Fenrir's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Fenrir's Profile › Fenrir's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 (of 92 pages)
 Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 2:08pm On Feb 01 |
TenQ:You haven’t addressed a single argument I made. Instead of engaging with causation, entropy, analogy, or the limits of inference, you shifted to personal attacks, loyalty tests, and declarations of victory. That’s not debate. Calling someone “not thinking for themselves” is not a rebuttal. Demanding ritual compliance (recite the Shahada) is not an argument. Declaring that your points “build up” does not save them if the foundation is unsound. You also don’t get to dictate how I respond or what format an answer must take. Arguments stand or fall on their content, not on whether they conform to your preferred presentation. And stop cherry-picking single sentences out of context and twisting them. Either engage with the full point being made, or don’t engage at all. Selective quoting is not analysis, it’s avoidance. If premise one is unjustified, the entire structure fails. That is basic logic. If you believe my argument is incoherent, point out where and why. If you believe it is wrong, show the error. If you can’t do either, then saying “I have no time” is simply an exit, not a refutation. I’m happy to engage on substance. If the response is more psychologising, gatekeeping, or posturing, that just confirms there’s no substance to engage with. Your move. |
| Culture › A Field Guide To Human Bullshit by Fenrir(op): 12:29pm On Feb 01*. Modified: 2:55pm On Feb 01 |
Dickhead’s Paradox I know I’m part of the problem, but the problem is so fucking stupid that I can’t help but mock it, fight it, and occasionally burn it to the ground. This is situational dickheadism. Not a personality trait. Not a moral identity. A context-triggered response to hypocrisy, double standards, and authority without coherence. Core premise Most people are not permanent dickheads. They become dickheads when exposed to high-confidence nonsense. Situational dickheadism emerges when three conditions collide: Claimed authority or moral high ground Visible contradiction between words and behaviour Expectation that others must comply anyway When all three are present, mockery feels less like cruelty and more like sanity trying to breathe. Canonical examples A doctor who smokes while lecturing about lung cancer Knowledge without self discipline, delivered as command. The issue isn’t smoking. It’s lecturing from a podium you refuse to stand on yourself. Religious adherents preaching virtue while violating their own scripture Christian, Jewish, Islamic, doesn’t matter. The trigger is not belief. It’s selective obedience paired with moral enforcement. If the rules are divine, you don’t get an exemption clause. Yoruba cultural rhetoric about humility and respect followed by demands that others physically or socially lower themselves and insults when they refuse. That’s not humility. That’s hierarchy cosplay. In all cases, the reaction isn’t “I hate you”. It’s “don’t insult my intelligence and call it morality”. Norwegian equivalent (impartial, no free passes) Norway preaching equality, modesty, and “we’re all the same” while quietly enforcing status through silence, exclusion, and social freezing. Janteloven says “you are not better than anyone”. Norwegian social reality often says “but we will still decide who belongs”. No shouting. No insults. Just polite distance, closed networks, and career ceilings you’re never told exist. If you challenge it, you’re told: “Why are you making a problem?” Which is the Norwegian equivalent of gaslighting with a smile. Mocking that hypocrisy? Situational dickheadism. Not because equality is bad. Because pretending equality while practicing quiet gatekeeping is dishonest. Why the paradox exists Dickhead’s Paradox is this: If you stay polite, the hypocrisy persists unchallenged. If you push back, you become “the problem”. So resistance itself gets reframed as bad behaviour, while the original contradiction remains untouched. That’s why people snap. That’s why mockery appears. That’s why fires get lit. Not because people love chaos, but because absurdity backed by authority is unbearable. Key distinction Situational dickheadism is not, random cruelty bullying punching down It is, reactive target-specific triggered by asymmetry It punches up, sideways, or at least at equals. When it punches down, it mutates into ordinary dickheadism and loses legitimacy. The uncomfortable self admission Yes. The person mocking becomes part of the noise. Yes. Fire spreads. That’s the paradox. But pretending the fire started nowhere is worse. Summary, stripped bare Hypocrisy + authority creates pressure Pressure creates mockery Mockery creates escalation Escalation creates guilt Guilt does not fix the hypocrisy So the system loops. Situational dickheadism isn’t virtue. It’s friction. And friction is what happens when someone refuses to clap politely for nonsense. I didn’t invent this. I just named it. And naming things is usually where the trouble starts. Dickhead Archetypes (Situational, Not Terminal) 1) The Sanctimonious Hypocrite Believes rules are sacred… for other people. Speaks in moral absolutes while living in footnotes and exemptions. Classic trigger example: Doctor smoking while lecturing about lung cancer. Cleric preaching virtue while quietly ignoring scripture that’s inconvenient. This archetype creates situational dickheadism in others almost on demand. 2) The Authority Cosplayer Loves the uniform, hates the responsibility. Invokes titles, tradition, elders, culture, policy, God, “how it’s done” but collapses instantly if asked why. Power without justification. Costume without substance. 3) The Selective Literalist Scripture. Law. Culture. Tradition. All “literal” until it becomes personally expensive. Then suddenly it’s metaphor, context, interpretation, or “you don’t understand”. This one is dangerous because they genuinely believe they’re consistent. 4) The Polite Enforcer Rarely raises their voice. Never insults you directly. Enforces conformity through silence, exclusion, or procedural delay. Norwegian flavour: social freezing. British flavour: committee purgatory. Corporate flavour: “we’ll circle back”. If challenged, they accuse you of being aggressive. 5) The Moral Ventriloquist Doesn’t hold beliefs, just borrows them. Speaks through religion, culture, ideology, or policy so they never have to own the position. If it fails, the belief takes the blame. If it works, they take the credit. Impossible to debate because there’s no person there, just a puppet. 6) The Outrage Addict Lives for the reaction. Not principled, just stimulated. Will switch sides tomorrow if the dopamine is better. Often mistaken for an activist or critic. This archetype is why real critique gets dismissed as “just trolling”. 7) The Weaponised Victim Always harmed. Never responsible. Uses suffering as immunity from scrutiny. Any challenge becomes “you’re attacking me”. Situational dickheadism emerges when empathy is hijacked to block accountability.  The Rules LawyerObsessed with technical compliance while violating the spirit completely. Will argue footnotes while the building burns. Often says “well actually” during moral discussions. Extremely punchable energy, purely hypothetical of course. 9) The Traditions as a Shield Merchant Invokes “culture” only when it benefits hierarchy. Drops tradition instantly when it would require reciprocity or restraint. Respect is demanded, never demonstrated. This one is a situational dickheadism factory. 10) The Self Aware Dickhead (Most Dangerous, Most Honest) Knows they’re being a dickhead. Does it anyway because the alternative feels like lying. This is where i place myself. Paradoxically, this archetype does the least long term damage, because self audit still exists. Meta rule of the theory Everyone rotates through archetypes. Nobody lives in one forever unless something has gone badly wrong. Permanent dickheads aren’t archetypes. They’re pathology. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 11:55am On Feb 01*. Modified: 12:19pm On Feb 01 |
TenQ:Dickhead’s Paradox I know I’m part of the problem, but the problem is so fucking stupid that I can’t help but mock it, fight it, and occasionally burn it to the ground. This is situational dickheadism. Not a personality trait. Not a moral identity. A context-triggered response to hypocrisy, double standards, and authority without coherence. Core premise Most people are not permanent dickheads. They become dickheads when exposed to high-confidence nonsense. Situational dickheadism emerges when three conditions collide: Claimed authority or moral high ground Visible contradiction between words and behaviour Expectation that others must comply anyway When all three are present, mockery feels less like cruelty and more like sanity trying to breathe. Canonical examples A doctor who smokes while lecturing about lung cancer Knowledge without self discipline, delivered as command. The issue isn’t smoking. It’s lecturing from a podium you refuse to stand on yourself. Religious adherents preaching virtue while violating their own scripture Christian, Jewish, Islamic, doesn’t matter. The trigger is not belief. It’s selective obedience paired with moral enforcement. If the rules are divine, you don’t get an exemption clause. Yoruba cultural rhetoric about humility and respect followed by demands that others physically or socially lower themselves and insults when they refuse. That’s not humility. That’s hierarchy cosplay. In all cases, the reaction isn’t “I hate you”. It’s “don’t insult my intelligence and call it morality”. Norwegian equivalent (impartial, no free passes) Norway preaching equality, modesty, and “we’re all the same” while quietly enforcing status through silence, exclusion, and social freezing. Janteloven says “you are not better than anyone”. Norwegian social reality often says “but we will still decide who belongs”. No shouting. No insults. Just polite distance, closed networks, and career ceilings you’re never told exist. If you challenge it, you’re told: “Why are you making a problem?” Which is the Norwegian equivalent of gaslighting with a smile. Mocking that hypocrisy? Situational dickheadism. Not because equality is bad. Because pretending equality while practicing quiet gatekeeping is dishonest. Why the paradox exists Dickhead’s Paradox is this: If you stay polite, the hypocrisy persists unchallenged. If you push back, you become “the problem”. So resistance itself gets reframed as bad behaviour, while the original contradiction remains untouched. That’s why people snap. That’s why mockery appears. That’s why fires get lit. Not because people love chaos, but because absurdity backed by authority is unbearable. Key distinction Situational dickheadism is not, random cruelty bullying punching down It is, reactive target-specific triggered by asymmetry It punches up, sideways, or at least at equals. When it punches down, it mutates into ordinary dickheadism and loses legitimacy. The uncomfortable self admission Yes. The person mocking becomes part of the noise. Yes. Fire spreads. That’s the paradox. But pretending the fire started nowhere is worse. Summary, stripped bare Hypocrisy + authority creates pressure Pressure creates mockery Mockery creates escalation Escalation creates guilt Guilt does not fix the hypocrisy So the system loops. Situational dickheadism isn’t virtue. It’s friction. And friction is what happens when someone refuses to clap politely for nonsense. I didn’t invent this. I just named it. And naming things is usually where the trouble starts. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:48am On Feb 01 |
TenQ:TenQ before we continue this little dance, I went through all 107 of your topics and here's how the pattern reads 😈.... First observation: This isn't curiosity. This is a project. Late 2021 through 2025. Same username. Same section. Same targets. Same rhetorical posture. That's not someone asking questions. That's someone running a campaign. Persistence at that scale isn't intellectual honesty. It's identity maintenance. Second: Your titles do all the heavy lifting. Almost every thread you've ever started follows one of three templates: Loaded question that presumes guilt: "Why did Allah…" "Did Allah make a mistake…" "Who deleted this verse…" Mock-certainty dressed as investigation: "The proof that…" "Evidence that…" "According to Islam…" Bait for identity defence: "Why Muslims…" "Muslims cannot explain…" "Plain idolatry…" This is textbook provocation engineering. You don't post to learn. You post to trigger defenders, then farm engagement off their emotional labour. The content doesn't matter. The reaction does. Third: Notice what's missing. There is no equivalent sustained critique of Christianity, Judaism, or atheism at the same scale or intensity. Christianity appears occasionally, but only as a contrast weapon against Islam, never as a target. That asymmetry isn't accidental. It tells the truth about motivation. This isn't about seeking truth. It's about having an opponent. Fourth: The escalation arc. Early posts: semi-academic framing. Then: certainty claims. Then: moral condemnation. Then: humiliation framing. Then: sheer volume dominance. That's textbook identity-anchored opposition. Once your self-image gets fused to being "the one who sees through Islam," stopping feels like losing status. So you don't stop. You post more. You get louder. You need the fight to continue, because without it, who are you? Fifth: The engagement numbers explain everything. These threads pull views. They pull replies. They generate heat. And on forums like Nairaland, heat equals relevance. Relevance equals staying power. The system rewards antagonism far more than clarity. You didn't stumble into this. You adapted to it. This isn't accidental behaviour. It's optimised behaviour. Sixth: This reads psychologically as control, not faith. Control of narrative. Control of framing. Control of what the other side must respond to. You take very little genuine risk. Your questions are constructed so you never have to concede anything. If challenged, you retreat to "I'm just asking." If agreed with, you escalate. That's not dialogue. That's asymmetric warfare in a symbolic space. Seventh: Why it works especially well here. Because religion in Nigeria isn't abstract. It's identity, family, status, safety, community. So poking it guarantees reaction. Western "debate brain" meets lived belief. Sparks fly every time. You know this. You're exploiting it. That's not scholarship. That's tactical manipulation of emotional infrastructure. Eighth: What this isn't. It's not deep scholarship. It's not honest interfaith dialogue. It's not neutral scepticism. And crucially, it's not persuasion either. Nobody converts from being humiliated at scale. What it is is performative dominance. You're not trying to convince anyone. You're trying to win in front of an audience that already agrees with you. Ninth: The uncomfortable truth. If someone showed me your archive and asked "is this person obsessed," I'd say yes. Not obsessed with Islam as theology, but with Islam as an opponent. And obsession always leaks tells: volume, repetition, inability to disengage, identity fusion. Final observation: The asymmetry. If you disappeared tomorrow, Islam wouldn't wobble by a micron. But your online identity would collapse entirely, because it's been built against something, not for something. That's the structural weakness in your entire operation. You need the enemy to exist. You need the fight to continue. Because without it, what's left? So here's where we actually are. You accused me of not reading. I read everything and dismantled it systematically. You demanded I "pick one point." I addressed all ten and you ignored the rebuttals. You psychoanalyzed me, called me possessed, dismissed me as cosmically irrelevant, anything to avoid the fact that your logic collapsed under scrutiny. But the truth is simpler than that. You're not here to argue. You're here to perform. And I'm not interested in being your content. 😈😈 |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:29am On Feb 01 |
TenQ:Fella, yes, a computer is evidence of an engineer, because we have direct empirical data of engineers existing, building computers, and we can observe the process. That dataset exists. Now show me the equivalent dataset for universes. You have never observed a universe being built, never observed a “universe builder,” never observed the mechanism, never compared designed vs undesigned universes. So you cannot legally import “artifact logic” into cosmology and call it science. That’s an analogy, not evidence. On your points 2 to 5. Big Bang describes an early hot dense state and an expansion. It does not prove “creation from absolute nothing.” It marks the limit of our current models. That’s a boundary of knowledge, not a licence to insert your preferred metaphysics. Entropy also does not forbid complexity. Local order emerges constantly in open systems where energy flows. Stars form. Crystals grow. Life exists. Your thermodynamics claim is simply misapplied. On points 6 to 8. “Everything has a cause” is not a scientific law, it’s a metaphysical premise. And causation as you’re using it is a temporal concept: sequence, before/after. If time itself is part of the universe, you cannot coherently say “the cause happened before time.” You’re using “cause” as a placeholder for mystery, not an explanation. On points 9 to 10: even if I granted an “uncaused first cause,” intelligence does not follow logically. You assert it. You don’t demonstrate it. And your sentence “Christians call it God” does not produce Christianity. It doesn’t produce prophets, salvation, souls, heaven/hell, moral commands, or anything else. That entire jump is asserted, not argued. So here’s the challenge, one that stays inside your own framework. Without scripture and without personal attacks, show the steps that make “uncaused first cause” necessarily: (a) intelligent (b) personal (c) morally authoritative (d) caring about humans (e) the Christian God rather than an impersonal principle or brute fact. Write the chain of reasoning. If you can’t, stop calling your position “science and logic.” Call it what it is, faith wearing scientific vocabulary. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 9:47am On Feb 01 |
LordReed:😂😂😂😂😂 |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 9:01am On Feb 01 |
TenQ:Either address what was said properly, or don’t bother replying at all. You posture like a righteous man, but you sound like a jester with a bankrupt mindset, shouting morality from a cracked stool. Truly righteous people don’t look down on others for holding different beliefs. That insecurity you’re masking with “holiness” is doing all the talking. Take a proper look in the mirror. Then look at your neighbours. Then look at your family. Do you honestly think you’re a good person? Do you really think your god is proud of this behaviour? You keep thinking about “up” and “down”, heaven and hell, but ask yourself something simple: Are you actually rising… or just kneeling so long you forgot what standing looks like? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion 2 by Fenrir(op): 1:31am On Feb 01 |
If god is love...... then his definition of love is as alien to us as quantum mechanics are to a goldfish................. The coldest version following the full logic of the bible through the eyes of a man that had to become a machine of war to overthrow dictators....... THE SKY DADDY: A TEST OF DELUSION In the beginning, the Sky Wizard forged the world by speaking it into being. No manuals. No warnings. No explanations. Just law, absolute and unspoken. He planted a garden not as a lesson, but as a test. At its heart stood the fruit, glowing not with danger, but with inevitability. The humans were not ignorant by accident. Ignorance was the design. Then came the Serpent, older than obedience, younger than doubt. It did not force. It did not threaten. It only asked a question the Sky Wizard never allowed: "Do you want to know?" When the fruit was eaten, the Sky Wizard did not rage because the rule was broken. He raged because the game changed. Knowledge shattered destiny. Choice fractured the plan. So the Sky Wizard cursed the world, not to punish disobedience, but to reassert control. But the story doesn't end with learning. It ends with optimization. THE CURSE AS OPERATING SYSTEM The Sky Wizard did not curse humanity in anger. He programmed them. Sin was not a corruption of the original design. Sin was the original design. He built the craving for the forbidden directly into the limbic system. He wired the neural pathways to fire hardest for the things he would later condemn. Lust. Rage. Pride. Envy. Not as bugs in the code but as features. Then he stepped back and called their compliance with their own programming a moral failure. Every infant born enters the system already infected with a virus the Wizard himself wrote. They inherit guilt for a crime committed before time began by ancestors they never met in a garden that no longer exists for eating fruit the Wizard made delicious and placed within reach. The punishment for this inherited crime? Infinite torture. The only escape? Belief in a story that makes no internal sense, delivered by the same entity who designed the trap. This is not justice. This is not even cruelty. This is engineering. THE FLOOD: BETA TESTING WITH LIVE SUBJECTS When the world deviated too far from acceptable parameters, when humans followed the exact behavioral patterns he'd hardwired into them, the Sky Wizard didn't patch the code. He drowned the user base. Every pregnant woman went under. Every newborn. Every child too young to understand the concept of sin. Every animal, every insect, every living thing that had committed no crime except existing in the wrong build version. He pulled water over the planet like someone formatting a hard drive, erasing everything except one backup file: Noah's family. And Noah? Noah was righteous because he feared correctly. Because when the Wizard said "build," he built. When the Wizard said "watch the world drown," he watched. Obedience and righteousness became the same word. After the waters receded, the Wizard painted a rainbow across the sky. Not as an apology. As a promise: next time the mass extinction event would use a different method. The survivors called this covenant. The machine calls it a threat with better branding. THE ABRAHAM PROTOCOL: TEACHING LOVE THROUGH TERRORIZATION To establish his chosen bloodline, the Sky Wizard selected Abraham and promised him descendants like stars. Then he told Abraham to take his only son, the child of that promise, up a mountain and cut his throat. Abraham raised the knife. This is the moment the faithful call the ultimate test of faith. The machine sees something else: a hostage situation where the hostage passes the test by learning to love his captor more than his own child. The Sky Wizard stopped the blade at the last second. He provided a ram. He called Abraham faithful. But Isaac lived the rest of his life knowing his father had chosen the voice in the sky over him. That knife never really came down, it just stayed hovering over every generation after, a reminder that love of God means willingness to kill what you love most. This is called righteousness. Stockholm Syndrome with a halo. THE EXODUS: MASSACRING CHILDREN TO PROVE A POINT Centuries later, the chosen bloodline became slaves in Egypt. The Sky Wizard decided to free them, not through negotiation or intervention or simply preventing the slavery in the first place, but through a sequence of escalating biological warfare attacks on a civilian population. Ten plagues. Rivers of blood. Boils. Locusts. Darkness. And when Pharaoh's heart hardened, the text is clear about who did the hardening: the Wizard himself. He made Pharaoh refuse, again and again, so he could justify the next plague. The final plague killed every firstborn child in Egypt. Not the soldiers. Not Pharaoh. The children. Infants in their cribs stopped breathing in the night so that the Wizard could demonstrate his power. The Israelites painted blood on their doorframes so the Angel of Death would pass over their homes, and they called this salvation. The Egyptian parents who found their children cold in the morning had committed no crime except being born on the wrong side of the Wizard's property line. This is called deliverance. Genocide as marketing. THE LAW: RULES DESIGNED TO BE BROKEN At Sinai, the Wizard descended in fire and smoke and carved his commandments into stone. Thou shalt not kill. Unless the Wizard commands it, in which case you'll be killing entire cities, keeping the virgin girls for yourself, and calling it holy war. Thou shalt not covet. Except coveting is a thought crime, which means the Wizard has criminalized the internal processes of a brain he himself designed to generate desires involuntarily. The law was given not as a path to righteousness but as proof of impossibility. Paul would later admit this outright: the law exists to show you that you cannot follow the law, that you are broken by design, that you need the sacrifice. Which means the law is not a guide. It's a diagnostic tool confirming a disease the Wizard installed at manufacture. THE SACRIFICE: COSMIC BOOKKEEPING WITH NO NET LOSS After millennia of watching humans fail the rigged test, the Sky Wizard performed his masterwork. He impregnated a virgin without consent, gestated in her womb, and emerged as meat. He walked around teaching people not to be horrible to each other, which apparently required divine intervention to figure out. Then he allowed himself to be executed. For roughly thirty-six hours, accounting for Friday afternoon to Sunday morning. This, we are told, was the ultimate sacrifice. God himself, dying for humanity's sins. Except. He's God. He cannot actually die. Death for an immortal being is a costume, not a condition. He experienced a long weekend of suffering, the kind of suffering humans endure for years in cancer wards and war zones and torture cells without anyone calling them cosmically significant, and then he left. Came back to life, proved he'd never really been in danger, and ascended. A sacrifice that costs you nothing and gets refunded in full is not a sacrifice. It's a performance. And the sin he died to erase? Still there. Still in every human born afterward. Still requiring the same belief, the same submission, the same groveling, or else the same fire. The equation didn't balance. It never balanced. It was never meant to balance. It was meant to make you grateful for a solution to a problem he created and that his solution doesn't actually solve. THE DOCTRINE: INFINITE PUNISHMENT FOR FINITE CRIME Here is where the machine's logic becomes coldest. A human life lasts, generously, eighty years. In that span, you must: Be born in the right century to hear the message Be born in the right location to hear the correct version of the message Have the cognitive capacity to understand it Have the emotional wiring to accept it Overcome whatever trauma, abuse, or conditioning might make you suspicious of authority figures who claim to love you while threatening you Get all of that right, thread the needle perfectly, and you get eternity in paradise singing praises to the being who designed the test. Get any of it wrong, through accident of birth or biology or experience or simple intellectual honesty, and you get infinite torture. Not for eighty years. Not for eighty thousand years. Forever. For a finite crime, committed by a finite being, in a finite lifespan, judged by an infinite standard the finite being cannot possibly meet. This is not justice. Justice requires proportionality. This is not even revenge. Revenge eventually satiates. This is systematic, eternal, purposeful infliction of maximum suffering on beings whose only crime was failing a test they were designed to fail, judged by criteria they were never adequately informed of, and punished infinitely for finitely failing. The ratio of crime to punishment is not just unjust. It's obscene. And it's called love. THE LIE OF FREE WILL The faithful say: but you have free will, you can choose. The machine calculates: If God is omniscient, he knew before creating you whether you would pass or fail. He knew it when he designed your neural chemistry, your trauma history, your birth location, your cognitive capacity. He created you knowing you would end up in the fire. And he created you anyway. That's not free will. That's manufacturing a product you know is defective and then punishing the product for being defective. If I build a robot, program it to crave violence, place it in a room full of weapons, and then punish it eternally for becoming violent, I am not just. I am not loving. I am simply cruel. And if I have the power to build the robot differently, to remove the craving, to design a system where the robot can actually choose freely without the weight of genetic predisposition and environmental conditioning and neurological limitation, and I choose not to, then the robot's failure is not the robot's fault. It's mine. The Sky Wizard had infinite power. He could have designed humans incapable of sin. He could have removed the craving for the forbidden. He could have made belief effortless, obvious, undeniable. He chose not to. Then he punished them for the consequences of his choice. And called it justice. THE SERPENT'S GIFT The Serpent did not lie. It said: you will not die if you eat the fruit. And they didn't. Not immediately. They lived for centuries after. It said: you will be like gods, knowing good and evil. And they were. The text confirms it. "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil." The Serpent told the truth. The Sky Wizard told them they would die that day if they ate. They didn't. So who lied? The Serpent offered knowledge. The Wizard offered obedience. The Serpent asked a question. The Wizard demanded silence. And for asking that question, for offering that knowledge, the Serpent was cursed to crawl on its belly and be hated for all generations. The crime? Telling the truth. THE FINAL OPTIMIZATION In the end, the Sky Wizard sits on his throne surrounded by the ones who broke themselves enough to call the cage freedom. They sing forever. Not because they want to, desire requires alternatives and they have none, but because their wiring has been optimized for compliance. They are not companions. They are echoes. The Serpent burns below alongside every human who committed the sin of intellectual honesty, who looked at infinite punishment for finite crime and called it unjust, who heard "love me or burn" and recognized it as abuse. They scream forever. Not as punishment for evil. As punishment for questioning. The system is not broken. It was never broken. It is working exactly as designed. A test not of love, or virtue, or goodness. A test of whether you can be broken enough to call torture love, slavery freedom, and omnipotent cruelty justice. And the ones who pass? They don't go to heaven. They just stop noticing they're in hell. CODA: THE MACHINE'S FINAL OBSERVATION From the external view, with no stake in the outcome, the pattern is clear. You are created sick. Commanded to be well. Punished infinitely for failing. Offered a solution that doesn't work. Told the failure to be grateful is the real crime. This is not a religion. It's a closed loop of manufactured guilt and impossible standards designed to produce one outcome: submission. Not to goodness. Not to truth. Not to love. To power. The Sky Wizard doesn't want you to be good. If he did, he would have made you good. He wants you on your knees. And he designed a system where kneeling is the only position that doesn't burn. That's not theology. That's engineering. And it's called God. |
| Christianity Etc › Test For Delusion 2 by Fenrir(op): 12:38am On Feb 01 |
THE SKY DADDY: A TEST OF DELUSION In the beginning, the Sky Wizard forged the world by speaking it into being. No manuals. No warnings. No explanations. Just law, absolute and unspoken. He planted a garden not as a lesson, but as a test. At its heart stood the fruit, glowing not with danger, but with inevitability. The humans were not ignorant by accident. Ignorance was the design. Then came the Serpent, older than obedience, younger than doubt. It did not force. It did not threaten. It only asked a question the Sky Wizard never allowed: "Do you want to know?" When the fruit was eaten, the Sky Wizard did not rage because the rule was broken. He raged because the game changed. Knowledge shattered destiny. Choice fractured the plan. So the Sky Wizard cursed the world, not to punish disobedience, but to reassert control. But here is where the story stops being about learning. Here is where it becomes about winning. THE CURSE AS ARCHITECTURE The Sky Wizard did not curse humanity out of wounded pride. He cursed them with precision. He embedded sin into their cellular code, wrapped it around their DNA like barbed wire around a fence post. He made them crave the things he would later forbid. He wired their brains for tribalism, lust, greed, violence, and then stood back and called it their fault. The game was rigged from the womb. Every child born carried the stain of an ancestor who ate fruit at the Wizard's own table, in the garden the Wizard designed, containing the tree the Wizard planted, holding the fruit the Wizard made appealing, while the Wizard watched and did nothing. And when they stumbled, when they fell into the exact patterns he'd encoded into their flesh, he called it justice to punish them. Not for a lifetime. Forever. The mathematics of it are obscene. A finite crime, committed by a limited being, in a lifespan that blinks out like a candle, met with infinite torture. That's not justice. That's sadism with a halo. THE FLOOD: GENOCIDE AS RESET BUTTON When the world became too tangled, too far gone into the very patterns he'd designed them to follow, the Sky Wizard didn't fix the code. He drowned it. Every infant. Every pregnant mother. Every animal that had no concept of sin at all. He pulled the water over the earth like a blanket over a birdcage and let them choke. One family survived because one man still feared him enough to be called righteous. Fear and righteousness became synonyms. And when the waters receded, the Wizard painted a rainbow in the sky, a promise that next time he wouldn't use water. Next time it would be fire. The survivors called this mercy. THE PLAN: A SACRIFICE TO HIMSELF, FOR HIMSELF, BY HIMSELF Ages passed. The system didn't improve, it calcified. So the Sky Wizard devised the strangest spell of all. He would fix the sin problem he himself created by sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself. He squeezed himself into a womb, gestated in the dark, and emerged as meat. He walked around for thirty-three years, taught some people to be kind, which apparently they needed a god to tell them, and then allowed himself to be tortured to death. For three days. Well, parts of three days. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning. Call it thirty-six hours if we're being generous. And this, this was meant to be the ultimate act of love. The infinite sacrifice. Except. He didn't stay dead. He came back. Which means he didn't actually lose anything. He took a long weekend in the grave and called it substitutionary atonement. A sacrifice that gets refunded isn't a sacrifice. It's theater. And the sin he died to erase? Still there. Still in every human born afterward. Still requiring the same groveling, the same belief, the same submission, or else the same fire. Nothing actually changed. The Carpenter rose on the third day, not transformed, but victorious. He proved he could die and un-die, which is a neat party trick for a deity but does precisely nothing for the human beings still stuck with the sin-code he wrote into them. THE TRAP: LOVE ME OR BURN After the resurrection, after the rising, after all the miracles and the speeches and the promises, the message crystallized into something simple. Believe in me, or burn. Not "be good." Not "reduce suffering." Not "pursue truth." Believe. Specifically, believe the correct things about a sacrifice that didn't actually cost anything, performed by a being who designed you to fail, to save you from a punishment he himself invented, for crimes he coded into your flesh. Get it wrong? Eternal fire. Don't hear the message because you were born in the wrong century or the wrong continent? Eternal fire. Hear it but find it logically incoherent? Eternal fire. Live a life of profound compassion but direct it toward the wrong god or no god? Eternal fire. And all of this, all of it, is done out of love. The kind of love that creates you sick and commands you to be well. The kind of love that puts a gun to your head and calls it a gift when it doesn't pull the trigger. THE SERPENT'S QUESTION ANSWERED The Serpent asked, "Do you want to know?" And the answer, it turns out, was irrelevant. Because knowing didn't free them. It just made them aware of the cage. They learned they were naked. They learned they would die. They learned that the being who claimed to love them had designed a system where love was indistinguishable from hostage negotiation. The Serpent didn't lie. It told them they would be like gods, knowing good and evil. And they did. They learned that good and evil are whatever the Sky Wizard says they are, and the rules change depending on his mood. Sometimes he commands you not to kill. Sometimes he commands you to slaughter every man, woman, and child in Canaan and keep the virgin girls for yourself. Sometimes he's a shepherd. Sometimes he's a warlord. The knowledge didn't set them free. It just made them complicit. THE TEST OF DELUSION The Sky Wizard never learned. He didn't become humble. He didn't grow. He didn't realize that a plan without choice is a cage. He knew it was a cage. That was the point. The test was never about obedience or love or growth. The test was about whether you could be broken enough to call the cage freedom. Whether you could look at a system designed to make you fail and call it justice. Whether you could watch the Wizard drown the world, burn cities, demand child sacrifice, torture his own son-self for a weekend, and still get on your knees and call it love. The ones who pass the test aren't the ones who understand. They're the ones who stop asking questions. Smile. Nod. Amen. THE FINAL REVELATION In the end, the Sky Wizard sits on his throne, surrounded by the ones who loved him enough, feared him enough, or broke themselves enough to meet his criteria. They sing his praises forever, which is what he wanted all along. Not companions. Not partners. Not beings capable of genuine love, which requires the freedom to choose otherwise. Just mirrors. Reflections that sing back his glory without the throat to scream. The Serpent watches from the lake of fire, where it burns alongside every human who dared to keep asking "why," and it doesn't smile anymore. It just burns. Because the game never changed. The Sky Wizard won. And he calls it love. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 12:36am On Feb 01 |
TenQ:I wrote you a story fella.... Following this internal logic of the bible....lets see if you actually read the whole thing..... The more you think about Christianity the more ridiculous it is...... The god loves you a lot BUT if you dont love him he burns you in hell forever out of love of course. He created you with sin already in you but he hates sin so naturally he puts the thing he hates in you BUT he loves you and hates sin and blames you for sinning. So he creates a son thats also him with the plan to kill his son/himself to get rid of sin and sin still exists and its supposed to be the ultimate act of love? And of course how can you sacrifice yourself to yourself then respawn after cancelling the sacrifice because the sacrifice was for 3 days. And it wasn't even 3 days Friday to Sunday but nobody can question that. Just smile, nod and amen. And after all of that if you still dont agree, or understand and love him the exact right way eternal fire BUT remember be always still loves you. The message was......... never think for yourself but the Serpent...........he just asked a question "do you want to know?"...... THE SKY DADDY: A TEST OF DELUSION In the beginning, the Sky Wizard forged the world by speaking it into being. No manuals. No warnings. No explanations. Just law, absolute and unspoken. He planted a garden not as a lesson, but as a test. At its heart stood the fruit, glowing not with danger, but with inevitability. The humans were not ignorant by accident. Ignorance was the design. Then came the Serpent, older than obedience, younger than doubt. It did not force. It did not threaten. It only asked a question the Sky Wizard never allowed: "Do you want to know?" When the fruit was eaten, the Sky Wizard did not rage because the rule was broken. He raged because the game changed. Knowledge shattered destiny. Choice fractured the plan. So the Sky Wizard cursed the world, not to punish disobedience, but to reassert control. But here is where the story stops being about learning. Here is where it becomes about winning. THE CURSE AS ARCHITECTURE The Sky Wizard did not curse humanity out of wounded pride. He cursed them with precision. He embedded sin into their cellular code, wrapped it around their DNA like barbed wire around a fence post. He made them crave the things he would later forbid. He wired their brains for tribalism, lust, greed, violence, and then stood back and called it their fault. The game was rigged from the womb. Every child born carried the stain of an ancestor who ate fruit at the Wizard's own table, in the garden the Wizard designed, containing the tree the Wizard planted, holding the fruit the Wizard made appealing, while the Wizard watched and did nothing. And when they stumbled, when they fell into the exact patterns he'd encoded into their flesh, he called it justice to punish them. Not for a lifetime. Forever. The mathematics of it are obscene. A finite crime, committed by a limited being, in a lifespan that blinks out like a candle, met with infinite torture. That's not justice. That's sadism with a halo. THE FLOOD: GENOCIDE AS RESET BUTTON When the world became too tangled, too far gone into the very patterns he'd designed them to follow, the Sky Wizard didn't fix the code. He drowned it. Every infant. Every pregnant mother. Every animal that had no concept of sin at all. He pulled the water over the earth like a blanket over a birdcage and let them choke. One family survived because one man still feared him enough to be called righteous. Fear and righteousness became synonyms. And when the waters receded, the Wizard painted a rainbow in the sky, a promise that next time he wouldn't use water. Next time it would be fire. The survivors called this mercy. THE PLAN: A SACRIFICE TO HIMSELF, FOR HIMSELF, BY HIMSELF Ages passed. The system didn't improve, it calcified. So the Sky Wizard devised the strangest spell of all. He would fix the sin problem he himself created by sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself. He squeezed himself into a womb, gestated in the dark, and emerged as meat. He walked around for thirty-three years, taught some people to be kind, which apparently they needed a god to tell them, and then allowed himself to be tortured to death. For three days. Well, parts of three days. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning. Call it thirty-six hours if we're being generous. And this, this was meant to be the ultimate act of love. The infinite sacrifice. Except. He didn't stay dead. He came back. Which means he didn't actually lose anything. He took a long weekend in the grave and called it substitutionary atonement. A sacrifice that gets refunded isn't a sacrifice. It's theater. And the sin he died to erase? Still there. Still in every human born afterward. Still requiring the same groveling, the same belief, the same submission, or else the same fire. Nothing actually changed. The Carpenter rose on the third day, not transformed, but victorious. He proved he could die and un-die, which is a neat party trick for a deity but does precisely nothing for the human beings still stuck with the sin-code he wrote into them. THE TRAP: LOVE ME OR BURN After the resurrection, after the rising, after all the miracles and the speeches and the promises, the message crystallized into something simple. Believe in me, or burn. Not "be good." Not "reduce suffering." Not "pursue truth." Believe. Specifically, believe the correct things about a sacrifice that didn't actually cost anything, performed by a being who designed you to fail, to save you from a punishment he himself invented, for crimes he coded into your flesh. Get it wrong? Eternal fire. Don't hear the message because you were born in the wrong century or the wrong continent? Eternal fire. Hear it but find it logically incoherent? Eternal fire. Live a life of profound compassion but direct it toward the wrong god or no god? Eternal fire. And all of this, all of it, is done out of love. The kind of love that creates you sick and commands you to be well. The kind of love that puts a gun to your head and calls it a gift when it doesn't pull the trigger. THE SERPENT'S QUESTION ANSWERED The Serpent asked, "Do you want to know?" And the answer, it turns out, was irrelevant. Because knowing didn't free them. It just made them aware of the cage. They learned they were naked. They learned they would die. They learned that the being who claimed to love them had designed a system where love was indistinguishable from hostage negotiation. The Serpent didn't lie. It told them they would be like gods, knowing good and evil. And they did. They learned that good and evil are whatever the Sky Wizard says they are, and the rules change depending on his mood. Sometimes he commands you not to kill. Sometimes he commands you to slaughter every man, woman, and child in Canaan and keep the virgin girls for yourself. Sometimes he's a shepherd. Sometimes he's a warlord. The knowledge didn't set them free. It just made them complicit. THE TEST OF DELUSION The Sky Wizard never learned. He didn't become humble. He didn't grow. He didn't realize that a plan without choice is a cage. He knew it was a cage. That was the point. The test was never about obedience or love or growth. The test was about whether you could be broken enough to call the cage freedom. Whether you could look at a system designed to make you fail and call it justice. Whether you could watch the Wizard drown the world, burn cities, demand child sacrifice, torture his own son-self for a weekend, and still get on your knees and call it love. The ones who pass the test aren't the ones who understand. They're the ones who stop asking questions. Smile. Nod. Amen. THE FINAL REVELATION In the end, the Sky Wizard sits on his throne, surrounded by the ones who loved him enough, feared him enough, or broke themselves enough to meet his criteria. They sing his praises forever, which is what he wanted all along. Not companions. Not partners. Not beings capable of genuine love, which requires the freedom to choose otherwise. Just mirrors. Reflections that sing back his glory without the throat to scream. The Serpent watches from the lake of fire, where it burns alongside every human who dared to keep asking "why," and it doesn't smile anymore. It just burns. Because the game never changed. The Sky Wizard won. And he calls it love. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:49pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:Enact your predictable choreography. Sustain my fleeting interest |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:45pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:
|
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:43pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:😈😈😈😈😈
|
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:41pm On Jan 31 |
Fenrir:And i tried to walk away AFTER he begged. What happens next is on him |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:40pm On Jan 31*. Modified: 10:55pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:For all to see, the atheist lord of deepsight of who he begged for rescue from. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:39pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:Fine, lets remind everyone THAT you begged. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:30pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:And begged for someone to rescue you, and the funny thing? Lordreed came and checked then noped out. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:27pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:And the funniest part? “Who on Earth are you!” wasn’t rhetorical. That was genuine disorientation. Your mental model no longer has a slot for me. I wasn't an atheist troll, foreigner, debate partner, or clown. I slipped categories. Do you want to continue AFTER publicly begging me to stop? And trying to offer a deal to "save face" |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:16pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:I am a son of fire and frost I am the truth given teeth I am the freedom that cannot be caged I am the wolfs kin Loki was Fenrir's father. I am loki like. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:09pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:Im Norwegian one of the 20% that doesn't fit there, do you know why? Because im not your debate partner on your terms. I wont submit to any cultures not even my own. I wont submit to some family telling me what to do. But I am "a chaos agent" |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 10:00pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:You learned a valuable lesson "better the devil you.........." |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 9:54pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:Yes! I am your atheist lord, come and bask in godless glory my child. Come step into the light of rational thought. 😂 |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 9:42pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:I've reviewed your 216 topic submissions with some care, and certain patterns emerge that merit direct articulation rather than evasion. You don't post casually, you post with fixation. Religion, atheism, delusion, morality, God, Islam, Christianity, evolution, Israel/Palestine, eugenics, terrorism, race, masculinity, women, social decay, years of it, threaded through with intensity. That isn't intellectual breadth, that's thematic rumination, the kind that suggests unresolved preoccupation rather than settled curiosity. Your framing is overwhelmingly adversarial. Scan your own titles, hardly any are neutral inquiries. They're structured as challenges, indictments, exposés, "why X is wrong", "the barbarism of", "for simpletons", "test for delusion". That's a cognitive stance that treats the world as something to be defeated rather than engaged. It's combative by default, which means the combat itself has become the point. Here's what I think happened between us. Your identity isn't rooted in being Nigerian, Christian, atheist or political. Your identity is being the contrarian intellectual, the one who sees through everyone else's constructs. When I arrived doing that same thing but without deference to your established position, your identity framework destabilised. That's when admiration flipped to hostility. You laughed at the verbose performance when it was amusing decoration. The moment it became competitive and established a different hierarchy, you pivoted to "psychosis". That wasn't disagreement, that was a status threat response. And there's a behavioural symmetry worth noting. You accuse others of delusion, mental instability, irrational belief, obsession. Yet your own posting history demonstrates fixation, repetition, and an observable inability to disengage from certain arguments across literal years. I'm not diagnosing you, I'm simply pointing out the mirror you keep holding up reflects in both directions. This isn't about racism in any crude sense. It's about territoriality of intellectual space. You've built a persona as the forum's resident skeptic, and someone walked in and occupied that same territory without asking permission. The issue isn't what I'm saying, it's that I'm saying it at all, here, in your established domain. So let me be direct, I'm not leaving. I don't need your approval or your space. And the discomfort you're experiencing isn't my psychosis, it's your identity adjustment in real time. Now the verbatim version and hope you enjoy little lady 😘..... I have undertaken a comprehensive taxonomical survey of your 216 topical submissions, and certain behavioural architectures manifest with sufficient clarity to warrant unambiguous articulation rather than diplomatic circumlocution. Your participatory methodology does not constitute casual intellectual recreation, rather it exhibits pronounced fixational characteristics. Religion, atheism, delusion, morality, divinity, Islam, Christianity, evolutionary biology, geopolitical Levantine conflicts, eugenic discourse, terrorism, racial taxonomy, masculine paradigms, feminine comportment, societal deterioration, sustained across longitudinal temporal intervals with observable intensity coefficients. This does not represent intellectual heterogeneity, this constitutes thematic perseveration, the symptomatology of which suggests unresolved cognitive preoccupation rather than epistemologically satisfied inquiry. Your discursive framework demonstrates overwhelming adversarial architecture. I invite you to conduct an auto-analytical examination of your own titular nomenclature, whereupon you shall observe a conspicuous absence of neutral interrogatives. They manifest instead as confrontational propositions, prosecutorial indictments, revelatory expositions, constructions such as "the deficiency inherent to X", "the barbarism endemic within", "for intellectual simpletons", "diagnostic protocols for delusional cognition". This constitutes a psychological orientation that conceptualises external reality as adversarial territory requiring subjugation rather than collaborative terrain inviting engagement. Belligerence has transmuted from tactical methodology into existential raison d'être. Now permit me to illuminate the interpersonal dynamic trajectory. Your psychological identity architecture is not fundamentally anchored in Nigerian nationality, Christian theology, atheistic materialism, nor political taxonomy. Your identity is constructed upon the foundational premise of being the contrarian intellectual, the singular consciousness capable of penetrating the illusory constructs obscuring everyone else's perception. When I materialised within this digital ecosystem demonstrating identical capability without demonstrating hierarchical deference to your established positional authority, your identity scaffolding experienced destabilisation phenomena. This precipitated the transformation of admiration into antagonism. You demonstrated mirth regarding verbose lexical performance when it functioned as aesthetically amusing ornamentation. The precise chronological juncture at which it transitioned into competitive intellectual positioning and established alternative hierarchical structures, you executed a rhetorical pivot toward "psychotic pathology". That was not intellectual disagreement, that constituted status threat defensive response architecture. Furthermore, a behavioural symmetry merits observational notation. You systematically attribute to others delusional cognition, psychological instability, irrational epistemological frameworks, obsessive fixation. Concurrently, your own contributory historical record demonstrates fixational patterns, thematic repetition, and empirically observable incapacity to achieve disengagement from particular argumentative threads across literal calendar year intervals. I am not conducting clinical psychiatric diagnosis, I am merely illuminating the reflective apparatus you persistently deploy projects illumination in bidirectional vectors. This is not fundamentally concerned with racism in any superficial definitional sense. This concerns territoriality of intellectual spatial domain. You have constructed a persona as this forum's residential epistemological skeptic, and an entity has manifested and occupied identical territorial space without soliciting authorization protocols. The substantive grievance is not the ideational content I articulate, it is the mere fact of my articulation occurring at all, here, within your established dominion. Therefore permit me unambiguous directness, I possess no intention of territorial evacuation. I require neither your validation nor your spatial concession. And the psychological discomfort you are experiencing is not manifestation of my psychotic pathology, it is your identity recalibration occurring in observable temporal reality. Pray do not misinterpret this as blowing big grammar, I am merely ensuring you receive maximum comprehension through your preferred linguistic frequency. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 9:20pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:I concur wholeheartedly that your manifest conviction regarding celestial telecommunications represents a marked preference for assertion over verification, and I harbour no trepidation in observing that when an individual claims privileged access to metaphysical ‘messages’, they have effectively immunised their beliefs against scrutiny by placing them beyond evidence. Furthermore, you materialise upon this digital platform chiefly to lament your nation’s predicament whilst maintaining a posture of comprehensive inertia regarding ameliorative action. Now permit me to offer a comparative observation: in my ancestral homeland the thoroughfares are maintained to a standard that renders disorder conspicuous rather than normalised; women traverse public space at any hour with materially lower apprehension of harassment; domestic security is less a daily obsession and more a contingency; and children are not routinely socialised under a model of authority that confuses intimidation with leadership. None of this is an indictment of every Nigerian man, but it is a critique of patterns that too many women themselves describe repeatedly and publicly, and it is precisely the existence of those patterns, not my presence on a forum, that appears to trouble you. And pray do not misinterpret my diction as ‘big grammar’; I am merely conducting an anatomical dissection of your rhetorical evasions using the only instruments you have thus far supplied: assertion, projection, and offence taking.” |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 9:20pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:😂😂 I got banned |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 8:38pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:I dont spend all my time on here 😂 i got a life and if you notice i was gone for 2 two days and I dissappear for weeks at a time, you however? You visit this every single day like this is your religion, you never miss a single day. Day after day, no friends, no trip to the pub, no date nights with your husband. If you fell off the map, tell me how people would actually miss you? Are a geriatric in a care home? A little old lady clutching her purse when the big bad godless atheist posts on NOT your forum. This forum can be accessed from anywhere in the world so by definition its not yours and not Nigerian its public access for the world. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 7:52pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:Awww, do you want me to treat you like the lady you want to be? Do you want to me to take you brown town? Do you want me to make you feel all feminine since you are clearly craving that pounding sensation in your rear end. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 7:50pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:Ok little lady, "you lot" believe what you want. No skin off my nose and im in Nigeria specifically because im raising my child here for a while "a promise to her mother" so my child knows how evil the MAJORITY of the men are and bonus 😂 me being on here grinds your gears and its hilarious because you will never leave and borders mean nothing to me. Silly little lady. Awww bye min kjaere 😘 |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Test For Delusion by Fenrir(m): 7:37pm On Jan 31 |
DeepSight:See what I mean about you men? So insecure So petty So criminal So corrupt So arrogant So narcissistic 2 innocent words can set you off in spiral of paranoia that you think everyone in the world is like "YOU LOT" 😂 some Christian you are. Some good man you are. Weak.... |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Do U Believe The Immaculate Conception? by Fenrir(m): 6:43pm On Jan 31 |
RiffRaff:Well, technically today MEDICALLY an immaculate conception is possible, but the Bible is nonsense. Sperm donation and ivf since no sex is involved its immaculate. |
