I have not yet come to love K-Pop and have heard of a lot of rumors about K-Pop idols (no specifications) having undergone some plastic surgery or the other. I have searched this up on google to see if it is true, and it seems as though some plastic surgeon has confirmed that most of the BTS idols have undergone the procedures, with J-Hope having had the most. When I ask on other sites about this, the fans usually deny it completely and even are toxic to me for even mentioning that the idol could probably have undergone some surgeries. So, I searched up their images before having allegedly undergone the plastics, and it is significantly different from what they look like today. Yet most fans deny this fact. But why? It is pretty clear that they have undergone surgery, and there is no backlash if the idols just come out with the truth. Most other celebrities openly state if they are undergoing some surgery or not, so why shouldn't the idols do the same? This act only increases the hate that people have towards the idols, so wouldn't it be better to tell the truth? That may decrease the hate!

Most of the women I dated in my 20’s and 30’s were on the fit to skinny side and now I don’t find that very attractive anymore! I am always checking out the bigger women now and find a chubby to bigger woman way sexier than I ever did. I can’t picture going on a date with a skinny woman anymore. I’m constantly searching for a curvy chubby lady to date and find them so sexy.

Cult Members,
Just the facts...in the title.
User Approval Instructions, if you're having issues posting, this should be why.
Report Redditcares Abuse messages
HARDCOC (Holy Army of the Reddit Defending the Cult of Cornette) Classifieds: Inquire using modmail, do not post in the comments.

• UsePost flair moderator: in search of a moderator to manage our post and user flairs. Can range from adding new flair, classifying flairs, and updating the look of the flairs.
• Facebook User: Been trying to email our Cult leader the questions all users ask every other week, but to no avail as of yet. Since Brian likes to grab questions from the Book of Faces, but it is no longer accepting new members; we could do with some assistance from the HARDCOC members to get our questions to the dear leader.
• Daily Discussion or WWE TV/PPV/PLE moderator: This sub prides in mimicking the organization of its dear leader, therefore the creation of re-occuring content mixed with all the other user content has helped in maintaining a regularly engaged subreddit. However one of our mods is looking to offload one of their posting responsibilities.

Finally, remember this is a Cult, and wrestling has its gimmicks...so HAM it up.

(Seeking opinions based on personal experience, not diagnosis)
Long story short: I've had Sebhorric dermatitis and eczema flares since teen years. The past month I've had two random allergic like reactions presenting on my face (eye swelling/hot and red face/rash on neck).

• The first instance, the doctor suggested it likely wasn't allergy if I hadn't changed anything and said that (what I thought was adult acne) was in fact rosacea and he thought this allergic looking reaction was actually a rosacea flare. He prescribed doxycycline.
• I've been on doxycycline and the pustules have improved, but yesterday morning I had another "flare" (pictured). The doc has doubled down on it being rosacea and has prescribed 1% Ivermectin Cream.

Question: Is there any one who has experienced this kind of flare up? I don't think the doctor is wrong but I haven't been able to find anything similar to this when looking at rosacea stuff online.

Hiring the right people can be the best choice for your business. To help you guide this complex process, we’ve compiled some insider tips that can transfigure your hiring tactics and lead to lasting success.
1. Understand Your Needs
Before you start the hiring process, take the time to outline the duties and responsibilities of the position you’re trying to fill . Recognize the skills and experience required, and consider the type of personality that will fit well with your company culture.
2. Craft Compelling Job Descriptions
A well-written job description does more than just list duties. It should outline what makes your company a excellent place to work and describe how the role fits into the bigger picture. Use this opportunity to draw in applicants who are not only qualified but also excited about the opportunity.
3. Leverage Multiple Recruiting Channels
Don’t limit your candidate search to just one strategy. Make use of job boards, social media, employee referrals, and recruitment agencies in combination. Each channel can reach different segments of potential employees, increasing your chances of finding the ideal fit.
4. Screen Resumes Efficiently
Create a checklist based on the job requirements to quickly filter through resumes. While searching for essential qualifications, keep an eye out for warning signs like frequent job changes that go unannounced. This process will help you Concentrate on the most promising candidates.
5. Prepare for Interviews Thoroughly
Before the interview, Examine the candidate’s resume and prepare a set of questions that assess both technical skills and cultural fit. Ask behavioral questions to understand how they’ve handled past challenges. This Planning guarantees a structured and effective interview process.
6. Involve Your Team
Hiring should be a collaborative effort. During the interview process include team members to get diverse perspectives on the candidate. Additionally, It can provide the candidate get a better sense of the team they might be joining.
7. Assess Cultural Fit
Skills can be taught, but fitting into the organizational culture is crucial for long-term success. Evaluate the candidate’s potential contribution to the team dynamic and how well their values match those of your organization.
8. Offer Competitive Compensation
Make sure your perks and Compensations are competitive within your industry. Talented employees are more likely to choose a position that offers competitive pay and good benefits. Be open about what you can offer and be prepared to negotiate.
9. Provide a Great Candidate Experience
Make sure that candidates have a great experience at every stage, from the initial contact to the final selection. Communicate clearly, respect their time, and offer feedback when you can. A positive candidate experience reflects well on your company and can influence their choice.
10. Make Data-Driven Decisions
Use data to inform your hiring decisions. Track metrics like time-to-hire, cost-per-hire, and quality-of-hire. Analyzing this data can help you identify areas for improvement in your hiring process.
By following these insider tips, you can increase your hiring strategy, attract top talent, and build a strong, cohesive team. Effective hiring is not just about filling positions; it’s about finding the right candidate who will contribute to your organization success for the long haul.

Hey guys, I tried to create bootable usb with rufus. But, I failed and instead the usb became write protected. I am 100% sure there is no physical protection key. I have tried almost all ways I found via google and even used softwares like Ease us Partition. But I can't remove the write protection on my usb. What do you think is the problem? Or should I just change my usb????
https://preview.redd.it/th3dbqqyar1d1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=016107110746a2f577a6bd7c5d9e8d7de56a53b6

Hello everyone and welcome to my post. In the following few paragraphs, you'll learn a few basics about myself as well as what I'm looking for in a partner. If any of it interests you, please don't hesitate to message me or start a chat. I look forward to hearing from all of you!
To begin with a little about myself, I'm 24M and currently living in NoVA for just over 1.5 years. Before that, I spent most of my life in Massachusetts but eventually ran out of new things to do there. Now, I work in AI research and spend most of my free time either playing board games or exploring nature. I also love to travel and see the world whenever possible. My trip last year was to Portugal (pictures available) which was such a beautiful country with such delicious food. I'm currently in Croatia for the next two weeks. Also, one cool and unique facts about me is that I have aphantasia which means I can't see images in my head. Oh and physically, I'm 5'8 with an average build and dark brown hair and eyes.
As for what I'm looking for, I really don't have many expectations in terms of appearance. By far the most important thing to me is that we are able to share each other's hobbies and enjoy time together. For example, I'd love someone I can take on hikes before ending off the day with a board game night at home. And, of course, I'd be interested in sharing and trying your hobbies as well. I also really value communication and people who can keep a conversation going in person and over text.
If you're still interested and made it this far, I've got a LIMITED TIME OFFER for you. In exchange for three unique facts about yourself, I will reply with three pet pictures. These pictures are guaranteed to be extra adorable and come with a 100% money-back guarantee if they don't make you smile.

Hello everyone and welcome to my post. In the following few paragraphs, you'll learn a few basics about myself as well as what I'm looking for in a partner. If any of it interests you, please don't hesitate to message me or start a chat. I look forward to hearing from all of you!
To begin with a little about myself, I'm 24M and currently living in NoVA for just over 1.5 years. Before that, I spent most of my life in Massachusetts but eventually ran out of new things to do there. Now, I work in AI research and spend most of my free time either playing board games or exploring nature. I also love to travel and see the world whenever possible. My trip last year was to Portugal (pictures available) which was such a beautiful country with such delicious food. I'm currently in Croatia for the next two weeks. Also, one cool and unique facts about me is that I have aphantasia which means I can't see images in my head. Oh and physically, I'm 5'8 with an average build and dark brown hair and eyes.
As for what I'm looking for, I really don't have many expectations in terms of appearance. By far the most important thing to me is that we are able to share each other's hobbies and enjoy time together. For example, I'd love someone I can take on hikes before ending off the day with a board game night at home. And, of course, I'd be interested in sharing and trying your hobbies as well. I also really value communication and people who can keep a conversation going in person and over text.
If you're still interested and made it this far, I've got a LIMITED TIME OFFER for you. In exchange for three unique facts about yourself, I will reply with three pet pictures. These pictures are guaranteed to be extra adorable and come with a 100% money-back guarantee if they don't make you smile.

The level exchange is an opportunity for users to share and play each others levels. If you want other people to play your levels and take an interest in what you are doing, the best thing to do is show an interest in other peoples creations and play their levels as part of an exchange.
What is proposed is that you take this post and sort it by "new" and try to play and leave comments on reddit for 2-4 levels that other people have posted. You don't have to star it if you don't want to, but there really is no reason to be stingy if you like the level. Once you've done that, post your own level and a brief description of it. Preferably include what the theme of the level is, what style of Mario game you used, and about how difficult you think it is!
A new exchange thread is created every few days
Use the exchange as an opportunity to get to know other makers and have fun.
Automoderator is watching this thread and will remove excesssive numbers of level codes, excessive level posting without offering feedback on reddit and it will be also stopping attention grabbing gimmicks like title formatting text.
Please note that due to a limitation of automoderator, posting levels on this thread will remove your picture flair that is visible on old.reddit.com. This does not affect the flair text. You can add it back from the sidebar . This should not affect award flairs like LOTW
NB: The original wii u Super mario maker has a separate level exchange thread found here

Please use this thread to ask any lawn care questions that you may have. There are no stupid questions. This includes weed, fungus, insect, and grass identification. For help on asking a question, please refer to the "How to Get the Most out of Your Post" section at the top of the sidebar.
Check out the sidebar if you're interested in more information on plant hardiness zones, identifying problems, weed control, fertilizer, establishing grass, and organic methods. Also, you may contact your local Cooperative Extension Service for local info.
How to Get the Most out of Your Post:

Include a photo of the problem. You can upload to imgur.com for free and it's easy to do. One photo should contain enough information for people to understand the immediate area around the problem (dense shade, extremely sloped, etc.). Other photos should include close-ups of the grass or weed in question: such as this, this, or this. The more photos or context to the situation will help us identify the problem and propose some solutions.

Useful Links:

Guides & Calculators: Measure Your Lawn • Make a Property Map • Herbicide Application Calculators • Fertilizing Lawns • Grow From Seed • Grow From Sod • Organic Lawn Care • Other Lawn Calculators
Lawn Pest Control: Weeds & What To Use • Common Weeds • What's Wrong Here? • How To Spray Weeds • MSU Weed ID Tool • Is This a Weed? • Herbicide Types • ID Turf Diseases • Fungi & Control Options • Insects & Control Options
Fertilizing: Fertilizing Lawns • How To Spread Granular Fertilizer • Natural Lawn Care • Fertilizer Calculator
US Cooperative Extension Services: Arkansas - University of Arkansas • California - UC Davis • Florida - University of Florida • Indiana - Purdue University • Nebraska - University of Nebraska-Lincoln • New Hampshire - The University of New Hampshire • New Jersey - Rutgers University • New York - Cornell University • Ohio - The Ohio State University • Oregon - Oregon State University • Texas - Texas A&M • Vermont - The University of Vermont
Canadian Cooperative Extension Services: Ontario - University of Guelph

Recurring Threads:

Daily No Stupid Questions Thread • Mowsday Monday • Treatment Tuesday • Weed ID Wednesday • That Didn't Go Well Thursday • Finally Friday: Weekend Lawn Plans • Soil Saturday • Lawn of the Month • Monthly Mower Megathread • Monthly Professionals Podium • Tri-Annual Thatch Thread • Quarterly Seed & Sod Megathread

https://reddit.com/link/1cx458m/video/tyvfowea5r1d1/player
I have recently made a AI based youtube shorts channel for kids. It's doing great so far. Tbh this is the first time I got some youtube success. Kids' channels are growing the fastest on YouTube. Channels like Cocomelon get more views than Mr. Beast. This is the first video I made for this channel. Everything from script to audio and video is done with AI. Here are the steps I followed
First go to ChatGPT. Now that 4o is free for everyone we have better outputs. We use ChatGPT to generate rhymes or songs. 4o is great at it. The prompt:
Can you create 10 children's rhymes of 4 paragraphs each that are educational and entertaining? Please include a variety of topics such as animals, space, fairy tales, everyday heroes like firefighters and doctors, seasons, and important life skills like sharing and kindness. Each rhyme should be catchy, easy to understand for young children, and incorporate fun facts or moral lessons where applicable. Feel free to introduce imaginative characters and vibrant settings to make the rhymes more engaging.
You have 10 poems now. Go to Suno .com and create an account, you can use google. Now from the create page, select “Custom Mode”. Copy paste one the the lyrics/rhymes. For style of music I used, “children rhymes song”. Give a title and click on “Create”. The results are surprisingly good! Download the audio.
On to the last step. Go to adobe express. From dashboard go to animate from audio or just search on google, “adobe animate from audio”. Select a character and background. Upload the sound file. Wait till the video is generated. You have your rhymes video ready. This takes like 5-10 minutes only for the whole process.
I hope you guys found this post helpful. I run an AI tools directory called seekme.ai. I’ve listed over 13k AI tools. This post is an edited version of my recent newsletter post. Consider subscribing to my newsletter to get more of these tutorials and use cases of AIs. Subscribe here

Okay so some back story, we met at work6 years ago, she was shy and quiet and the most beautiful thing I had ever seen.
She already had a kid I knew that and also thought it was absolutely worth it. She did tell me not to worry about the kid which I did think was weird and I told her I was serious so I would not be doing that.
Anyway 3 years we decide that I had a new very well paying job and we both wanted a baby. It took a while but it worked out eventually and I have a beautiful daughter now. My relationship with her son was constantly strained as she just never allowed me to be a role model or a dad to him just constantly blocking activities of just me or him or if I had to do any sort of parenting she would immediately undermine me and coddle him all the time.
Anyway this is where the problems start. The moment she was pregnant she got aggressive and mean. Now I know that can be part of it, women have it rough. But I mean really mean. This is in the UK she was on benefits (this is not to be rude it was her best choice) so her income was real low and I had to do most of the buying etc.
I did everything for her. Took her out bought her things. Showed her affection took her and her son on things that she could never afford and I did treat her really well. I got a bit distant when the abuse was constant, everyday it was something else. Like literally insulting me for how I looked or dressed or a wet towel literally in the hamper, you get the picture it was not nice.
We even got a house which was a joint effort through a housing scheme. I dropped all my savings into that house even levelled the garden (we didn’t even have a finished bathroom) cos she told me she wanted it. I did a lot of it myself. Laid the floors pulled waste (like almost 2t of concrete) out of the garden ground and levelled it almost completely alone.
This is all to say that I did so much for her I truly loved her and to me it didn’t matter she was yelling and shouting everyday cos we were going to make it work. Anyway a year and a 1/2 in the house and it’s almost daily. Shouting screaming. Not all one sided anymore but I had been chipped away that much.
I left. This is my biggest mistake of my life, as she got to do what she wanted. She truly didn’t want me there.
She swears she begged for me to come back or said we should go counselling. I can tell you she did not even message me. Only responding to me or messaging if she wanted something.
I never should of left I loved those 2 kids (I still try to see the son as much as possible - she still tries to interfere) and I see my daughter less than 50% against my will.
I gave her everything, things she never would have had in her life. The house now would still be unfinished if it wasn’t for what I put in.
This is what I need help with. She is almost 31 and she’s got with a 21 year old at work. This is kind of grim to me. I have been asking to come back try for the kids and I love her so much etc etc.
She’s got with someone a decade younger who doesn’t drive has dropped out of college and she says he’s mature but I have met him and he goes out drinking and partying. To me this is a selfish choice as this is not someone who benefits or even cares for the kids.
She’s allowed to be with whoever she wants I get that. And even though I tried my best together and after and I should feel I tried my best but I just feel defeated
A 21 year old she works with. No drive no ambition, (these are facts not attacks on him, I used to work there too. He’s happy to stay minimum wage and does not care to even learn to drive) over me who gave both those kids everything I could and I really did treat her so well truly sucks
She said it’s cos we didn’t have a good connection??? We had a kid together moved in together and then she begged to get a dog with me for the kids even though she hates dogs? To me that makes no sense
The advice now for me is what am I suppose to do? How do I get over her new partner? Again she can do what she wants and yea she says it’s serious and so does he. And what do I do about the son I care a lot but I get a lot of mixed messages about how it should be handled.
Full clarification i unfortunately do still love her. She was the only person I have ever been with emotionally and physically so maybe there’s strong emotions I don’t understand on my end that she doesn’t have? She truly just tossed me away
Sorry final bit I don’t know where to fit it in
We (just me) tried again this year (05 Jan - 6th March) I spent loads of money treating her and the time I got back with the kids. I played with the kids and gave her breaks from them (which is something I did not do well before) but she did not do anything in return emotionally or even try messaging me I had to do everything. Turned out she was messaging this 21 year old for at least a week before that ended.
Thank you for any input
EDIT: I feel like I just need to be clear about the partner cos I know it’s not all about what you offer and what you can do. I just feel like why not someone your age? Or someone who can at least provide experience to those kids? She has said she never wants kids again and apparently he says he doesn’t want one? To me this is just weird I don’t think a 21 year old would truthfully be able to answer that question? Yeh probably doesn’t want kids now but maybe in future when he’s got more figured out. And like I said he’s got no motivation and no drive. It is truly a hold up point for me.
I loved her and I did so much I don’t get how it can be just thrown away. She won’t even meet in person to talk it out. She just says ‘I’m with someone’ I have given up contacting now cos it seems that is truly what she wants. It’s been very depressing but there’s not much I can do about it

TW for mention of critical illness, hospitals, parental strife
This story spans over a few years so I'm sure I'll have to edit this to clarify.
When I was 17 years old I got diagnosed with a thing in my brain* through an MRI.
^\The shorthand is "AVM" for arteriovenous malformation, a tangle of blood vessels that irregularly connects arteries and veins. In the brain, it can cause brain bleeds which affect cognitive and motor function and can also result in death. The way i explain it is that you've got the blood pressure and flood of an artery going into a deformed clump of capillaires and veins with thin walls, deforming them further. The risk of rupture increases every year. Idk if it sounds scary enough like that, but it's like a ticking time bomb.)
I got gamma radiation shortly after, which is only relevant because they use a metal frame with metal spikes they drill against your skull so you can’t move your head during radiation. I chose this method of treatment because it was supposed to be quick and painless with no general anaesthesia but it turned out that the treatment experience was completely traumatising and I’m still living with a clinical PTSD diagnosis following that.
This mode of treatment aims at calcifying the inside of the veins in a specific zone and the gradual closing of vulnerable veins can take from 6 m to 3y.
I have siblings and we’ve all always been afraid of our dad. He was always extremely authoritative and we were very well behaved because of that. He got angry very easily, and the smallest thing would send him storming off screaming and breaking things, preceded by silent treatment (which was somehow the scariest all). He’d punish us extremely strictly, and would often drive up to 40km/h over the speed limit to scare or punish us, the reasoning was something like « if we all die it’s your fault because we made me angry).
All this to say my relationship with my father has always been extremely vertical and our relationship never grew into something like equal footing and I always got extremely nervous and scared whenever I was about to meet with him.
This being said, there is no amount of words I can use to describe the depth of my love for him. He drove us around without a protest for hours and hours and hours, gave us a beautiful luxurious life and never missed any of our important dates. Birthdays and chistmases were an avalanches of gifts and we were completely spoiled. He was extremely involved and I know he loves me so much. I’ve stopped speaking to him a few years ago but it truly breaks my heart because I love him so much and I miss the smell of his aftershave and I know he misses me very much too.
When the MRI result came back, my dad was there. He was the one who walked up to me and said « everything is fine, there is just a *little* thing.
I’m sure this was hard for him because his mom died of cancer when he was 28, but he never mentioned it in relation to my illness.
Pretty quickly, my dad stopped me whenever I mentioned illness and made sure I amended any mention of the experience by adding a sweetened positive twist at the end like « I’m glad I learned so much » or « but I grew so much from the experience ».
Gradually and too seamlessly for me to really notice, he decided I was « cured » and would no longer tolerate any mention of illness. He’s get impatient, tell me off, and even genuinely angry when I did. He’d say « you’re cured now » and « idk why you keep talking about this, it’s in the past now, you need to move on and live life ». Important note here : he is not a doctor, just a regular dad in the world with zero medical knowledge.
I don’t know if it was his own version of « manifesting » healing for me or a symptom of his fear. I wonder if he misunderstood the neurologist saying it could take up to three years to see if the treatment was effective. Before the 3 year mark, with no tests and MRIS to back it, he’s managed to completely convince himself and the rest of the family that I was cured and only still talking about it for attention. He even invented a pseudo-psychological term he dubbed the « syndrome of the sick child » to belittle my fear and worry and terror and loneliness, which if I understand his concept correctly meant I was clinging to an expired diagnosis in order to be babied and gat my parents attention. IDK maybe this can give you insight into his personality, how convincing he could be.
And it was just a really lonely experience for me. All of the « why are you still talking about this you ‘re cured and you need to move on now », while still trying to cope with so much fear of dying at all times, without having anywhere to talk about it. I wonder if the lack of parental support I experienced thought such a traumatising experience as a teenager and then as a young adult was what contributed to transform the trauma into clinical PTSD (diagnosed).
Eventually, I got my 3-year mark MRI. The radiologist was my dad’s BIL and he called my dad and gave him the result directly instead of contacting me directly. I was a legal adult and ab. 22 by then. My dad then called me on the phone, I remember the conversation so clearly, he said I was cured and I proceeded to call my mom and grandparents and best friend to share the news.
yay now you can move on. When he got home he popped a bottle of champagne open in celebration.
This was so tough because something didn’t quite sit right with me. Because of growing up hypervigilent I’m usually good at telling when someone is lying and twisitng the truth.
He seemed off on the phone, and in person, and I couldn’t tell if it wasn’t just that I couldn’t imagine life ebbing cured.
A few days later the BIL called me and said there was a lil persisting on the MRI. I wonder if I’d been brainwashed by my dad already by the time BIL called because when I asked dad if there was anything he didn’t tell me, he said « well you can’t expect to be 100% cured with things like this », and « 99% cured is the same as 100% » and other things of the sort. It was like he’d twisted the results in favour of his opinion.
By that time, I was stuck and really confused, and everyone was already convinced I was cured. And it got really hard for me to know what to do and where to turn because I was till so young and the hospital system was so confusing.
It took two years for me to decide to get a second opinion. Someone else looked at the MRI and said there was still something left, but since I’d heard my dad assure me it meant I was cured, it took considerable effort for me to reach out to my service in the hospital again for an appointment with the specialist I’d seen back when I was 17. This alone was extremely challenging because no one took be seriously, and I had to call the secretary office on a daily basis for a couple weeks to ask what I should do to get a confirmation I was cured. I’m quite headstrong and I wanted to hear from the specialist directly that I was cured do as to have no doubts at all. Throughout this, dad tried to discourage me and then eventually accepted it might be the only way for me to move on.
The MRI happened and I sat in the neurosurgeons office at the hospital of my nightmares asking if my results were conducive with full recovery. He confirmed there was something left, and then that the aim of treatment is to be completely cured. That the malformation should not be visible on an MRI once it was cured. He added that the risk of rupture increased each year. I soon had another more intrusive san done and it confirmed there was a little left, which meant I needed to get another round of Gamma radiation.
This hit me like a ton of bricks.
The second round of treatment was just as traumatising as I’d remembered the first round to be.
I don’t know what to do with how angry I am with my dad. He lied to me and invited all of us to live in a fiction of his making, thus endangering me. Every insistence I’d been cured and needed to move on when I wasn’t, and in fact the risk of me having an aneyrism was growing with every day.
The worst is that he never apologised. He instantly switched up his story and started pretending he’d never said I was cured. He created a whole new fiction where « he’d always insisted I’d get a more thorough MRI checkup ». It’s so unfair. How he can’t embrace a world where he’s wronged me, and not because it destroyed me but because he can’t be wrong. He has to be perfect. How unfair.
I most likely wouldn’t have mede it past the age of fifty if I’d believed of indeed obeyed him.
I used to check my memories again to make sure I hadn’t made it up, and eventually I accepted I’d never get an apology. And that I was wronged and I didn’t deserve that. And that I should’ve gotten the support I needed.
I’m cured now, I sat in another doctors office a year ago and he said my MRI came back normal and the AVM was no longer on the scan. I’m really proud I was so headstrong.
And eventually I decided to take distance from my dad, and life improved when I stopped talking to him. I know it hurts him, and that he’s extremely angry. He expresses this to my siblings, and I know they get punished in my stead and I feel so guilty. But I can’t be around my dad, I’m too angry. I’m trying to live with the love I have for him in my heart, with my childhood memories and the guilt and missing him and then more guilt for being happier now that I don’t have to talk to him and listen to his tirades. And I worry for my siblings who still talk to him, because he doesn’t treat them kindly and they deserve so much love and admiration and support, which he’d never give them.
I used to want to press charges and I wonder if he shouldn’t be in prison for what he did but he’s a vicious man and he’s go to much money and friends in high places that I couldn’t take him on. And things would get ugly, I know. I just wish he could pay for what he did.
I’ll update later for typos and clarifications :)

General
I am looking for a lady between 28 and 35 years old, for a committed monogamous childfree relationship. My goal is to become a true team, supporting each other, caring for each other, nurturing each other and helping each other grow and realise our goals and dreams as much as possible. I'm hoping to find someone that values a relationship as much as I do and takes it seriously. It's not the only thing my life revolves around, but it's also not just something 'nice to have' for me.
I tried to be as concise as possible while still providing what details I think are crucial to know; I realise this post turned out very long, but I prefer those because I can get as good an idea as possible with detailed descriptions, bar actually talking to the person, and find that very valuable, so if that also applies to you, that would be awesome.
Basics
I am 186cm tall, slim/fit built, dark brown hair, brown eyes. Both my arms are tattooed (full sleeve), as are my calves and the areas above my ankles. Regarding pictures see below. I am a runner (ranging from 5k to full marathon), training multiple times a week. I'm also vegan. My love languages are physical touch and words of affirmation. While I am mostly securely attached, withdrawing from me triggers anxiety and I have made a horrible experience with a fearful avoidant partner in the past, so that is something I fear I cannot deal with again.
I am also an atheist.
I am a very warm, soft and sensitive person, I think I am humorous, I am self reflecting a lot and I can also be really passionate and romantic. Those are traits that also are really important to me in a woman.
I can be quite social, I am a good talker, but also love to listen to really get to know someone on a deeper level. I can enjoy an evening out with friends just as much as the silence of sitting at the shores of the river and watching the sunset in solitude (although I've been craving to watch it together with a partner for a really long time now). I can be out in a pub, at a rave, a metal show or in the stadium watching football and have the time of my life, but I cannot do these things every day; I need recharge time (on the sofa, in the woods for a run, a lazy Sunday staying in bed etc.). This should give you an idea; basically, I am a homebody that thoroughly enjoys going out in moderation.
I won't say too much about hobbies; suffice it to say I am into the dark, the obscure, the macabre, the occult, the mysterious, the erotic. It won't surprise you that I had a gothic phase in my youth, bonus points if you did too!
What I am looking for
Although similar hobbies and interests are a plus (and there have to be at least a couple things we have in common), emotional and sexual compatibility are more important to me. I am a very sensitive and emotional person (I do cry easily and by this point I don't think I'll ever be able to change that, sorry), so if you're too, we will definitely understand each other. I need someone who I can open up to (which I do rather quickly, anyway), be myself, bare my soul to and I need these things from you, too. I've had my share of emotionally unavailable women who were afraid of intimacy so I know I can't deal with that again because of the way how those things affect me. I am always emotionally invested with the woman I pursue and in those cases that was to my detriment. But my ability to feel so deep is also something I wouldn't want to change because as of yet, although it's getting harder, I haven't given up on finding someone.
With those emotional needs come two requirements that I found to be vital over the years: First, being able to be silly and cutesy together and to accept each other's inner child and care for it. I am not talking about having to deal with another person's immaturity or inability to perform basic adult skills, rather with the way sadness, hurt, anxiety and being overwhelmed manifests for me (and maybe for you, too?). I need someone who is able to comfort me, to hold me, to allow me to be weak and needy for a while until I've calmed down, and I'm more than ready to offer the same. Your inner child can come out for a while, no problem (: Also in a positive way: Thankfully, today everyone seems to be understanding of the cuteness overload cats (or any animal baby, really) can cause; I need that with a partner. I also still have plushies as comfort animals (some of which in quite a litteral sense as they make for really amazing pillows) and ideally, you do too.
There is a saying that in every relationship, one person is the stronger one. In the past, I have been with women who obviously were stronger than me, but that doesn't mean they always had to be strong, far from it. I certainly, like I said, need to be able to feel protected, but it's not like I'm a particularly needy partner, like everyone, I have my ups and downs, but I can pull my weight and have been told by past partners that I am very caring and that they felt safe and understood with me, and providing that for my partner is really important for me as well – this just to put the picture I'm (somewhat haphazardly) trying to paint into perspective.
Second, sexual compatibility. I have a high libido and I have kinks, so you should, too, in order that we can explore and enjoy them together. I found out how fulfilling living out those fantasies can be after years of never being able to try and in a relationship, sexual fulfillment for both partners is a must for me. Someone on here has coined the term 'filthy best friends and partners' which I have no shame to be stealing because it's such an apt description.
I'm looking for a balance between healthy independence and being emotionally present. A relationship where we 'get' each other; we're both each other's number one and treat each other like royalty. Where a disagreement leads to more intimacy between us as we understand better, not to resentment. Where we're comfortable baring our souls to each other, becoming a safe haven and secure base for each other. I don't like the modern notion that you 'should never feel too safe in a relationship' because that sounds like running from the mafia (and believe me, I love mafia movies); you should always put in effort, yes, but safety is one of the things I always want to experience and provide in a relationship. We shouldn't fear that a disagreement leads straight to breakup. I know ‘self-sufficiency’ is trending right now, but I feel like as partners, we’re partly responsible for each other and not our own but also each other’s happiness. Being dependant and dependable at the same time is important; making each other’s wellbeing a priority. I love the relationship model outlined in Stan Tatkin’s ‘Wired for Love’ and you should, too. If you’re not able to healthily depend on someone and their support while you’re having a hard time, look elsewhere. I know codependency is the latest thing everyone’s afraid of, but experiencing someone you’ve grown very attached to just bailing because they’re counterdependent and can’t stand working on themselves while simultaneously letting you in is something I’d rather not go through again. If I have to be afraid you’ll run at the first major problem that surfaces, even if it’s a ‘you’-problem, it’s not going to work. I think that all things can and need to be talked about. If you think ignoring someone for days is a form of communication, please look elsewhere. If you think’s it’s okay to lovebomb someone and then leave after a couple of months with the minimum amount of information and no proper conversation because you’re not ready to own up to what’s happening to you emotionally, please look elsewhere.
I am looking for someone real. We all have our problems, I don't want or need a 'perfect' person. You don't have everything figured out or 'all your shit' together. Be imperfect. Admit when you feel sad and angry, lonely, hopeless or even helpless – it's all relatable. Don't hide it. Be quirky, be dorky, be witchy, be opinionated, be yourself. Don't pretend.
I'm looking for someone to share romance with. Not great gestures, but small, meaningful ones. Poems for each other, expressing our feelings; cards with heartfelt messages that we put our perfume/cologne on, and a symbol that means something to us only, the print of your lips with lipstick, the way I sign and seal my letters for you.
Just as important to me is agreeing on living a healthy life, staying in shape both for ourselves and for each other, regularly working out and eating healthy. I am drug and disease-free and expect the same of you. I do drink as I love a good beer or glass of wine, rum or whiskey, but I've never really been drinking much and especially during the past year have further reduced it. One vice I have is that I enjoy a couple of cigars a year, but I can definitely accommodate you in this regard.
Another important point is aligned life goals: many childfree people seem to be adventurous, but that is a trait I don't associate with myself at all. I value safety more than adventure. I want to build a home together with my partner, a safespace for the both of us, where we always feel loved and protected, a place that we create together, make it cozy together so we just love to get back home there wherever we might have been, a home we decorate together for Halloween (my favourite holiday) or Christmas or Springtime, as we live in tune with the seasons, seeing them change around us, enjoying nature on a walk or the rain outside, reading in our cozy home. I value stability and harmony.
Appearance-wise, I am into ladies on the smaller side (albeit not regarding height), so I'm looking for someone petite/slim/skinny/healthy-fit. Likewise, I am not really muscular and don't have visible abs; like I said, I'm a runner, so if you're more into the gym-type, I'm not a good fit.
The natural progression for me would be to move from text to voice calls, videochat and then meeting up, all of that rather sooner than later. Not that there’s a need to rush anything, but having my heart broken because I already developed feelings due to a longer timeframe and then everything unexpectedly turning to shit is not something I want to have to live through again. I’d rather see earlier if we’re compatible or not; as someone who catches feelings fast I need to protect myself, I unfortunately had to learn that
Caveats/Possible red flags

• I don't like travelling as it stresses me out; I don't mind being somewhere else for a week or two, but the organisation part of it drains my energy very quickly and dealing with stuff that doesn't work out is overwhelming to me. Smaller trips are ok, but I'm not the right person to travel the world with.
• I am not the most awake person in the morning (i.e. I identify as nightowl)
• I need space for my own projects/time to recharge after social interaction.
• While I feel like I am in tune with my inner child and working on/with it through therapy, I realise this is something that could be a turn-off for people.
• I have been diagnosed with depressive episodes in the past and am taking anti-depressants right now. I realise that I am a work in progress, maybe more so than in times past, but I manage and the fact that I'm putting myself out here is based on me being ready to get to know someone new.
• I want to create a home together here, as I'm firmly rooted where I was born; I realise this is a lot to ask, but I have seen many people here being open to moving, so I want to at least try reaching out to them.

If you're interested, feel free to message me and include some pictures of yourself and I will reply with my own. Have a nice day (:

"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 am looking for a lady between 25 and 35 years old, for a committed monogamous childfree relationship. My goal is to become a true team, supporting each other, caring for each other, nurturing each other and helping each other grow and realise our goals and dreams as much as possible. I'm hoping to find someone that values a relationship as much as I do and takes it seriously. It's not the only thing my life revolves around, but it's also not just something 'nice to have' for me.
I am 186cm tall, slim/fit built, dark brown hair, brown eyes. Both my arms are tattooed (full sleeve), as are my calves and the areas above my ankles. Regarding pictures see below. I am a runner, training multiple times a week. I'm also vegan. My love languages are physical touch and words of affirmation. While I am mostly securely attached, withdrawing from me triggers anxiety and I have made a horrible experience with an avoidant partner in the past, so that is something I fear I cannot deal with again.
I am also an atheist.
I am a very warm, soft and sensitive person, I think I am humorous, I am self reflecting a lot and I can also be really passionate and romantic. Those are traits that also are really important to me in a woman.
I can be quite social, I am a good talker, but also love to listen to really get to know someone on a deeper level. I can enjoy an evening out with friends just as much as the silence of sitting at the shores of the river and watching the sunset in solitude (although I've been craving to watch it together with a partner for a really long time now). I can be out in a pub, at a rave, a metal show or at a football game and have the time of my life, but I cannot do these things every day; I need recharge time (on the sofa, in the woods for a run, a lazy Sunday staying in bed etc.). This should give you an idea; basically, I am a homebody that thoroughly enjoys going out in moderation.
I won't say too much about hobbies; suffice it to say I am into the dark, the obscure, the macabre, the occult, the mysterious, the erotic. It won't surprise you that I had a gothic phase in my youth, bonus points if you did too!
What I'm looking for
Although similar hobbies and interests are a plus, emotional and intimate compatibility are more important to me. I am a very sensitive and emotional person (I do cry easily and by this point I don't think I'll ever be able to change that, sorry), so if you're too, we will definitely understand each other. I need someone who I can open up to (which I do rather quickly, anyway), be myself, bare my soul to and I need these things from you, too. I've had my share of emotionally unavailable women who were afraid of intimacy so I know I can't deal with that again because of the way how those things affect me. I am always emotionally invested with the woman I pursue and in those cases that was to my detriment. But my ability to feel so deep is also something I wouldn't want to change because as of yet, although it's getting harder, I haven't given up on finding someone.
With those emotional needs come two requirements that I found to be vital over the years: First, being able to be silly and cutesy together and to accept each other's inner child and care for it. I am not talking about having to deal with another person's immaturity or inability to perform basic adult skills, rather with the way sadness, hurt, anxiety and being overwhelmed manifests for me (and maybe for you, too?). I need someone who is able to comfort me, to hold me, to allow me to be weak and needy for a while until I've calmed down, and I'm more than ready to offer the same. Your inner child can come out for a while, no problem (: Also in a positive way: Thankfully, today everyone seems to be understanding of the cuteness overload cats (or any animal baby, really) can cause; I need that with a partner. I also still have plushies as comfort animals and ideally, you do too.
Apparently in every relationship, one person is the stronger one. In the past, I have been with women who obviously were stronger than me, but that doesn't mean they always had to be strong, far from it. I certainly need to be able to feel protected, but it's not like I'm a particularly needy partner, like everyone, I have my ups and downs, but I can pull my weight and have been told by past partners that I am very caring and that they felt safe and understood with me, and providing that for my partner is really important for me as well.
Second, intimate compatibility. I am rather insatiable and love to experiment when it comes to the bedroom, so you should, too, in order that we can explore and enjoy together. I found out how fulfilling living out those fantasies can be after years of never being able to try and in a relationship, this kind of fulfillment for both partners is a must for me. I found the term 'filthy best friends and partners' to be a perfect description.
I'm looking for a balance between healthy independence and being emotionally present. A relationship where we 'get' each other; we're both each other's number one and treat each other like royalty. Where a disagreement leads to more intimacy between us as we understand better, not to resentment. Where we're comfortable baring our souls to each other, becoming a safe haven and secure base for each other. I don't like the modern notion that you 'should never feel too safe in a relationship' because that sounds like running from the mafia (and believe me, I love mafia movies); you should always put in effort, yes, but safety is one of the things I always want to experience and provide in a relationship. We shouldn't fear that a disagreement leads straight to breakup. I know ‘self-sufficiency’ is trending right now, but I feel like as partners, we’re partly responsible for each other and not our own but also each other’s happiness. Being dependant and dependable at the same time is important; making each other’s wellbeing a priority. If you’re not able to healthily depend on someone and their support while you’re having a hard time, look elsewhere. If I have to be afraid you’ll run at the first major problem that surfaces, even if it’s a ‘you’-problem, it’s not going to work. I think that all things can and need to be talked about. If you think ignoring someone for days is a form of communication, please look elsewhere.
I am looking for someone real. We all have our problems, I don't want or need a 'perfect' person. You don't have everything figured out or 'all your shit' together. Be imperfect. Admit when you feel sad and angry, lonely, hopeless or even helpless – it's all relatable. Don't hide it. Be quirky, be dorky, be witchy, opinionated, be yourself. Don't pretend.
I'm looking for someone to share romance with. Not great gestures, but small, meaningful ones. Poems for each other, expressing our feelings; cards with heartfelt messages that we put our perfume/cologne on, and a symbol that means something to us only, the print of your lips with lipstick, the way I sign and seal my letters for you.
Just as important to me is agreeing on living a healthy life, staying in shape both for ourselves and for each other, regularly working out and eating healthy. I am drug and disease-free and expect the same of you. I do drink as I love a good beer or glass of wine, rum or whiskey, but I've never really been drinking much and especially during the past year have further reduced it. One vice I have is that I enjoy a couple of cigars a year, but I can definitely accommodate you in this regard.
Another important point is aligned life goals: I value safety more than adventure. I want to build a home together with my partner, a safespace for the both of us, where we always feel loved and protected, a place that we create together, make it cozy together so we just love to get back home there wherever we might have been, a home we decorate together for Halloween (my favourite holiday) or Christmas or Springtime, as we live in tune with the seasons, enjoying nature on a walk or the rain outside, reading in our cozy home. I value stability and harmony.
Appearance-wise, I am into ladies on the smaller side), so I'm looking for someone petite/slim/skinny/healthy-fit. Likewise, I am not really muscular and don't have visible abs; like I said, I'm a runner, so if you're more into the gym-type, I'm not a good fit.
I’d prefer to move from text to voice calls, videochat and then meeting up, all of that rather sooner than later. Not that there’s a need to rush anything, but I’d rather see earlier if we’re compatible or not; as someone who catches feelings fast I need to protect myself.
Caveats

• I don't like travelling as it stresses me out; I don't mind being somewhere else for a week or two, but the organisation part of it drains my energy very quickly and dealing with stuff that doesn't work out is overwhelming to me. Smaller trips are ok, but I'm not the right person to travel the world with.
• I am not the most awake person in the morning (i.e. I identify as nightowl)
• I don't want children and had a vasectomy
• I need space for my own projects/time to recharge after social interaction.
• While I feel like I am in tune with my inner child and working on/with it through therapy, I realise this is something that could be a turn-off for people.
• I have been diagnosed with depressive episodes in the past and am taking anti-depressants right now. I realise that I am a work in progress, maybe more so than in times past, but I manage and the fact that I'm putting myself out here is based on me being ready to get to know someone new.
• I want to create a home together here, as I'm firmly rooted where I was born; I realise this is a lot to ask, but I have seen many people here being open to moving, so I want to at least try reaching out to them.

If you're interested, feel free to message me and include some pictures of yourself and I will reply with my own. Have a nice day (:

Recently a guest sent an inquiry for 7 nights and asking if I could show him the place. I contacted Airbnb support and they said not to show potential guest the place before a confirmed booking.
In the meantime the guest changed the status from an inquiry to a trip request. I messaged him saying that we don't show our place beforehand and that it's against Airbnb policy and to withdraw the request.
They replied saying "Ok, you don't have to show me the place. Can I book this for 1 week?".
I lost my patience and just declined the request even tho I know it will negatively affect my listing ranking in search results.
If a guest does not trust the description and pictures, why should I trust the guest after the fact the they initially wanted to see the place beforehand? Saying "Ok, no biggie I don't have to see the place, but I still want to book it" is just disrespectful and means that the person doesn't think their initial request for fishy.
Also, this person has no profile pic, no previous trips and reviews and joined Airbnb last year.
Honestly, I am so sick of these semi anonymous people who act with such entitlement and no understanding how trust works.