In these tales, the Kraken is depicted as a colossal sea monster that dwells in the depths of the ocean. It is often described as a creature of immense size, capable of causing massive destruction. According to legends, the Kraken would rise from the depths, its tentacles reaching towards the surface, creating powerful whirlpools and turbulent waters that could swallow entire ships. Over time, the Kraken's presence has extended beyond mythology, permeating popular culture. It has been immortalized in various literary works, art pieces, and films, solidifying its status as an iconic symbol of the sea's mysteries. Poet Alfred Tennyson, in his poem "The Kraken," describes the creature as a "giant form" that sleeps at the bottom of the ocean, waiting to be awakened. Jules Verne's novel "Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea" features a memorable encounter with a colossal squid, which is often associated with the Kraken. The Kraken has also made appearances in films such as "Clash of the Titans" and the "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise, further cementing its position in popular culture.
Accounts vary regarding the exact size of the Kraken, but they consistently describe it as a creature of immense proportions. Some ancient texts suggest that the Kraken's size is so colossal that it can easily engulf entire ships. Eyewitness testimonies often refer to its multiple long and powerful tentacles, equipped with suckers capable of gripping and pulling down even the sturdiest vessels. The Kraken is said to possess massive eyes that can strike fear into the hearts of those who dare to look into them, as well as a beak-like mouth that can deliver a deadly bite. According to legends, the Kraken is a formidable hunter with a voracious appetite. It is believed to feed on large sea creatures such as whales, seals, and even other giant squids. The Kraken employs various strategies to capture its prey, utilizing its immense strength and agility. Some accounts suggest that it has the ability to drag entire ships underwater, using its powerful tentacles to ensnare and submerge its victims. The sheer size and force of the Kraken's attacks make it a fearsome predator of the deep. In recent years, scientific explanations have been proposed to account for the Kraken myth. One prevailing theory suggests that encounters with giant squids may have fueled the legends of the Kraken. Giant squids are colossal cephalopods that can reach lengths of up to 43 feet (13 meters) and possess long, powerful tentacles with suckers. The similarities in appearance and behavior between the Kraken and giant squids have led some researchers to speculate that the myth of the Kraken may have originated from real-life encounters with these deep-sea creatures.
Another perspective suggests that certain natural phenomena and optical illusions may have contributed to the belief in the Kraken. Whirlpools, water spouts, and floating debris can create visually striking scenes that may be misinterpreted as evidence of a giant sea monster. Additionally, storytelling traditions and exaggeration may have played a role in embellishing eyewitness accounts, further perpetuating the myth of the Kraken.

"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.]

Someone called me, asked if ako ba yung tinatawagan nila, if I'm currently employed, and if I applied as a cad operator to their company. I said yes to all of them and alam kong mali yun pero na-pressure akong umoo since naghahanap ako ng malilipatang work and katatapos ko lang mag mass apply sa iba't-ibang companies a couple of months ago.
After ng questions, nagsabi sila na if may kakilala akong naghahanap ng work esp. cad operator, i-refer ko lang daw company nila (na di ko rin masyado maintindihan). Magsesend din daw sila ng message kasama ng email na pagsesendan ng resume in case na may mahanap akong maire-refer sa kanila pero wala akong natanggap na text message pagkatapos.
Sinabihan ko na family members ko na wag maniniwala in case may random numbers na humingi ng kahit anong info about sa akin o kahit ano and sa number ko lang sila maniniwala.
Scam ba 'to? In what ways ba sila pwede makapag take advantage and ano pa ba need ko gawin to avoid na mangyari yung mga gusto nilang gawin in case?
Please help. Thank you so much.

I'm resigning from my job tomorrow to to go work for a direct competitor. I've worked at the company for over 6 years in sales. I plan to give four weeks notice and I expect to be walked out the door immediately.
I was just wondering if my employer can request a shorter notice period to essentially save money. It's it's a small business and I potentially see something like this happening. The only the information I can find is on employers giving notice not on employees.

Dramatic title, but I can't really explain it that well in few words. I also couldn't figure out a Subreddit that this would fit on, I think this one is best.
This one's a long one. TL;DR at bottom, but some details are important.
A bit of backstory first.
I'm a recently graduated HS Senior, headed to university in Fall. Around March, I applied to work at a mid-sized stadium in my area for a summer job-- I have about 2 years of stable retail experience, plus ServSafe certification and some good credentials outside of that. I've left almost all my jobs on good terms and I do my work fine. Never had any complaints.
I am a black woman. That is relevant to my story. I also have a very "white-sounding" name. For the sake of my privacy, let's say it's Sarah McIntyre. It's got the same vibe. I also have a "white-sounding" voice, especially over the phone. A lot of my family pokes fun at it, and it's not a huge deal.
So, I'm applying to this job, and the online application is pretty sparse. Few questions about my experience, age, and contact info. Nothing about my race at all. I apply, get a request for a phone interview, and hop on a call a few days later. My manager loves me. We have a great interview. She emails me a day later and says I got the job, and my orientation is in a week.
Orientation goes on, it's in a pretty large group and she doesn't address any of us directly or even ask for names, but I noticed her giving me a bit of a weird look. I figured it was about my hair which is dyed bright green so whatever.
We start working, and she's just very weird to me the whole time. Gives me weird looks, doesn't answer my questions, always watching me while I'm working at the concessions register. She doesn't do this with any of the other girls there. Concessions is about five other girls, all around my age. All of them are first-years at the stadium.
I get ready for work the next day, and I get a call from my Manager:
"Hey, OP. Don't come in today." "Oh? Is the game called off?" "No. Someone else is covering you. Bye."
Which was incredibly weird to me, honestly. But I wasn't going to press on the issue-- it was the first shifts of the season, maybe she wanted to train someone else instead of having me work. After this, there was about a month and a half gap between my next shift, which was May 9. Then I have another May 11; both go fine.
Manager posts the schedule for the next few weeks, up until June 9. I have one single shift. One. A four-hour concessions shift. I was insanely confused by this-- it's the start of the season with home games almost every single day, and multiple events with huge crowds. I texted the other girls I work with through our scheduling app and asked what their shifts looked like-- 3 to 5 shifts every week, about six hours each.
I was seriously wracking my brain for 3 days straight trying to think why on Earth I got the short end of the stick. I show up early and leave late every day, I help out as much as I can, customers don't complain, I'm experienced with the register and with counting tender, my co-workers and I get along fine, I've never had any issues with anyone.
The only thing I could seriously think about was my race. Which feels very cheap and victim-y, but it was the only thing I noticed that was an outlier. Out of every single employee at our stadium, I am the only person of color. Maybe somebody else is a minority, too, but they're incredibly white passing if they are. The only other brown people are the baseball players, which aren't on our staff team-- they're a separate entity entirely.
But that's all I can think of-- and my manager wouldn't have known about my race until she saw me for the first time at my first shift. And it's kind of difficult to have all-white staff considering we are in the suburbs of Chicago. Most people in our area are Black or Latino. It's seriously a considered effort to have an all-white staff in this area. I think I may have just slipped through the cracks because my name and voice are very misleading? But I can't tell if I'm overreacting or not-- I haven't said anything to my manager.
I don't want to quit because my coworkers are really nice, and I love the job. It's great being outside and being in a fun and fast environment like a stadium. But I'm trying to save for university and that's difficult when I don't work at all. Plus, I don't wanna give my labor to someone who despises me.
Am I overreacting in this situation and getting ahead of myself, or is this actually something worth looking into? Please help me. And yes, I know that it's very overdramatic to make things about my race-- this is genuinely the first time I've had to consider this with an employer.
TL;DR I'm the only minority at my job and I get barely any shifts while my white coworkers get more. I don't do anything wrong and I have lots of experience in similar roles. Should I look into this more, or get over myself?

I (F30) became friends with a group of girls at school at age 12. We were all very different and never had the feeling of actually being seen, heard or understood. I was into books and sports, they were into make up and boys. I do not remember having an interesting conversation, and if we had, it was the exception not the rule.
I should start by saying that there is a clear difference between an acquaintance and a friend, but what I am referring to is something in between: more than an acquaintance yet not a friend. For friend is a very profound and meaningful word that does not apply to the relationships I am referring to yet we've known each other for over 20 years.
As we aged, we followed our own paths in life. They stayed in the city where we met and were not particularly intellectually curious, while I moved to another country and consciously focused on my intellectual and emotional development.
Now that I am back in our country, I find these relationships uninteresting and rather toxic. They are still the type that sees someone wearing unusual clothes and will instinctively laugh at this person or make a comment and even take a picture, which I find rather disrespectful.
As arrogant as it sounds, I'm well above all this and can only feel but love and admiration for those who dare to be different. I also don't assign them a value or identity based on behaviour. These people are just not there.
While we live in the same country, we've been living in different cities. This made it quite easy. In the move, they never reached out to see if I was okay and I think that it was because in our last meet up, I was quite off and when asked, I mentioned that I just couldn't help but feel that the conversations were not interesting and found that laughing and taking a picture of a person and their looks is disrespectful. They said it is common to have meaningless conversations when in group, but the truth is that some of the best conversations I've had were in group. We are simply in very different platforms in life.
Perhaps as a result, they didn't reach out to me to see how the move went and have pulled away. I am very happy about this, in the sense that I feel freed from social conventions and obligations that are no longer healthy for me. In fact, looking back, these relationships never were, but still they were meaningful and I care about them, I don't want to hurt them.
I will be back in their city and feel obliged to inform them and join their outings. When the truth is that I don't want to. Partly because I don't want to feel the discomfort of seeing them but also because my time would be better employed elsewhere.
I love them the same and I am here to help them but I have very little time since I work long hours and the little I have I just don't want to share it with them.
How would you go about this so that they do not feel traumatised about the let go?
I would love to learn from your experiences and perspectives.
Thanks very much.

Hi i would like to know if this is possible In Freshservice, for sample when submitting a service request, my supervisor, Mr. X, is also the department head. In the approval workflow, Mr. X is both the first approver and the last approver representing the department. Is there a way to automatically skip the last approval step when the first approver and the department head are the same person?

Yes if you are under 40 and have enough to pay all bills without working people judge the ever living day lights out of you. They make all kinds of assumptions especially since I live a modest lifestyle. I could care less about living in a big house or owning some Telsa. I own a good gaming Desktop and PS5. That's about all the luxury I care to have. Beyond that I live with a roommate, own a modest car and eat in.
When people ask what I do saying "I'm doing fine". Should be the end of the conversation. But that's never the case.
Working two sales jobs frankly has made me hate society as a whole. After losing the last one due to COVID I just haven't been passionate about getting something else. Just had an interview yesterday at a bank where the dude interrupted me a few times to complain about those working under him. And since LinkedIn has done the whole repeating ID request doom loop. I'm apparently locked out of much of the employment market if the Gen Z dudes I know are correct about that trendy M$ braindead site. It's basically TikTok for jobs from what little I got to use it before the random Defacto ban even though I didn't even use it over a year.
At church being unemployed basically means I'll never fit in. But even in other social context it's been true.
It's not even like I want to talk about people's life situation. Others just insist on bringing it up and making a giant deal out of it. I don't talk about how much I have. It's just I don't have a job and I do fine. That's all. I don't talk about investments now because the last friend that I told isn't my friend anymore and got divorced after losing the house.
People clearly care more about this than not dating and I thought that was a pain. Like the time I got into an argument with a pastor that told me anyone can reproduce and therefore all should get married unless they are going to be a full time minster. Yeah after giving my two 2 cents they told me please don't return if you can't accept our family values.
It's really why can't I go to a church and not have someone want an argument because I answer in plain truth. It's somehow a worse version of the why aren't you dating/married argument. And all I want is peace.

is it okay if I refuse to work on the grounds of autism ? I currently receive disability benefits . The DWP isn’t trying to get me into work , in fact they have left me alone . my co ordinator keeps suggesting I get into employment. On our last appointment she said once I get my adhd meds I could look into employment as a possibility . The thing is I don’t feel ready and i know it would be detrimental to my mental state . I do not get on well with people and it causes conflict in the workplace .
I used to have a job a year ago but I would regularly have meltdowns and eventually ended up getting arrested . I have since been referred to PREVENT (Uks anti terrorism program ) they said the content I was consuming during my meltdowns was concerning .
My care co ordinator seems to think once im on adhd meds I’ll be okay enough to hold a job … I doubt this is the case cuz I believe my autism impacts me more than the adhd .. the problem I have is with social interaction . I feel the entire world is against me I can get extremely paranoid if I feel like I’m being bullied . I’m extremely sensitive to criticism (something I can’t help) since I was bullied a lot growing up it’s traumatised me .
It gets to the point where I can be a danger to myself and others . I’m scared if I end up being pressurised into employment I’ll end up getting re arrested and this time it’s prison time .
I know someone will suggest wfh jobs but they’re extremely hard to get and I don’t possess any qualifications . I also can’t stick to a work schedule I struggle so hard with the executive function side of things .
I would rather I just be left alone and not be told to get a job on the chance it might improve my mental health … i just know I wouldn’t cope and things wouldn’t end nicely …

After Luds comment on his last stream I did a quick Reddit search and found this post from 9yrs ago in sex by U/LudwigAhgren
Note: It was a funny read and definitely in his charming grammar style.
Note 2: Some of things do not work anymore but, a few still do.
“The Ultimate Guide to Shaving Your Pubes for Beginners (Men)
If you have a bush like Brillo^© , or just want to trim up the forrest so others can pass safely, you're in the right place.
I split groin hair into 5 different groups. Below I have listed the difficulty of each area as well as what kind of shave each area shall receive.
This is what we want the end product to look like. (His pubes look like the mustache of almighty Zeus himself!)

Pubic Hair	Ball Hair	Taint/Gooch Hair	High Thigh Hair	Shaft Hair
Easiest to shave. Needs to be trimmed down (No new-born baby penis look)	Scariest/Most Difficult to shave. This will be a clean shave.	Moderate difficulty. Up to shaver, but I prefer a clean shave.	Easy to shave. This will be a clean shave.	Nicks can happen here easily. This will be a clean shave.

Tools Needed: Shaving cream (MUST - Practice before which shaving cream works best! Sometimes Conditioner can work better),
electric razor (The side that pops out I will refer to as buzzer and the side with the guard I will refer to as electric razor from here on out)
A Women’s! shaving razor (women’s razors have a much higher guard and will protect better than one for men.
 
*PLEASE BE PREPARED!* I mean it’s your balls we’re talking about here…
 
Step 1: The first step will be to shave the pubic hair. Depending on how much hair is down there, you have the option to go at it with scissors like a harbor before throwing the buzzer down there. If you have an average amount (2”>x) then go at it with the buzzer. Hover your family jewels over the toilet, you may even choose to sit like a cool substitute teacher. Brush the square side of the buzzer backwards across your pubes vertically. It may seem as if it isn’t doing anything but trust me you’re losing hair faster than LeBraun James. Continue this until you deem it short enough, I like my pubes around 1/2”.
Note Make sure the pubes length is even throughout, focusing on areas that with longer hair to insure optimum symmetry, bitches love symmetry. Use a mirror!
 
Step 2: Now you’ll want to ‘square’ out your hair and completely shave off any outliers around your pubes. Perhaps you have a leaky happy trail? Or maybe your pubes are ‘fading’ in. Either way you’ll want this instead of this (not penis don’t fret) Use a mirror to make sure it’s not lopsided.
 
Step 3: Here we are going to tackle that upper thigh hair that encompasses the whole male crotch area. Now get all nakey if you aren’t already and hop in that shower. Make sure the water is warm because you’re going to be in there for a while. Whip out you’re shaving cream of choice, I use this because it makes the blade glide across my nuts (phrase of the day!). To be fair I am more metrosexual than most gay men. Anyway(!) lather that shaving cream on to you’re upper thigh, above the pubes and right around the taint (make sure the water isn’t washing it all away) and start shaving those areas. The shaving razor will insure that these areas are hair-free.
Note Make sure the blade follows the surface of the skin. You want max blade to skin contact.
 
Step 4: Here’s my favorite part. Shaving the shaft. Why is it my favorite? It adds an inch to your perceived dick length (now your dick will look like it’s an inch long^rekt. Extend your dick by pulling out your head. It will give a similar surface on the base of the dick to an erect penis. Now with the shaving cream and razor, shave the front part of the base, while always making sure the base is flat. Then do each side, trying your best to make the area being shaved flat. A flat area not only allows the razor to get more hair, it also prevents little nicks that can occur. I’ll refer back to Davidfor how far down the base you should shave.
Note If you look at the pic of David, you’ll notice he shaved the area to the right and left of his penis. That is totally you’re call, I have no opinion I find both to by stylish in their own penis way.
 
Step 5: The balls. AKA Holyshitiamsoscarediamgoingtochopmynutsoff. You may be tempted to skip this part, but trust me, hairy balls do not look good when the rest has been shaved. If you start this, you must to finish it. You are the chosen one. You are supposed to bring balance to your pubes, not leave them in darkness! Do it for the (potential) children.
Back to the balls. We’re going to first start with the outside balls. To do this get in your best captain stance which creates a nice U shape between your thigh and outer left/right ball. This is the kind of U Brett Farve has been talking about. Now, using that handy shaving cream and razor, this should be quite easy. Gently go up that are and always going along the grain. Don’t switch up directions here, that’s too ballsy.
After that’s done we’re going to drift away from the pubes for just a bit. Throw some shaving cream on the taint (this is the area that prevents you from shitting on your balls) and you’ll want to shave from your asshole to the base of your balls. Always going in that direction. IMPORTANT If you touch your taint (ew you’re gross) you’ll notice there is a line. Kind of feels like hair running from your asshole to your balls. It’s actually a vein that controls your orgasms. DO NOT SHAVE ON THIS VEIN Shave to the left and right of it. Don’t go directly on it. I don’t think anything will happen if you do… but better safe than orgasmless.
 
Step 6: Back to the balls and the last part of the shaving in the shower. This part is difficult and to be honest I’m not sure of the best way to approach this. Balls are weird and that they have no fucking shape and 2 million wrinkles. I like to first take my electric razor and use the buzzer part of it. Then I just air swipe my balls getting all the hair about 1/4” short. Then I take the shaving cream and focus on specific parts squeezing my balls to get maximum surface area. This seems to work out for me, but keeping it 1/4 of an inch isn’t that big of a deal. Hair that short is difficult to notice and ladies/men will still suck your nuts.
Note Loosen up before shaving your balls. Take deep breaths and relax. Make sure your asshole isn’t clenched because that raises your balls. And if you’re down there shaving with a clenched asshole, and for any reason your asshole unclenches, you’re balls will drop (again) and hell will break loose. It is better to shave them while they are low and have them clench upwards.
 
Step 7: Clean up all the pubes off of your body. This is no simple task. Water is an adhesive so you’ll have to detach the shower head and put that all up in your business. I like to turn on the bath and use that heavy rush of water to cleanse my body of those clingy cutoff pubes. Hop out the shower, dry off and look at your masterpiece Michelangelo. But you are not done yet!
 
Step 8: Similar to barbers, you will have missed a few hair and you’ll probably have a few 2 inch hairs amongst you’re gently coiffed pubes. Grab a pair of nail scissors or whatever tool you prefer and chop those suckers off. The majority will be on your balls. A fun thing I like to do that is totally fucking weird, is pulling long pubes on my balls and plucking them off. It is surprisingly easy to do so because of the loose ball skin. Don’t yank it out like a band-aid though or you’ll need a band-aid (Ha Ha.. I’m not funny)
 
Voila, you’re done. Get some aftershave on those freshly shaven balls to disinfect your nicks and make those meaty knockers smell like a man. Congratulations and I hope I was of some help!
 
Edit 1: Let't talk about asshole hair, (what a great conversation start^{furiouslyjotsdown)} that area can be shaved and it can look/feel good! But personally, I like to keep my Brown Eye of Sauron to myself. No traveller has dared venture down so I feel no need to shave.
Edit 2: One of my ball shaving colleagues has alerted me that the 'taint vein' is actually, "[A] scar, from where the skin fuses before birth and is called the perineal raphe." (Google it for some nice visuals)
 
Thank you all for the great response! Being on the front page of sex is something all my future employers will be impressed by. I recently shaved and I seriously mistook my junk for King David's jewels (obviously he is miles bigger) and I thought I'd right down exactly what I did.”

Have a general question? Want to offer some commentary on markets? Maybe you would just like to throw out a neat fact that doesn't warrant a self post? Feel free to post here!
If your question is "I have $10,000, what do I do?" or other "advice for my personal situation" questions, you should include relevant information, such as the following:

• How old are you? What country do you live in?
• Are you employed/making income? How much?
• What are your objectives with this money? (Buy a house? Retirement savings?)
• What is your time horizon? Do you need this money next month? Next 20yrs?
• What is your risk tolerance? (Do you mind risking it at blackjack or do you need to know its 100% safe?)
• What are you current holdings? (Do you already have exposure to specific funds and sectors? Any other assets?)
• Any big debts (include interest rate) or expenses?
• And any other relevant financial information will be useful to give you a proper answer.

Please consider consulting our FAQ first - https://www.reddit.com/investing/wiki/faq And our side bar also has useful resources.
If you are new to investing - please refer to Wiki - Getting Started
The reading list in the wiki has a list of books ranging from light reading to advanced topics depending on your knowledge level. Link here - Reading List
Check the resources in the sidebar.
Be aware that these answers are just opinions of Redditors and should be used as a starting point for your research. You should strongly consider seeing a registered investment adviser if you need professional support before making any financial decisions!

Welcome to the /Fitness Daily Simple Questions Thread - Our daily thread to ask about all things fitness. Post your questions here related to your diet and nutrition or your training routine and exercises. Anyone can post a question and the community as a whole is invited and encouraged to provide an answer.

As always, be sure to read the wiki first. Like, all of it. Rule #0 still applies in this thread.

Also, there's a handy search function to your right, and if you didn't know, you can also use Google to search Fitness by using the limiter "site:reddit.com/fitness" after your search topic.
Also make sure to check out Examine.com for evidence based answers to nutrition and supplement questions.
If you are posting a routine critique request, make sure you follow the guidelines for including enough detail.

"Bulk or cut" type questions are not permitted on Fitness - Refer to the FAQ or post them in bulkorcut.

Questions that involve pain, injury, or any medical concern of any kind are not permitted on Fitness. Seek advice from an appropriate medical professional instead.

(Please note: This is not a place for general small talk, chit-chat, jokes, memes, "Dear Diary" type comments, shitposting, or non-fitness questions. It is for fitness questions only, and only those that are serious.)

The shiny new discs you got last week didn't make your golf game any better, huh?
Welcome to the Form Check Weekly Thread, a weekly thread that will be stickied every Monday morning for a few days. All form check requests will be referred to here.
There have been some fantastic Form Check guides but this one by MVP_Steve is far and away the best - https://www.reddit.com/discgolf/comments/760ckm/form_check_psa_how_to_leave_a_form_check_request/

Hi! Currently loooking for a project-based or part-time job for my college funds and rent for my boarding house and utilities.
What I offer: - Tutoring services (Pre-calculus to calculus, general and inorganic chemistry, physics, biology, fisheries, GIS, English) - 3 years experience as an online ESL teacher - Data Entry - Bookkeeping - Social Media MarketeManager - Virtual Assistant (willing to be trained) - SHS research consultation (oceanography, fisheries stock assessment, GIS mapping, aquaculture, and fisheries-related courses are my specialties) - Coaching for Research Oral Presentations (Best in Oral Presentation PAMS) - SEO content writing (can send samples of my work) - short-form video editing (AMV and edits)
If you have any leads for jobs I can apply for I can send my CV, portfolio, and resume for your reference.
Can work everyday 20 hours per week.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

We recently had a problem in a workload cluster which had a cascading effect on our Vault cluster. Essentially there was a lot of pod restarts causing an increase in requests for new database credentials. The maximum load was not big, from ~0.5 req/s to ~1 req/s but it resulted in a big increase in the time it took to create database credentials on a specific connection. Load testing shows that using multiple Vault connection configurations to the same database, only the connection under load is affected.
The bottleneck presumably is somewhere in the database secrets engine not in the database. We have spent a lot of time trying to figure out where our bottleneck is as we need to be able to scale beyond this but have not been able to figure it out. The graph below shows that with a slight increase in number of users being created the timing starts to increase eventually going beyond 80 seconds. CPU usage and memory usage does not increase significantly nor does the time to PUT to the raft storage. So throwing more hardware at it does not seem to be the solution. We are currently using the reference architecture for a small cluster.
We are at a loss. Any recommendation to what metrics we should be looking at or what we should be doing to shed some light on the situation would be greatly appreciated.
https://preview.redd.it/qzm8sxnrjq1d1.png?width=1690&format=png&auto=webp&s=f3200a23618285a518087a0fcdf991bf1a801935
Reference k8s architecture

Greetings!
We at Honor Games released award winning Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars modification Tiberium Secrets. We are now pursuing our first commercial titles.
We consist of passionate individuals striving to get into the games and entertainment industries, which has resulted in us networking with many developers and executives in the industry.
We're looking for dedicated individuals interested in continuing a new project with us.
You can learn more about us here:
Honorgames.co
~Opening: Lead writer~
We at Honor Games (based in Pacific standard time (GMT-8) are searching for a competent lead writer to take on the hands-on details of implementing world building and character backstories of the IP we create. As of now, we have 1 project in active development (vultures), 1 project in preproduction (charge!), and 1 project waiting for proper personnel support (Equation of Humanity).
As a writer myself, I’ve come to understand that I’m more interested and able to do the big picture writing and act as a “show runner.” I’m less interested in IMPLEMENTING the nitty gritty details myself. I’D SAY I’M GOOD AT DOING “THE BROAD BRUSH”, and I’d like to find a writing candidate to train into lead writer, and eventually narrative director for the company.
I have a psychology background, and I act as CEO an executive producer for the company and projects in question. I’ve also acted as lead writer and PR lead in the past. I’m specifically searching for narrative candidates who are able to run with an existing direction, stay within the limits of said direction, yet also synthesize concepts into a holistic picture in potentially novel ways.
We’re looking for a passionate and strong minded individual, a person who can articulate their position and work alongside other department leads. They will be able to act as a core leadership member and back up their perspective logically. They will be able to hold their ground, and lead a writing department that has yet to be staffed. They will be able to write and proof public relations posts as needed. They will be able to take notes for meetings they attend. They will be able to do effective research. Other duties as assigned.
~The only hard requirement I have, is that you need to have at least one finished and published work OUT IN THE WORLD.~
~PROJECT OVERVIEWS:~
~Vultures~ is a game that combines the elements of an economic and manufacturing simulator such as Factorio and Production Line. The game takes place in real time, with players put in charge of a manufacturing corporate empire. Players are responsible for buying plants and equipment, hiring labor, and buying and selling raw materials and finished goods.
Vultures aims to satirize corporate culture and the manufacturing process. Vultures will keep players engaged, switching between the two simulations to keep either one from becoming stale too quickly.
~Charge!~ is a first-person shooter (FPS) set in the future where there is peace on earth, and this sport is how most people entertain and advance themselves. All weapons are light based. and players will be able to choose different color classes, each with their own unique set of features.
The game is effectively laser tag with mirrors, prisms, and lenses. It can also be thought of as Portal with light-based puzzles.
To advance the first-person shooter (FPS) genre, by adding novel mechanics and unconventional weapons. Returning to the halcyon days of FPS, focusing on deathmatch and the multiplayer experience.
~Equation of Humanity (EoH)~ Is a concept for a real-time strategy (RTS) game in a science fiction setting. Players will take control of one of two armies, building bases, managing resources, and producing and commanding units in order to destroy other players and AI controlled factions on the battlefield. EoH started out as a mod for another RTS game (Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars) named Tiberium Secrets. The mod aimed to add three new armies, each with unique aesthetics and mechanics that separated them both from existing elements within the base game and from each other. Tiberium Secrets had a partial release to good reception, especially considering how old the base game was at the time. However, the limitations of the base game and its license eventually proved insurmountable, and the mod was canceled before a full release. The ASI faction was finalized and shipped, along with minor but fundamental changes to the original factions.
EoH seeks to pick up where Tiberium Secrets left off. Like its predecessor, EoH has plans for three armies with radically different designs. Using the power of the Unreal Engine, EoH will be free of the constraints of a mod and will be commercially available as a standalone product.
The factions come complete with diverse units, structures, mechanics, and lore. Players will take command of a global government faction intent on ensuring the survival of humanity without concern for red tape or ideologies or an artificial intelligence believing itself to be the next evolution of humanity.
This Game’s aim is to create an aesthetically pleasing, diverse and intriguing play-style for each faction, incorporating inspiration from many other works and real-world subjects. We also strive to recreate and surpass the original draw and impact of “Tiberium Secrets”. Striving to present theories of how the world/ universe works and operates.
Requirements:

• Excellent English communication skills (spoken and written).
• Positive influence and leadership skills - Motivates and energizes others
• Critical thinker
• Contract Signature
• Team Player
• Passionate and respectful
• Grit
• Initiative
• Keen attention to detail
• finish at least 1 shipped game / project/ book or equivalent
• Experience with Jira (Bonus)

Benefits:
This position gives the great chance to not only gain experience in your fields, but to also work together with highly motivated individuals in a team. It is required to give and take constructive criticism and simply push the designs to the limits to give the player the best gaming experience possible. In addition, we are focusing on creating high quality across the board, which means that you'll get great video material to publish on your blogs/websites to showcase your work. You can expect a solid foundation and work done in every area of development, since this is not our first project. The team leader may be a reference for future work relationships.
Professional networking and development opportunities are also critical to our success and if you invest in us, we will invest in you, both on a personal and professional level. As long as your committed to our core values and share knowledge and resources.
Required Time:
This position will require 10-15 hours per week. It is very important that you can react to emails and inquiries via smartphone or any other devices. We also have regular team meetings, which are required. Many of us have day jobs in addition to this commitment. You will be responsible for logging and reporting your hours, which will be regularly audited, for the purpose of determining fair Revenue share when the game ships.
We use Google Drive, Jira, Slack, Zoom and Email for the exchange of data and information. Further information can be given upon request.
Interested in working with us?

To Apply

If you’re interested and able Please email me [eric.chou@honorgames.co](mailto:eric.chou@honorgames.co)
Include: 1. Time zone 2. Portfolio/ writing samples 3. Introduction 4. name of your published work, and your biggest lesson learned

TW: references to suicidal thinking, discussions of harm toward others, mental health challenges
When I (23f) was a freshman in college, I had a friend, Amanda (name changed), who was in the same program as me and lived down the hall from me, and we hit it off. She had her quirks, and she made gruesome comments a lot, but mostly it was stuff you could easily take as a joke without thinking twice about her intentions. I considered her a friend.
Towards the end of spring break, she called me and asked if I could take her to pick up her glasses that were being fixed as she couldn’t drive herself without them. I agreed and when I got back to campus that Saturday around noon, we headed out to get her glasses. Turns out it was a trap.
As soon as we got off campus, she went from acting totally normal to practically sobbing. She was over the top emotional, explaining how her partner had just broken up with her and how she was so hurt and broken. I was caught off guard by the sudden mood swing to say the least. But then she kept going. She proceeded to make remarks about driving to the ex’s place of employment to physically confront them, but wouldn’t it be a shame if she were to wreck and off herself intentionally along the way? Her pattern of thinking went off the deep end so fast I felt like I was getting whiplash. She went from laughing and joking to talking about offing herself to make her ex feel bad within literal minutes.
I did my best to calm Amanda. We got her glasses picked up, got her food, and then I told her she could come back to my dorm room when we got back to campus because her words made me scared to leave her alone. When we got back to my dorm I started to unpack from going to visit my parents over the break, and she sat on my floor and started telling me, in graphic detail, how she could off herself that night. I tried my best to calm her down, tried to lighten the mood, and text a mutual friend to come help me because Amanda was spiraling very rapidly.
Before the friend arrived, Amanda started describing how she could kill her ex and how easy it would be to kill me. Amanda was pretty athletic, and she worked out with our campus ROTC, so she was pretty agile. I knew if she had any intention of hurting me, I wouldn’t win in the fight. So when she was not paying as much attention or was looking at her phone, I started hiding anything and everything in my room I could think of that she could use to hurt herself or me: scissors, charging cables, my cutlery. And she kept flipping the conversation to hurting somebody (herself and/or me or her ex) the whole time. This spiral in my dorm lasted about three hours.
Finally my friend arrived and we were able to convince Amanda she needed help and drove her to the hospital around midnight. After waiting for almost 6 hours, Amanda was released and our mutual friend who had gone back with Amanda so she wasn’t alone pulled me aside and said Amanda had lied to the doctors and said we forced her there against her will and she was totally fine. The doctors released her with a prescription for an anxiety medication and a note to my friend to have Amanda give us all her sharp items.
We go back to the dorms, Amanda voluntarily gives us any sharp or weapon-like objects she has in her dorm, and separate to go to sleep. Not even two hours after I fall asleep that morning (it was almost 7 AM when we got back from the hospital), I wake up to noises in my room. I lived alone. Amanda had broken into my dorm room and was scurrying around in the dark. To say it scared the absolute crap out of me would be an understatement. Amanda claimed my door was unlocked, but I know it wasn’t. She also claimed she was only in there to get her leftovers from the day prior, but something didn’t feel right to me.
I distanced myself that next day because she was honesty scaring me and I needed space to sort out my thoughts. When I wouldn’t answer her messages, she started bombarding me with calls and texts. When I let her know I wasn’t answering because I was with other friends on campus, she requested that I let her into their dorm so she wasn’t alone. I said I couldn’t do that and she said she was going to harm herself. I called the RA on duty and informed them of her statements and sent screenshots of the message from Amanda saying she would hurt herself to them. When the RA went to check in on Amanda, they told me she was chilling in her room completely normal. No odd behavior or heightened emotions.
That Sunday night when I returned to my dorm, I had stepped in my room to put down my bag and turn on my light and then walked down the hallway to use the communal restroom. Her dorm room was on a hallway angled to my own and she could see my window from hers. She was watching and saw my light come on and was pounding at my door within minutes. She was knocking and yelling so loud I could hear her in the bathroom. It scared me, and I didn’t know what to do so I messaged another girl on our hallway and asked her to intervene so I could leave without Amanda spotting me.
When the girl went out to see what Amanda was doing and tell her to quit, Amanda told her that she was just going to pick my lock and wait for me to get back from wherever I had gone. My friend managed to distract Amanda enough that I slipped out of the dorm unnoticed.
I slept in another dorm that night with a friend, but went to my schools Title IX the next morning to report the break in and harassment. The school took four days, with around five meetings, including one with a campus counselor and several with the dean of student affairs to finally allow me a no contact order with Amanda, but the damage to me was done. I fell into what was one of the worst depressive episodes of my life. I was scared to leave my dorm room. I was scared to be alone. I woke up panicking thinking somebody was in my room. I didn’t leave my dorm room for almost two weeks unless my friends dragged me to the cafeteria for food but I rarely let them.
My grades plummeted because I wasn’t attending class or doing my homework. Amanda started telling anybody who was in the program with us that I had abandoned her for no reason and even told the dean of student affairs that we had been in a relationship and I didn’t want to break up with her to her face so I went to Title IX and made it all up. She was lying to anybody and everybody who would listen.
I almost lost my scholarships, I lost friends, and I lost myself because of all of this. It’s been five years now, and while I am better, I still have triggers related to what Amanda put me through. I’m slower to trust, more calculated when making plans with friends, and if anybody around me has a negative emotional response (aka anger or frustration or sadness) I panic into a spiral by automatically fearing that they will off themself.
The bright side of the situation ended up being a love of psychology that I discovered while trying to overcome my mental health struggles brought on by this situation. I changed my major to psychology, got my bachelors of science, and am now content working on my masters and looking forward to getting my PH.D. in the near future.
I don’t think I’ll ever fully emotionally recover from the fear and trauma of that weekend, but I forgave Amanda a long time ago because the reality of the situation is that she needed help. And I did all I could to try and get her that help, but if she wasn’t ready to accept it then there was truly nothing more I could have done. I only removed myself when it became harmful to myself. And I hope wherever Amanda ended up today that she is safe and content with her life and her choices.

In the competitive world of jewelry design, presenting your creations in the most captivating and realistic manner is essential. This is where jewelry rendering services come into play, transforming your designs into lifelike visuals that attract clients and elevate your brand. But with so many options available, how do you choose the best jewelry rendering service? In this blog post, we’ll explore key factors to consider and highlight what makes a jewelry rendering service truly exceptional.
1. Quality of Renderings:
The hallmark of the best jewelry rendering service is the quality of its renderings. High-resolution images with detailed textures, accurate reflections, and realistic lighting are essential. The renderings should closely resemble real-life photographs, capturing every facet, curve, and detail of the jewelry piece. Please look for services that provide samples of their work to see if they are good enough.
2. Expertise and Experience:
Experience matters when it comes to jewelry rendering. The best services employ skilled artists who understand the nuances of jewelry design and rendering. They should have a proven track record of delivering high-quality renderings for various types of jewelry, from rings and necklaces to intricate custom pieces. An experienced team can bring your vision to life with precision and artistry.
3. Customization and Flexibility:
Every jewelry design is unique, and the best jewelry rendering services offer customization and flexibility to meet your specific needs. Whether you need to tweak the size of a gemstone, change the metal type, or adjust the overall design, the service should provide the tools and support to make these changes easily. Look for providers that offer iterative design processes and are responsive to feedback.
4. Advanced Technology:
The best jewelry rendering services utilize advanced technology to create their renderings. This includes the latest 3D modeling software, high-performance rendering engines, and tools for creating realistic materials and lighting effects. The use of cutting-edge technology ensures that the renderings are of the highest quality and produced efficiently.
5. Fast Turnaround Times:
In the fast-paced jewelry industry, time is of the essence. The best jewelry rendering services offer quick turnaround times without compromising on quality. They should be able to meet tight deadlines and deliver renderings promptly, helping you stay ahead of the competition and meet client demands.
6. Competitive Pricing:
While quality is paramount, pricing is also an important consideration. The best jewelry rendering services offer competitive pricing that provides value for money. Look for transparent pricing structures with no hidden fees, and consider whether the service offers different packages or options to suit various budget levels.
7. Customer Support and Communication:
Effective communication and excellent customer support are key attributes of the best jewelry rendering services. The provider should be responsive, easy to reach, and willing to answer any questions or address concerns you may have. Good communication ensures that the rendering process runs smoothly and that the final product meets your expectations.
8. Positive Reviews and Testimonials:
Finally, one of the best ways to gauge the quality of a jewelry rendering service is by looking at reviews and testimonials from other clients. Positive feedback and high ratings can provide insight into the service’s reliability, quality, and customer satisfaction. Don’t hesitate to ask for references or check online reviews to make an informed decision.
Conclusion:
Choosing the best jewelry rendering service is crucial for bringing your designs to life and presenting them in the most appealing way possible. You can find a service that meets your needs and exceeds your expectations by considering factors such as quality, expertise, customization, technology, turnaround times, pricing, customer support, and reviews. Investing in a top-notch jewelry rendering service will not only enhance your design process but also help you captivate your audience and elevate your brand.

So let me go on a story.
I'm a gay 29M.
I lost my parents, and received inheritance around two months before my birthday last year. It was put toward purchasing a lovely home with several rooms and accommodations. It's very lovely.
However; when this happened, I lost my job which would've provided a far better income, benefits, and far easier work due to circumstances that transpired. I was set back for a while, and ultimately became financially unstable. I always make it work out ultimately now, re-employed and taking odd jobs, so I've become reliable on that front.
I invited a coworker of mine who wanted to avoid her abusive living situation with her mother, who threatened to kick her out. This coworker friend (20F) [Let's call her J] tends to have anger-issues that elicit her to lash out at people rather immensely. She has made tremendous progress in this respect I feel in some of the time I know her, but habits continue. It's not physical or anything, it's just emotional/anxiety riddled stuff, and so forth. For the most part, having lost the job, the majority of the duress between us arrives from housing situations and ultimately the issues aren't massive. Either out of respect, out of understanding, or out of better compatibility, things improved. Likewise she has a cat, and while it can be a little annoying, it's adorable so I forgive it. Likewise she's a big animal lover.
Near Christmas, another former Coworker of mine (24F) [She can be H.]had a falling out with her boyfriend. So at the behest of my new roommate's request, she was given a room. It was a trial to sort of get her back on her feet. I offered a month without rent to allow her to save money. Then a 3-month period discounted Rent, to help her furnish herself. Likewise due to a smaller room; she had less money owed. This has continued for five or so months in totality. This Coworker I don't have much synergy with, and she seems primarily self-contained. I don't opt to interact with her, and she doesn't with me. Likewise; she's far more extroverted than I or my roommate, so often goes out drinking, hanging out with boys, etc.
Recap.
J is 20. H is 24.
And for the majority of the time together; the two have been fast friends and likewise seemed to improve more as they've hung out here. Until the second roommate wanted a cat, which initially both were overjoyed by. She got a kitten, pretty spontaneously. And ignoring advice, she let it interact with my roommate's cat. We were initially planning on keeping them apart for both their safety, especially because the kitten hadn't been vet-processed and J's cat has a slightly weak immune system. This was in breach of trust given, and upset J quite a bit.
H had made plans to hangout with a friend that night, and essentially left the cat in a carrier in her room, and told J she'd likely be back by 1 AM that night, and if she could watch the cat. J had work at 7 AM, but agreed.
H got drunk and never came home that night. Meanwhile, the kitten she adopted was mewling all night across J's room and upsetting her essentially. The 4-week old kitten was comforted and likewise, and could fit into your cupped hands. It got stuck under a door once even, escaping it's carrier. It could've been bad or worse. I'm mildly upset at it.
But likewise; I own a pet I keep in my room too, who rarely scratches at the door sometimes. I can understand a cat left to their own devices can be fine, they can be solitary creatures seemingly. But given how young the kitten was and how it needed constant attention, it felt very rough for J to both look after H's kitten after everything, and for H to disappear after saying she'd return. Likewise J didn't want the cat to be harmed. She'd leave it be for intermittent periods but would check in on it every half-hour to hour.
So on this side of the topic; I feel J is beyond validated.
But it evolved.
J elected to lash out at H over this. Sending 20+ text messages in the same day; threatening to get the cat into a Vet, or Humane Shelter due to what had happened and the seeming neglect, so on and forth. Hollow threats she claims to provoke H into caring more, but ultimately still made and essentially this was on the first day of owning the kitten. I don't feel H was given an opportunity or time to process or adjust from her day's decision, and was bombarded immensely with hateful messages that tore her down.
Ultimately, this led to H giving her cat away, but she refuses to apologize, and their friendship essentially broke. H's ability to take accountability is tremendously limited and often leans toward victimization at times, but I empathized with her because J can be absolutely vitriolic, toxic, and poisonous when her anger oversteps her rationality.
Ultimately H feels like moving out in some regards due to it. But the talk about J's feelings toward H; the disdain, annoyance, and likewise low-opinion J holds due to this, has caused H to recluse some toward J further. And ultimately time has passed, between shouting at one another, to text messages, to H seeking refuge in friends and drink, to J having a operation around this time and spending time recuperating from it. Which opened a bridge of concern from H, that I hoped would maybe lead them to talking it out. Because the two can be good at it.
But ultimately when J relented enough to offer the Olive Branch, H rejected it. Which is her right. Civility after the initial moments had been somewhat restored, life moved on, they weren't friends but they could mostly live with one another.
Which led J spiraling into an angry tirade that was primarily meant to tear down H again, and did so by praying on trauma H had. Because J wanted to ensure all bridges were burnt down.
I'm stuck in the middle on this and it's aggravating me.
H refuses to even so much as budge in admitting fault, but I honestly don't think leaving your kitten alone at home is necessarily a bad idea on paper; since many animals are often left alone and while not the greatest situation can still be fine. She already has to work an 8-hour+ job some days, and would be relying on us in the interim for feline-care, until the cat was grown, had her shots, and was allowed to roam the house and have some more freedom. And likewise she had made plans, and got carried away. I can honestly chalk up her decisions to inexperience and bad decision-making and feel in some respects she deserves some grace. Likewise J's treatment of her, personal attacks, threats to get the Cat put into a Vet after one day, and likewise were it me in her shoes it would make me reconsider ownership of the cat as well, and likewise would make me very unreceptive toward any sort of relationship with J.
But as I said; H throughout all of this didn't apologize, and took solely to defending her decisions, justifying her rationale in them, and ultimately even on the things she did wrong that led to the situation developing, doesn't relent.
J meanwhile, I can see the frustration on. She is earnestly trying to get H to be accountable. She helped tremendously toward even getting the cat, and offered a lot of help throughout the process. She had her own cat endangered recklessly despite several warnings (in a very avoidable way that you'd deliberately have to do otherwise), and likewise was sent to work without sleep caretaking for a kitten that she had only volunteered for a few hours for. Much the same, the kitten was essentially in distress and abandoned in the first day, which raised a few questions about the responsibility and future events arising alike to that.
But; I feel that while J deserves to be told that in several respects she was right, that her grievances toward H erupted in such a manner that it was absolutely disrespectful, and painful, and likewise manipulative in the worst of ways.
I've no idea what to do in this case, because I'd like both Renters to sort of hash it out, and be done with it, but obviously not happening per se. But I'm also conflicted on the topic. I don't know if the kitten left alone is a massive deal and red flag for future neglect on the first day, or if it was acceptable to take time away from the kitten given how it would be left alone anyway when she worked. Likewise; I'm not sure if J's justified in respects for how used it made her feel and not receiving a single apology, or if H at this point is suffering more than enough from how J's reacting.
I'm very stuck in the middle here, and I'm worried about losing one. Should I accept the potential loss?
TL;DR: 20F lashes out toxically at 24F for abandoning kitten she had just adopted for twelve+ hours and making her babysit on a work-night beyond agreed upon times and also endangering her own cat in the same day. 24F refuses to apologize, but 20F's negative response has been borderline overwhelming and personal.
29M landlord is unsure what to do, feel, think, or prepare for.