titles and stumbled upon a game-changer SEO system that can skyrocket your visibility. In this mega-post, I'll break down how simple tweaks to your titles, combined with the mysterious power of CTR manipulation, can transform your YouTube game. Get ready to unleash the potential of your videos and dominate those search results!
Ever wondered how some YouTube channels manage to float to the top of your search results, almost as if they've cracked the code to digital success? In a world where video content is king, understanding the nuances behind video ranking, from tantalizing titles to the strategic use of SEO tools, can transform your digital presence. Dive with us into the depths of YouTube SEO strategies and the revolutionary 'Rank Attack SEO System' that's changing the game for creators and marketers alike.
Video Transcript Analysis and Outline for an In-Depth Reddit Post

Transform Your YouTube Strategy with Advanced SEO Techniques

Exploring the dynamic world of YouTube video ranking requires a deep dive into not just the basics of SEO but into advanced tools and strategies that can catapult your content to the top. This post unpacks everything from title optimization to leveraging AI for marketing success. Here's what we will cover amnd there is a webinar replay at the bottom of the post with live demo!

Understanding YouTube Titles and Their Impact

• The significance of titles in video ranking
• Real-time demonstration on optimizing titles for better rankings

Introducing the Rank Attack SEO System

• The evolution from basic SEO to the Rank Attack SEO System
• How CTR manipulation tools evolved over time

Leveraging AI for Cutting-edge Marketing

• The role of AI in modern marketing strategies
• Examples of AI tools that can amplify your content's reach

SEO Beyond YouTube: Boosting Web Page Rankings

• The interconnectedness of YouTube and Google rankings
• Strategies for enhancing web page SEO through YouTube

The Power of CTR Clicks and Engagement Signals

• A breakdown of CTR clicks and why they matter
• How engagement signals contribute to your video’s success

Practical Steps to Optimize Your YouTube SEO

• A step-by-step guide to utilizing the Re-Optimizer tool
• Incorporating CTR manipulation for exponential growth

Post Body:
Optimizing your YouTube titles might seem like basic advice, but the reality is that a well-crafted title is your first step towards ranking success. Demonstrations have shown that tweaking your video titles can significantly impact their visibility and searchability (embed a clip here showcasing the title change impact).
When it comes to advanced YouTube SEO, the Rank Attack SEO System introduces a nuanced approach. It’s not just about hitting the right keywords but also about engaging with tools like the first CTR manipulation tool introduced in 2014, evolving into what we now know as SerpAttack (embed video clip of the Rank Attack SEO system explanation).
AI has fundamentally changed the marketing landscape, offering tools that can think, analyze, and optimize faster than ever before. Incorporating AI into your strategy means staying ahead of trends and being able to predict audience behaviors in ways that were previously impossible.
But YouTube SEO isn’t just about dominating YouTube search results. It’s also about leveraging YouTube success to boost your website's Google rankings. This interconnected strategy ensures that success in one area can lead to gains across the board, a concept that has been largely overlooked.
CTR clicks and engagement signals play a pivotal role in how content is ranked. Unlike passive views, CTR clicks show active audience engagement, which both YouTube and Google’s algorithms favor. Encouraging viewers to interact, from leaving comments to sharing links, enhances these signals (Show a short clip demonstrating how CTR improvement affects rankings).
Finally, taking actionable steps towards optimizing your content involves a detailed analysis of your current strategy, identifying areas of improvement, and applying tools like Re-Optimizer to make meaningful changes. With tools like SerpAttack, you can kickstart your journey towards improved visibility and engagement, ensuring that your content reaches its intended audience.
In conclusion, mastering YouTube SEO is more than just a checklist. It’s about understanding the tools at your disposal, from AI to advanced analytical software, and using them to craft a strategy that speaks directly to your audience. Whether you’re a seasoned creator or just starting, the journey towards SEO mastery begins with a willingness to experiment and adapt. Share your experiences, questions, or any insights you might have on navigating the complex world of YouTube SEO. Let's learn and grow together!
Ready to take your YouTube SEO to the next level? Dive into the world of advanced optimization with SerpAttack. With its AI-driven insights and powerful CTR manipulation capabilities, you're just steps away from transforming your content's performance. Watch the webinar replay with live demo of the above strategy and in the YouTUbe video description you can Get a 14 Day Trial Of SerpAttack today and witness the transformative power of tailored SEO strategies!

Hello Fellow Apes🍌 I’m extremely tired and I have school at 8 in the morning. Don’t let my hard work go to waste. U.pv.ote
If Faraday Future Intelligent Electric Inc. (FFIE) were to experience a successful short squeeze, the potential peak price would depend on several factors, including the intensity of the short squeeze, the extent of retail investor participation, and the responses from institutional investors. Drawing from historical examples and market dynamics, here's an outline of what could influence the peak price:

Factors Influencing the Peak Price

1. Short Interest:
   
   • With FFIE's high short interest, where over 95% of its float is shorted, a substantial short squeeze could lead to a dramatic increase in price. In the case of GameStop (GME) in 2021, the stock surged from around $20 to nearly $500, representing a 2,400% increase at its peak oai_citation:1, Is a Giant Short Squeeze Brewing in Faraday Future (FFIE) Stock? InvestorPlace oai_citation:2, Why Is Faraday Future (FFIE) Stock Up 380% Today? InvestorPlace .
2. Retail Investor Momentum:
   
   • The collective buying power of retail investors can significantly amplify the stock price. If retail investors continue to buy and hold FFIE shares, refusing to sell, this could push the stock to extreme highs due to limited available shares and increased demand.
3. Media and Social Media Attention:
   
   • Media coverage and viral social media posts can further fuel retail interest and buying pressure, similar to the influence of figures like Roaring Kitty during the GameStop rally oai_citation:3,Renaissance acquired GameStop and AMC shares ahead of meme stock rally - Hedgeweek.
4. Institutional Responses:
   
   • Institutional investors covering their short positions would add to the buying pressure, potentially driving the price even higher. Some institutions might also take long positions to capitalize on the upward momentum.
5. Regulatory Interventions:
   
   • Any regulatory interventions or trading halts could impact the peak price. For example, during the GameStop rally, trading halts and restrictions on buying introduced by brokerages like Robinhood temporarily suppressed the price oai_citation:4,Key Points About Regulation SHO.

Potential Peak Price

Given these factors, a potential peak for FFIE could be estimated by looking at similar past events:

• Conservative Estimate: If the short squeeze is moderate, FFIE might see a 500% increase from its current levels. For example, if FFIE is trading at $1.80, a 500% increase would bring it to around $9 per share.
  
• Aggressive Estimate: If the squeeze is as intense as the GameStop rally, where the price increased by approximately 2,400%, FFIE could see its price reach around $43 per share, assuming a starting price of $1.80.
  

Historical Context and Examples

• GameStop (GME): In January 2021, GameStop's stock price surged from around $20 to nearly $500 due to a coordinated short squeeze by retail investors on Reddit, resulting in a 2,400% increase at its peak oai_citation:5,Is The New Meme Stock Rally Led By GME, AMC A Repeat Of 2021? Vanda Research Says No: 'Chances We Reach That Stage Are Low' - GameStop (NYSE:GME) - Benzinga oai_citation:6,Renaissance acquired GameStop and AMC shares ahead of meme stock rally - Hedgeweek.
• AMC Entertainment (AMC): Another example from the 2021 meme stock rallies, AMC's stock price increased from around $2 to over $60, representing a 3,000% increase at its peak oai_citation:7, Why Is Faraday Future (FFIE) Stock Up 380% Today? InvestorPlace .

Conclusion

While it's challenging to predict the exact peak price, understanding the dynamics of short squeezes and historical precedents can provide a reasonable estimate. If FFIE were to follow a similar trajectory to previous meme stocks, it could see substantial gains, with potential peaks ranging from a conservative estimate of $9 to an aggressive estimate of $43 or higher. The actual peak would depend on the intensity of the short squeeze, retail investor coordination, and market reactions.
(All ChatGPT oriented)

Hello, looking for songs that are sung like a conversation... Here's some examples of what I mean :-
English -

• Frenship - Capsize.
• Gotye - somebody that I used to know.
• Of monsters and men - Little Talks.
• Pink/Nate Ruess - Just give me a reason.

Other Languages -

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO5OonYkAPQ&list=RDzYRvNzP4OOk&index=3 - Original. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7A67TYudISs - Cover) - Chinese.
• Goose house (Your lie in april) - Hikaru Nara - Japanese.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyMm5HRd1Ks - Chinese. (I think this is a cover of a different song from a single artist but these two sing really well so I've placed it here)
• https://youtu.be/YdsKNrow7dw?si=tbzYs4xqWaKraDMW - Chinese

Please feel free to suggest songs from any language, as I would love to listen to any & all languages.
I honestly don't look at lyrics and meaning of the songs but I look for the
Vibes I get from the music and the Voices of the artists singing.
I do prefer Female artists more than male.

Hi Leetcoders! I wanted to share a successful profile of someone that landed jobs at Meta, Google, and Microsoft with 2 YOE and a Master's degree.
The interview journey is long and difficult. Reviewing someone else's successful interview preparation process and the interview questions they were asked could be super useful to prepare for your own interviews.
Take a break from Leetcode and let's see how they achieved it.
YOE: 2
Previous Company: JP Morgan
Highest Education: Master's
Background: Fullstack Software Engineer

Interview Preparation

Behavioral

• YT videos by Dan Croitor
• Understand various Leadership principles.
• Go through your Resume and write stories following STAR approach Your story should project at-least one of the attribute such as taking lead, resolving conflicts, dealing with ambiguity etc..
• Read, Rehearse and Repeat.

Technical
Coding

• Leetcode
  • Would recommend buying premium subscription. It's worth it.
  • Try to do daily Leetcode challenges. It helps you in being consistent and also covers variety of problems.
  • I used Explore card of Google and Facebook and tried to solve most of the problems.
  • Top 100 questions by frequency.
  • Top 75 LC curated: https://leetcode.com/list/xi4ci4ig/
• Cracking the Coding Interview book
• YT channels/videos:
  • Data Structure lectures by Abdul Bari
  • Graph Theory by Willian Fiset
• Few Tips:
  • Try to solve a problem by yourself, even if you are not able to come-up with an optimal solution.
  • Think about time and space complexity of your solution. Identify sections which can be optimised and think of a better solution/ data structure.
  • After understanding the approach, try to implement it yourself without taking a look at code. This would help you in really understanding the concept.
  • Try to beat 90% of solutions by runtime.

System Design

• Book: DDIA (MUST READ if targeting Google)
• Book: System Design Interview by Alex Xu
• System Design Primer by Donne Martin
• Courses - Groking the System Design and Groking the Advanced System Design
• YT:
  • System Design Interview videos by Mikhail Smarshchok.
  • InfoQ videos and presentations
  • Go through Architecture of popular systems such as GFS, Kafka, Cassandra etc.

Interview Experiences

Accepted: Meta, Google, Microsoft
Rejected: Uber, Atlassian

Meta

Only did Leetcode daily challenges this month and went through 10-15 FB tagged problems(sorted by frequency) before the interview. Spent 1-2 days in preparing for behavioural round as well (writing stories following STAR approach).
Had 2 coding + 1 product design + 1 behavioural round with Facebook.
In 1 coding round I had to solve 2 LC mediums and in other round 1 LC easy and 1 LC Hard was given. Solved all 4 problems. These were all variations of FB tagged problems on Leetcode and if you have solved them, it's fairly easy. Yep, FB is very predictable w.r.t. coding.I had very strong feedback for 2 coding rounds, good feedback for behavioural but my product design round didn't meet E5 expectations. This was I believe happened due to following reasons:

• Never did a mock-up before or gave any product design interview before. This was the first time for me in an interview setup so was a bit nervous a well. I would highly recommend doing some mock interviews.
• I had prepared extensively for system design which focuses heavily on the system side (Database, Schema, Partitioning, Replication etc.). In product design, you are expected to focus more on the API side and High level functionality. I was not given a choice between product design and system design round. Talk to your recruiter and see if you can schedule the round where you are strong at.

Recruiter reached out to me and offered to send my packet to HC for E4 as feedback for product design didn't meet the bar for E5. I declined as it was not worth and a down-level for my experience.

Google

I had 3 coding rounds , 1 system design and 1 googlyness round.
Round 1 (Coding): 1 ambiguous problem with follow-ups. Expectation was to gather requirements and frame the problem statement. Once the scope was defined I provided few solutions with Time/Space complexities. Coded the same. Had few follow-ups w.r.t. what changes I'd make to make it thread-safe etc. This went well.
Round 2(Coding): 2 problems were given. First was related to 2-D matrix and 2nd was a graph problem. Solved both.
Round 3(Coding): A problem statement was given related to a e-commerce website. Had to gather requirements and once the scope was clear I understood it was a graph problem. Provided solutions using both DFS and BFS approach, implemented using DFS. Follow-up was again how to make it thread-safe. Next was kind of LLD question where I was given a problem and was expected to define classes/schema and relations. I provided a generic solution which would scale even for cases outside of problem statement scope.
Round 4(System Design): Was a given a problem related to a real life scenario. Very practical but not something you'd find on any YT channel or course. Since I had never seen the problem before there were no biases or known design in my mind. Kept it simple from the beginning. After gathering functional and non-functional requirements and some back-of-the-envelope estimations presented a very simple high level design. I literally drew just 3 components: client, server and a database. Then started talking about how I can scale each layer and talked about trade-offs as well. This was 1 hr round and first 45 mins went pretty well. In last 15 minutes I wasn't sure about what to talk about more as I was not getting any feedback from my interviewer. I believe he only talked during first 10 mins when I was gathering requirements and he had to answer my queries. In last 15 mins I thought of providing an algorithm of how to implement my approach and talked about few data-structures as well (although this might not be in scope of system design round). After the interview I knew it won't be a No Hire but was also not sure whether it would be Lean Hire or Hire etc.
Round 5(Googlyness): This was the best round. I discussed about various scenarios and situations following the STAR approach. I had prepared a lot of answers w.r.t. ambiguity, leadership, conflict, strengths etc. but I was kind of surprised as he didn't ask any direct questions which you usually prepare. I guess I only used 1 prepared story and rest was on the fly. But if you had prepared enough, you'll know what to answer and how to answer and would be able to relate to it using one of your experiences/projects.
Problems asked in Google were not directly from LC or any other platform. If you had practiced enough, you'll be able to solve them.Make sure you gather requirements, ask questions before jumping to solution. Keep talking and explain your thought process through-out. This is very important as interviewer would be able to judge you better and provide hints, if required.

Microsoft

Round 1 (Coding): It was a online assessment round. I had to solve 2 problems in 90 mins time. These 2 problems were new to me and I didn't find them on Leetcode. I'll categorize them as LC medium from algorithm perspective. But I had to write a lot of boiler-plate code unlike the usual LC mediums. You are given few visible test-cases and option to add custom test-cases. When you submit, 10-12 hidden test-cases are executed which are only visible post submission. So make sure you write your own test-cases well. After talking to various folks and going through community discussions, I also focused on code quality.I was able to solve both of them in 60 mins. Spent next 15 mins in adding comments in various functions to explain what they were doing. I also mentioned time and space complexity wherever I felt it was required. This is really important as this was not the screening round for me but an actual coding round where I would be judged not just on code correctness but also on code quality/modularity.My score was 100% (I passed all the visible and hidden test-cases for both the problems)
Round 2(Coding): 2 LC mediums with follow-ups. This went really well. Since we completed the coding exercise in ~35 mins, spent next 10 mins discussing my work experience/projects.
Round 3(LLD): First 10-15 mins were spent on my work experience. I had to design a Parking-Lot. Went well. You can find a lot of example/tutorials on Youtube etc.
Round 4(HLD): This was the Hiring Manager round. First 20 mins spent on my projects and various discussions w.r.t. how I handled a particular scenario and why I chose one technology over other. Next was given a popular HLD question. I did very well here. I believe this round differentiated between L63/L64 level and given my interview performance, I was offered L64 eventually.
Round 5(Director): This was mostly project discussions and behavioural questions. Nothing technical. Went well.

Uber

Screening Round: This was rather unexpected as interviewer gave me a LC Hard graph problem!! Who expects a LC hard in screening ? Well, Graph theory is one of my favourite and kind of my strength too, so I solved the problem well within time limit. At the start of the interview she told that if I could write the psuedo-code, that'd we fine too. But since we had time, I wrote some test-cases and tried the ones she copied pasted as well. All worked, pheww.
Round 1(Coding): 2 LC medium types. 1 related to Linked-List and other binary tree problem. Solved both.
Round 2(Coding): 1 data-structure design problem with lot of follow-ups including making it thread safe. Similar to Design a HashMap with custom O(1) operations. I was able to come up with design and implemented the same with O(1) complexity. Couldn't find the variation given to me on Leetcode.
Round 3(System Design): Design Uber. (yep, LOL)
Round 4 (Hiring Manager): Mostly project discussions and Behavioural questions.
Round 5 (Behavioural) - Cancelled. I received offers from Google and Microsoft and asked them to cancel as I had a deadline to make a decision on offers.

Atlassian

I felt Atlassian's interviews are really practical and they don't ask questions which you won't be expected to solve on a daily-basis. No screening round here, just a 30 min discussion with recruiter before scheduling interviews:
Round 1(Coding) : 1 problem was given. I was expected to code the same in my preferred IDE (IntelliJ, Eclipse etc.). Focus was mostly on data-structures and code quality. The algorithm itself was really easy if you chose correct data-structures. I used HashMap, Set and PriorityQueue in my solution. Created multiple classes, methods etc. Wrote a few test-cases. You end-up writing a lot of boiler-plate code in IDE as you need to write the main class and method, instantiate everything and then create test-cases. I even used a debugger to debug one of the test-case. This round went well.
Round 2(Machine Coding): Asked to implement a Rate-Limiter. Used an IDE again. Was given 1 problem statement and was expected to write a Object-oriented and modular code. This also went well.
Feedback of both the rounds were positive and recruiter scheduled 3 more rounds for me. 1 Design and 2 Cultural fit types. But I had to cancel them all as I had a deadline to make a decision on offers.

Closing Advice

Do not try to memorize or cram anything, it's useless. Instead try to deeply understand concepts and be curious. That's the only way to make this more enjoyable. It's a difficult journey but it will all be worth it at the end!
I hope this provides some perspective on the blackbox SWE interviews and helps you prepare better!
Full Experience: Here
Candidate's Resume: Here