theshadowed

Rank #2782 on Comments
theshadowed Avatar Level 300 Comments: Lord Of Laughs
Online
Send mail to theshadowed Block theshadowed Invite theshadowed to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Interests: Games, Reading, Satire, History
Date Signed Up:5/04/2012
Last Login:1/26/2015
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#2782
Highest Content Rank:#2321
Highest Comment Rank:#639
Content Thumbs: 5488 total,  6119 ,  631
Comment Thumbs: 10776 total,  13587 ,  2811
Content Level Progress: 73% (73/100)
Level 154 Content: Faptastic → Level 155 Content: Faptastic
Comment Level Progress: 91% (91/100)
Level 300 Comments: Lord Of Laughs → Level 301 Comments: Lord Of Laughs
Subscribers:1
Content Views:214850
Times Content Favorited:622 times
Total Comments Made:7126
FJ Points:2568

latest user's comments

#61 - That has nothing to do with the content, **** off…  [+] (1 new reply) 01/23/2015 on (untitled) 0
User avatar #105 - wellimnotsure (01/23/2015) [-]
Palestine is much much much worse, Israel isn't great but fuck Palestine
#60 - Jesus are people this oblivious to sarcasm? 01/23/2015 on (untitled) +7
#59 - I'm going to have a talk from a Holocaust survivor on Monday. … 01/23/2015 on (untitled) +3
#256 - Nope. No. No no no. The New Testament did not remove …  [+] (21 new replies) 01/23/2015 on (untitled) 0
User avatar #258 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
I've read the New Testament, I've read a version of the Catholic bible that was the Old Testament and the New Testament revised. I've read the Jehovas Scripture, I've read a translation of the Jewish Tanakh. In middle school I read a couple books of the Quran and I intend to read all of it eventually, but first I am going to learn about Paganism and then Wikken.

All of the extremist Chrstian behavior in the last.. lets say fifty years for a nice round number, almost exclusively quoted or drew from the Old Testament. If the inspiration of this radical behavior was the Old Testament because those same passages didn't exist in the New Testament, that means the New Testament is intentionally less violent than the Old.

Who's to say that the so called 'tone' of the book was less violence? Modernising it to attract more people. It's like how many politicians these days advocate for gay rights when five years ago they would do press releases about how they're a good christian boy with wholesome ideals for the average Australian family.
User avatar #259 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
The bible has not been out-rightly modified for centuries. There have been minor changes, but nothing as major as whatever the hell you're talking about

Yes it is less violent, but thats because times had changed and the new Christians were no longer having to fight for their very existence like the Jews of the Old Testament.

Your issue is that while you have read the Books, you have absolutely no context. You do not understand the context in which these books were altered and were written, otherwise you would understand that the apostles had no need to 'damage control', as things were a lot different back then.

And guess what? I've actively studied the history of the church, and I know for a fact that the Bible has not been edited to make it less violent, but because different branches of the church interpreted it differently

And anyway, this has absolutely nothing to do with my original comment, nor the content. And referring to your original reply:
'The Apostles are less an action in the bible and more so part of the crusades - actual history' shows how little history you know. Can I inquire how the apostles were more in action during the crusades which were a thousand years after they had died?
User avatar #282 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Well hold on, right there you're putting dates on something that is dateless. I've seen many a mathmatical explination of the dates in the bible and they've summarised it with 'so we think it's around THIS time' and each one has been upwards of a half millenium different from the other.
User avatar #283 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. We know for a fact that Jesus lived at the turn of the millenia. There are records from the Romans of a Jewish preacher by the name, and St Peter and the apostles founded a church. We have enough historical evidence that it is fact that Jesus and the apostles lived during the time of the Empire, Jesus likely being born either 4BCE or 16CE, and St Peter the Apostle became Pope, and was then crucified during the great fire of Rome around 64CE.

And we all know the Crusades happen between the 1000s and the 1500s

I'm not putting dates on dateless things. I just know my history
User avatar #284 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
But his name was Joshua. Not Jesus.
User avatar #285 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. No where in any bible nor historical document has Jesus Christ of Nazareth been referred to as Joshua.
Both historians who make mention of Jesus reffered to him as Jesus (that being Josephus the Jew and Tacitus the Roman).
And anyway, that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We were discussing the dates on Jesus and his apostles and I proved you wrong

And how could you even come close to the assumption that the apostles were alive during the crusades? There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that has ever said that
User avatar #286 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The bible and also the book of Jehova were originally written in biblical hebrew, but also ancient greek and sometimes sanskrit. His name in the original books was Yeshua, which translates to Joshua. However, the books were originally translated into Greek and Yeshua was translated into Lesous, which was 'romanised' (translated by syllable rather than by word) into Jesus.

The reason I say his name was Joshua was to poke a hole in your response.

For example, e=mc^2. The theory of relativity basically reads as 'e=mc^2, therefore all bodies with energy have mass and all bodies with mass have energy, therefore this, and therefore that.' However if Stephen Hawking came along today and said 'well actually, e does not equal mc^2' the whole theory of relativity would collapse on itself.

You say that these people knew and refferred to a man named Jesus, but his name wasn't Jesus. Jesus is a mistranslation of a mistranslation.
User avatar #287 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok. Fair enough.
But. You admit it yourself. You just said that to poke a hole in my argument. So I can see theres no point in arguing with someone who looks at the argument, and completely ignored every point that you can't argue against until you find something so irrelevant and small to the argument its ridiculous, and pedantically argue it.
User avatar #290 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Besides that, they've actually found that Islam, Judaism, Christianity (and also Catholocism and Jehova) were originally Islam, which was memorised by elders and passed on generation for generation, and that centuries long game of chinese whispers was actually based on sheep farmers around Egypt (like the family in Exodus)
User avatar #293 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oh god. I can't actually comprehend what you're saying its that wrong.
Ok number one please give me the sources you've gotten your information from.

Right. There is no way, no possible way, that any of them started from Islam. Because Islam is the newest one of the Abrahamic religions.
Islam was started by Mohammed, an originally Christian man who lived in 400 CE. LITERALLY CENTURIES AFTER THE TALMUD AND JUDAISM WAS WRITTEN. Seriously. Judaism had been around for hundreds of years, and there is so much evidence telling you how wrong you are
User avatar #288 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok

Have you seen that video of hipsters coming out of coachella, and this fake reporter asks if they saw a band the reporter had made up on the spot. All of the hipsters in the video said 'yea, totally! They're so down to earth'

So apply that same logic to Josephus. How can Josephus speak of a man named Jesus if his name wasn't Jesus, and if Josephus did not actually speak to a man named Jesus then how can we place Jesus in that time period.
User avatar #289 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Because Josephus lived at the same time (37CE-100CE). Same period for Tacitus. And its quite obviously that fact 'Yosephus' was not Latin.
Jesus is not a mistranslation. It is the Latin version of Yosephus. They make mention of Yosephus, but in the Latin form.
But that was not your point. Your point was that the apostles lived during the crusades, or we don't know when they lived when we do. We do, how can you not understand that.
User avatar #291 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok so the Crusades were officiated by the second pope, yea? How can the second pope come a thousand years after the first pope?

The disciples of Jesus were commanded to take the knowledge of his scripture and spread it around the world, that's the Crusades.

You keep dating the bible, but you can't carbon date books that have fallen to bits millenia ago.
User avatar #294 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
What the fuck what the fuck what the fuck
Who taught you history. I legitimately had to take a moment after reading that.
The 2nd pope was St Linus. The Pope who commissioned the Crusades was Pope Urban II, THE 159TH POPE.

We date the books by comparing the events mentioned with historical documents, like all history is dated. And there are some original texts we have dated. Dead Sea scrolls?
User avatar #298 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Sure, let me just pop downstairs to my literal library of about 900 books and pick on off of the entire bookcase dedicated to science and history.
User avatar #300 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Actually they're probably still in the moving boxes in my garage. Never mind.
User avatar #299 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
That from the sound of, you've never read. Seriously you haven't said one correct thing. Anyway, lets end this before my brain explodes
User avatar #296 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
I'm gonna stop this here.

You clearly of the opinion that your religion is the one true religion (like no ones ever said that before) and blah blah blah Jesus exists blah blah.

Is it so hard to believe that maybe you're wrong? Good on you for researching your religion, but don't research your religion to the extent that it agrees with your current perspective of your religion and disregard anything that might oppose it. Then, what's the point?
User avatar #297 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Right, I can see that you're a complete and utter idiot. If you must know, I am religious, but I believe every religion is a valid and legitimate interpretation of God.

Thats funny because its quite obvious that I know more about religions than you, as you've been nothing but wrong.

Its ironic that you're saying I'm wrong when everything you have spouted is such complete and utter bullshit my inner historian is dying. Seriously, you know fuck all about history. This has been the most painful 'discussion' I have ever had the displeasure of being in. Jesus woman, pick up a fucking history book
User avatar #295 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The dead sea scrolls are the second oldest manuscripts. That means the second oldest copies that have survived to modern era. Not the original. Also the dead sea scrolls were translations of Islam, take to Rome I think it was.

I use the word Islam loosely. Like I said, for centuries before Islam was actually Islam it was a big game of chinese whispers. Have you heard of Sikh? There were a couple of variations of it.

But yea, my bad about the pope. This whole discussion has been for memory on my end.
User avatar #292 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Even the 'original bible' set of seven hand written books that cost more than a house in Hollywood is not actually the original bible.
#382 - Its actually in one of the side books, but it is canon. The la…  [+] (7 new replies) 01/23/2015 on Video games +1
#390 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oh alright that is interesting I've been meaning to pick up all the books and stuff for DA I just haven't had the money lately. Yeah I would love to see the game take a look some of the political things happening with the wardens especially now that they are out of the blight or at the least face new threats. That ending made me lose it I really want to see where it goes. Would the black city be where the elvish gods were sealed and if so will we actually be allowed to enter? There is some supporting evidence for the black city being the place Solas did his deed and how he regrets it.
User avatar #391 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
The whole thing with Solas will be interesting. I mean hes obviously got a plan. I reckon the next game will be dealing with the Wardens and Solas
#392 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Yeah I just hope his plan doesn't turn him into a full on antagonist. I grew really fond of him between his cool head and that hint of underlaying sadness he always seems to have he quickly became a favorite of mine. I imagine DLC coming soon anyway because of how the game went and DA Keep having a inquisition tab on the tapestry.
User avatar #393 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oo. I forgot about dlc. I honestly wonder what they're going to do.
Solas's betrayal angered me so much that I honestly hate him now. I liked him when he was with us, but I can't stand traitors.
#394 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
I don't know I have a hard time thinking of it as a betrayal considering his back story and the exchange he had at the end. He seems to have good intentions and Mythal forgave him saying what he did was right. So it makes me wonder if he feels he is the only one able to correct his mistake or a motive that remains unseen. There is a lot of things going on behind the scenes yet and I am really hoping Solas doesn't turn out to be like what the stories say his nature is.
User avatar #395 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
The thing is he is the Elvish equivalent of Loki.

Another thing I loved about Inquisition is the wider roleplay thing. I got to play as a religious nut, it was great. Even better when the truth about the Inquisitors survival in the breach was discovered
#396 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Yeah when you take the dalish interpretations of stories he is essentially Loki. How he acts though and what you learn in the temple speaks of a much deeper character than simply a trickster. As well as the "gods" being less grand than the dalish remember them. Information from the temple and other sources leads me to believe that Solas whatever he did to the gods was a act made of desperation hoping to stop something rather than a act of pettiness or spitefulness.

Yeah I agree Inquisition gave you plenty of options to develop your character. My main character I went with a willing skeptic outlook on religion with a slight reluctance to lead.
#253 - Well thats amusing because thats completely off topic, and wro…  [+] (24 new replies) 01/23/2015 on (untitled) 0
User avatar #255 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
I literally wrote to a local politician about religious freedom like an hour ago
User avatar #254 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
It's not completely off topic and it's not wrong.

Literally the new testament took out parts of the bible that were considered to be too violent or ridiculous at the time. If that's not damage control I don't know what is. And I don't consider the bible being a book of evil at all, I am a huge advocat for freedom of religious choice and in fact I have read many holy book, so it's interesting that you'd call your assumption of my opinion irrelevant because it disagrees with your opinion on all atheists being snobs.

Having said that, of any religion, Christianity is easily the most hypocritical. So I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that someone I assume to be a Christian (or one of its reinterpretations) is a hypocrite.
User avatar #256 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Nope. No. No no no.

The New Testament did not remove the parts of the bible that were too violent. Seriously I am unsure of how you even achieved that assumption. The New Testament left the entire Old Testament alone, which is the violent part of the bible. The New Testament didn't remove parts of the New Testament either, the factions of Churchmen at the time just decided that some books were not to be included, such as (potentially) the Book of Mary Magdalene, due to her being a woman, and other books, which were just considered heretical and disagreed with the tone. Not because they showed the Bible as harmful.

Now, it is not damage control. Damage control would be the Pope removing Leviticus currently. You don;t use damage control when your religion literally controls the biggest empire in the world. They had nothing to fear, and nothing to remove.

Having studied this, I think you may be misunderstanding the Gnostics. The Gnostics disagreed heavily with the church founders, and were prosecuted, and their Books they wanted to include destroyed. Not because they showed Christianity as bad, but rather they were deemed heretical as they disagreed with their tone.

Its absolutely lovely that you advocate freedom of religion, and good for you writing to your local politician about it.
Just before you start to discuss religion, don't just read some parts of holy books. Actually study the history of the time and learn a bit of context
User avatar #258 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
I've read the New Testament, I've read a version of the Catholic bible that was the Old Testament and the New Testament revised. I've read the Jehovas Scripture, I've read a translation of the Jewish Tanakh. In middle school I read a couple books of the Quran and I intend to read all of it eventually, but first I am going to learn about Paganism and then Wikken.

All of the extremist Chrstian behavior in the last.. lets say fifty years for a nice round number, almost exclusively quoted or drew from the Old Testament. If the inspiration of this radical behavior was the Old Testament because those same passages didn't exist in the New Testament, that means the New Testament is intentionally less violent than the Old.

Who's to say that the so called 'tone' of the book was less violence? Modernising it to attract more people. It's like how many politicians these days advocate for gay rights when five years ago they would do press releases about how they're a good christian boy with wholesome ideals for the average Australian family.
User avatar #259 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
The bible has not been out-rightly modified for centuries. There have been minor changes, but nothing as major as whatever the hell you're talking about

Yes it is less violent, but thats because times had changed and the new Christians were no longer having to fight for their very existence like the Jews of the Old Testament.

Your issue is that while you have read the Books, you have absolutely no context. You do not understand the context in which these books were altered and were written, otherwise you would understand that the apostles had no need to 'damage control', as things were a lot different back then.

And guess what? I've actively studied the history of the church, and I know for a fact that the Bible has not been edited to make it less violent, but because different branches of the church interpreted it differently

And anyway, this has absolutely nothing to do with my original comment, nor the content. And referring to your original reply:
'The Apostles are less an action in the bible and more so part of the crusades - actual history' shows how little history you know. Can I inquire how the apostles were more in action during the crusades which were a thousand years after they had died?
User avatar #282 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Well hold on, right there you're putting dates on something that is dateless. I've seen many a mathmatical explination of the dates in the bible and they've summarised it with 'so we think it's around THIS time' and each one has been upwards of a half millenium different from the other.
User avatar #283 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. We know for a fact that Jesus lived at the turn of the millenia. There are records from the Romans of a Jewish preacher by the name, and St Peter and the apostles founded a church. We have enough historical evidence that it is fact that Jesus and the apostles lived during the time of the Empire, Jesus likely being born either 4BCE or 16CE, and St Peter the Apostle became Pope, and was then crucified during the great fire of Rome around 64CE.

And we all know the Crusades happen between the 1000s and the 1500s

I'm not putting dates on dateless things. I just know my history
User avatar #284 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
But his name was Joshua. Not Jesus.
User avatar #285 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. No where in any bible nor historical document has Jesus Christ of Nazareth been referred to as Joshua.
Both historians who make mention of Jesus reffered to him as Jesus (that being Josephus the Jew and Tacitus the Roman).
And anyway, that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We were discussing the dates on Jesus and his apostles and I proved you wrong

And how could you even come close to the assumption that the apostles were alive during the crusades? There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that has ever said that
User avatar #286 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The bible and also the book of Jehova were originally written in biblical hebrew, but also ancient greek and sometimes sanskrit. His name in the original books was Yeshua, which translates to Joshua. However, the books were originally translated into Greek and Yeshua was translated into Lesous, which was 'romanised' (translated by syllable rather than by word) into Jesus.

The reason I say his name was Joshua was to poke a hole in your response.

For example, e=mc^2. The theory of relativity basically reads as 'e=mc^2, therefore all bodies with energy have mass and all bodies with mass have energy, therefore this, and therefore that.' However if Stephen Hawking came along today and said 'well actually, e does not equal mc^2' the whole theory of relativity would collapse on itself.

You say that these people knew and refferred to a man named Jesus, but his name wasn't Jesus. Jesus is a mistranslation of a mistranslation.
User avatar #287 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok. Fair enough.
But. You admit it yourself. You just said that to poke a hole in my argument. So I can see theres no point in arguing with someone who looks at the argument, and completely ignored every point that you can't argue against until you find something so irrelevant and small to the argument its ridiculous, and pedantically argue it.
User avatar #290 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Besides that, they've actually found that Islam, Judaism, Christianity (and also Catholocism and Jehova) were originally Islam, which was memorised by elders and passed on generation for generation, and that centuries long game of chinese whispers was actually based on sheep farmers around Egypt (like the family in Exodus)
User avatar #293 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oh god. I can't actually comprehend what you're saying its that wrong.
Ok number one please give me the sources you've gotten your information from.

Right. There is no way, no possible way, that any of them started from Islam. Because Islam is the newest one of the Abrahamic religions.
Islam was started by Mohammed, an originally Christian man who lived in 400 CE. LITERALLY CENTURIES AFTER THE TALMUD AND JUDAISM WAS WRITTEN. Seriously. Judaism had been around for hundreds of years, and there is so much evidence telling you how wrong you are
User avatar #288 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok

Have you seen that video of hipsters coming out of coachella, and this fake reporter asks if they saw a band the reporter had made up on the spot. All of the hipsters in the video said 'yea, totally! They're so down to earth'

So apply that same logic to Josephus. How can Josephus speak of a man named Jesus if his name wasn't Jesus, and if Josephus did not actually speak to a man named Jesus then how can we place Jesus in that time period.
User avatar #289 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Because Josephus lived at the same time (37CE-100CE). Same period for Tacitus. And its quite obviously that fact 'Yosephus' was not Latin.
Jesus is not a mistranslation. It is the Latin version of Yosephus. They make mention of Yosephus, but in the Latin form.
But that was not your point. Your point was that the apostles lived during the crusades, or we don't know when they lived when we do. We do, how can you not understand that.
User avatar #291 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok so the Crusades were officiated by the second pope, yea? How can the second pope come a thousand years after the first pope?

The disciples of Jesus were commanded to take the knowledge of his scripture and spread it around the world, that's the Crusades.

You keep dating the bible, but you can't carbon date books that have fallen to bits millenia ago.
User avatar #294 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
What the fuck what the fuck what the fuck
Who taught you history. I legitimately had to take a moment after reading that.
The 2nd pope was St Linus. The Pope who commissioned the Crusades was Pope Urban II, THE 159TH POPE.

We date the books by comparing the events mentioned with historical documents, like all history is dated. And there are some original texts we have dated. Dead Sea scrolls?
User avatar #298 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Sure, let me just pop downstairs to my literal library of about 900 books and pick on off of the entire bookcase dedicated to science and history.
User avatar #300 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Actually they're probably still in the moving boxes in my garage. Never mind.
User avatar #299 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
That from the sound of, you've never read. Seriously you haven't said one correct thing. Anyway, lets end this before my brain explodes
User avatar #296 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
I'm gonna stop this here.

You clearly of the opinion that your religion is the one true religion (like no ones ever said that before) and blah blah blah Jesus exists blah blah.

Is it so hard to believe that maybe you're wrong? Good on you for researching your religion, but don't research your religion to the extent that it agrees with your current perspective of your religion and disregard anything that might oppose it. Then, what's the point?
User avatar #297 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Right, I can see that you're a complete and utter idiot. If you must know, I am religious, but I believe every religion is a valid and legitimate interpretation of God.

Thats funny because its quite obvious that I know more about religions than you, as you've been nothing but wrong.

Its ironic that you're saying I'm wrong when everything you have spouted is such complete and utter bullshit my inner historian is dying. Seriously, you know fuck all about history. This has been the most painful 'discussion' I have ever had the displeasure of being in. Jesus woman, pick up a fucking history book
User avatar #295 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The dead sea scrolls are the second oldest manuscripts. That means the second oldest copies that have survived to modern era. Not the original. Also the dead sea scrolls were translations of Islam, take to Rome I think it was.

I use the word Islam loosely. Like I said, for centuries before Islam was actually Islam it was a big game of chinese whispers. Have you heard of Sikh? There were a couple of variations of it.

But yea, my bad about the pope. This whole discussion has been for memory on my end.
User avatar #292 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Even the 'original bible' set of seven hand written books that cost more than a house in Hollywood is not actually the original bible.
#251 - Apart from the fact that after the book of Acts thats all the …  [+] (27 new replies) 01/23/2015 on (untitled) 0
User avatar #252 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
Yea see I'm not a fan of the new testament. It's like Freudes theories. His theories are wrong. We didn't say 'well if we change this and rephrase that..' we said 'no, those are wrong, here's a more accurate and entirely different theory'

All the new testament is, is damage control.
#302 - dehumanizer (01/24/2015) [-]
>all of the new testement, is damage controll

how stupid are you?
User avatar #253 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Well thats amusing because thats completely off topic, and wrong anyway.
You can't just say the New Testament is damage control because you believe that it disagrees with your opinion on the bible being a book of evil

ANYWAY, the content clearly states that the bible only mentions those places, while I showed it did not by listing places that are described in the bible that the apostles spread out to convert in
User avatar #255 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
I literally wrote to a local politician about religious freedom like an hour ago
User avatar #254 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
It's not completely off topic and it's not wrong.

Literally the new testament took out parts of the bible that were considered to be too violent or ridiculous at the time. If that's not damage control I don't know what is. And I don't consider the bible being a book of evil at all, I am a huge advocat for freedom of religious choice and in fact I have read many holy book, so it's interesting that you'd call your assumption of my opinion irrelevant because it disagrees with your opinion on all atheists being snobs.

Having said that, of any religion, Christianity is easily the most hypocritical. So I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that someone I assume to be a Christian (or one of its reinterpretations) is a hypocrite.
User avatar #256 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Nope. No. No no no.

The New Testament did not remove the parts of the bible that were too violent. Seriously I am unsure of how you even achieved that assumption. The New Testament left the entire Old Testament alone, which is the violent part of the bible. The New Testament didn't remove parts of the New Testament either, the factions of Churchmen at the time just decided that some books were not to be included, such as (potentially) the Book of Mary Magdalene, due to her being a woman, and other books, which were just considered heretical and disagreed with the tone. Not because they showed the Bible as harmful.

Now, it is not damage control. Damage control would be the Pope removing Leviticus currently. You don;t use damage control when your religion literally controls the biggest empire in the world. They had nothing to fear, and nothing to remove.

Having studied this, I think you may be misunderstanding the Gnostics. The Gnostics disagreed heavily with the church founders, and were prosecuted, and their Books they wanted to include destroyed. Not because they showed Christianity as bad, but rather they were deemed heretical as they disagreed with their tone.

Its absolutely lovely that you advocate freedom of religion, and good for you writing to your local politician about it.
Just before you start to discuss religion, don't just read some parts of holy books. Actually study the history of the time and learn a bit of context
User avatar #258 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
I've read the New Testament, I've read a version of the Catholic bible that was the Old Testament and the New Testament revised. I've read the Jehovas Scripture, I've read a translation of the Jewish Tanakh. In middle school I read a couple books of the Quran and I intend to read all of it eventually, but first I am going to learn about Paganism and then Wikken.

All of the extremist Chrstian behavior in the last.. lets say fifty years for a nice round number, almost exclusively quoted or drew from the Old Testament. If the inspiration of this radical behavior was the Old Testament because those same passages didn't exist in the New Testament, that means the New Testament is intentionally less violent than the Old.

Who's to say that the so called 'tone' of the book was less violence? Modernising it to attract more people. It's like how many politicians these days advocate for gay rights when five years ago they would do press releases about how they're a good christian boy with wholesome ideals for the average Australian family.
User avatar #259 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
The bible has not been out-rightly modified for centuries. There have been minor changes, but nothing as major as whatever the hell you're talking about

Yes it is less violent, but thats because times had changed and the new Christians were no longer having to fight for their very existence like the Jews of the Old Testament.

Your issue is that while you have read the Books, you have absolutely no context. You do not understand the context in which these books were altered and were written, otherwise you would understand that the apostles had no need to 'damage control', as things were a lot different back then.

And guess what? I've actively studied the history of the church, and I know for a fact that the Bible has not been edited to make it less violent, but because different branches of the church interpreted it differently

And anyway, this has absolutely nothing to do with my original comment, nor the content. And referring to your original reply:
'The Apostles are less an action in the bible and more so part of the crusades - actual history' shows how little history you know. Can I inquire how the apostles were more in action during the crusades which were a thousand years after they had died?
User avatar #282 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Well hold on, right there you're putting dates on something that is dateless. I've seen many a mathmatical explination of the dates in the bible and they've summarised it with 'so we think it's around THIS time' and each one has been upwards of a half millenium different from the other.
User avatar #283 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. We know for a fact that Jesus lived at the turn of the millenia. There are records from the Romans of a Jewish preacher by the name, and St Peter and the apostles founded a church. We have enough historical evidence that it is fact that Jesus and the apostles lived during the time of the Empire, Jesus likely being born either 4BCE or 16CE, and St Peter the Apostle became Pope, and was then crucified during the great fire of Rome around 64CE.

And we all know the Crusades happen between the 1000s and the 1500s

I'm not putting dates on dateless things. I just know my history
User avatar #284 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
But his name was Joshua. Not Jesus.
User avatar #285 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. No where in any bible nor historical document has Jesus Christ of Nazareth been referred to as Joshua.
Both historians who make mention of Jesus reffered to him as Jesus (that being Josephus the Jew and Tacitus the Roman).
And anyway, that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We were discussing the dates on Jesus and his apostles and I proved you wrong

And how could you even come close to the assumption that the apostles were alive during the crusades? There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that has ever said that
User avatar #286 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The bible and also the book of Jehova were originally written in biblical hebrew, but also ancient greek and sometimes sanskrit. His name in the original books was Yeshua, which translates to Joshua. However, the books were originally translated into Greek and Yeshua was translated into Lesous, which was 'romanised' (translated by syllable rather than by word) into Jesus.

The reason I say his name was Joshua was to poke a hole in your response.

For example, e=mc^2. The theory of relativity basically reads as 'e=mc^2, therefore all bodies with energy have mass and all bodies with mass have energy, therefore this, and therefore that.' However if Stephen Hawking came along today and said 'well actually, e does not equal mc^2' the whole theory of relativity would collapse on itself.

You say that these people knew and refferred to a man named Jesus, but his name wasn't Jesus. Jesus is a mistranslation of a mistranslation.
User avatar #287 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok. Fair enough.
But. You admit it yourself. You just said that to poke a hole in my argument. So I can see theres no point in arguing with someone who looks at the argument, and completely ignored every point that you can't argue against until you find something so irrelevant and small to the argument its ridiculous, and pedantically argue it.
User avatar #290 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Besides that, they've actually found that Islam, Judaism, Christianity (and also Catholocism and Jehova) were originally Islam, which was memorised by elders and passed on generation for generation, and that centuries long game of chinese whispers was actually based on sheep farmers around Egypt (like the family in Exodus)
User avatar #293 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oh god. I can't actually comprehend what you're saying its that wrong.
Ok number one please give me the sources you've gotten your information from.

Right. There is no way, no possible way, that any of them started from Islam. Because Islam is the newest one of the Abrahamic religions.
Islam was started by Mohammed, an originally Christian man who lived in 400 CE. LITERALLY CENTURIES AFTER THE TALMUD AND JUDAISM WAS WRITTEN. Seriously. Judaism had been around for hundreds of years, and there is so much evidence telling you how wrong you are
User avatar #288 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok

Have you seen that video of hipsters coming out of coachella, and this fake reporter asks if they saw a band the reporter had made up on the spot. All of the hipsters in the video said 'yea, totally! They're so down to earth'

So apply that same logic to Josephus. How can Josephus speak of a man named Jesus if his name wasn't Jesus, and if Josephus did not actually speak to a man named Jesus then how can we place Jesus in that time period.
User avatar #289 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Because Josephus lived at the same time (37CE-100CE). Same period for Tacitus. And its quite obviously that fact 'Yosephus' was not Latin.
Jesus is not a mistranslation. It is the Latin version of Yosephus. They make mention of Yosephus, but in the Latin form.
But that was not your point. Your point was that the apostles lived during the crusades, or we don't know when they lived when we do. We do, how can you not understand that.
User avatar #291 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok so the Crusades were officiated by the second pope, yea? How can the second pope come a thousand years after the first pope?

The disciples of Jesus were commanded to take the knowledge of his scripture and spread it around the world, that's the Crusades.

You keep dating the bible, but you can't carbon date books that have fallen to bits millenia ago.
User avatar #294 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
What the fuck what the fuck what the fuck
Who taught you history. I legitimately had to take a moment after reading that.
The 2nd pope was St Linus. The Pope who commissioned the Crusades was Pope Urban II, THE 159TH POPE.

We date the books by comparing the events mentioned with historical documents, like all history is dated. And there are some original texts we have dated. Dead Sea scrolls?
User avatar #298 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Sure, let me just pop downstairs to my literal library of about 900 books and pick on off of the entire bookcase dedicated to science and history.
User avatar #300 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Actually they're probably still in the moving boxes in my garage. Never mind.
User avatar #299 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
That from the sound of, you've never read. Seriously you haven't said one correct thing. Anyway, lets end this before my brain explodes
User avatar #296 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
I'm gonna stop this here.

You clearly of the opinion that your religion is the one true religion (like no ones ever said that before) and blah blah blah Jesus exists blah blah.

Is it so hard to believe that maybe you're wrong? Good on you for researching your religion, but don't research your religion to the extent that it agrees with your current perspective of your religion and disregard anything that might oppose it. Then, what's the point?
User avatar #297 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Right, I can see that you're a complete and utter idiot. If you must know, I am religious, but I believe every religion is a valid and legitimate interpretation of God.

Thats funny because its quite obvious that I know more about religions than you, as you've been nothing but wrong.

Its ironic that you're saying I'm wrong when everything you have spouted is such complete and utter bullshit my inner historian is dying. Seriously, you know fuck all about history. This has been the most painful 'discussion' I have ever had the displeasure of being in. Jesus woman, pick up a fucking history book
User avatar #295 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The dead sea scrolls are the second oldest manuscripts. That means the second oldest copies that have survived to modern era. Not the original. Also the dead sea scrolls were translations of Islam, take to Rome I think it was.

I use the word Islam loosely. Like I said, for centuries before Islam was actually Islam it was a big game of chinese whispers. Have you heard of Sikh? There were a couple of variations of it.

But yea, my bad about the pope. This whole discussion has been for memory on my end.
User avatar #292 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Even the 'original bible' set of seven hand written books that cost more than a house in Hollywood is not actually the original bible.
#167 - And Africa and India 01/23/2015 on (untitled) 0
#166 - Apart from, for example, the apostles in Italy, Africa, India,…  [+] (29 new replies) 01/23/2015 on (untitled) +2
User avatar #221 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
Eeeeh

The Apostles are less an action in the bible and more so part of the crusades - actual history.
User avatar #251 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Apart from the fact that after the book of Acts thats all the new testament is about.
User avatar #252 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
Yea see I'm not a fan of the new testament. It's like Freudes theories. His theories are wrong. We didn't say 'well if we change this and rephrase that..' we said 'no, those are wrong, here's a more accurate and entirely different theory'

All the new testament is, is damage control.
#302 - dehumanizer (01/24/2015) [-]
>all of the new testement, is damage controll

how stupid are you?
User avatar #253 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Well thats amusing because thats completely off topic, and wrong anyway.
You can't just say the New Testament is damage control because you believe that it disagrees with your opinion on the bible being a book of evil

ANYWAY, the content clearly states that the bible only mentions those places, while I showed it did not by listing places that are described in the bible that the apostles spread out to convert in
User avatar #255 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
I literally wrote to a local politician about religious freedom like an hour ago
User avatar #254 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
It's not completely off topic and it's not wrong.

Literally the new testament took out parts of the bible that were considered to be too violent or ridiculous at the time. If that's not damage control I don't know what is. And I don't consider the bible being a book of evil at all, I am a huge advocat for freedom of religious choice and in fact I have read many holy book, so it's interesting that you'd call your assumption of my opinion irrelevant because it disagrees with your opinion on all atheists being snobs.

Having said that, of any religion, Christianity is easily the most hypocritical. So I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that someone I assume to be a Christian (or one of its reinterpretations) is a hypocrite.
User avatar #256 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Nope. No. No no no.

The New Testament did not remove the parts of the bible that were too violent. Seriously I am unsure of how you even achieved that assumption. The New Testament left the entire Old Testament alone, which is the violent part of the bible. The New Testament didn't remove parts of the New Testament either, the factions of Churchmen at the time just decided that some books were not to be included, such as (potentially) the Book of Mary Magdalene, due to her being a woman, and other books, which were just considered heretical and disagreed with the tone. Not because they showed the Bible as harmful.

Now, it is not damage control. Damage control would be the Pope removing Leviticus currently. You don;t use damage control when your religion literally controls the biggest empire in the world. They had nothing to fear, and nothing to remove.

Having studied this, I think you may be misunderstanding the Gnostics. The Gnostics disagreed heavily with the church founders, and were prosecuted, and their Books they wanted to include destroyed. Not because they showed Christianity as bad, but rather they were deemed heretical as they disagreed with their tone.

Its absolutely lovely that you advocate freedom of religion, and good for you writing to your local politician about it.
Just before you start to discuss religion, don't just read some parts of holy books. Actually study the history of the time and learn a bit of context
User avatar #258 - thirdjess (01/23/2015) [-]
I've read the New Testament, I've read a version of the Catholic bible that was the Old Testament and the New Testament revised. I've read the Jehovas Scripture, I've read a translation of the Jewish Tanakh. In middle school I read a couple books of the Quran and I intend to read all of it eventually, but first I am going to learn about Paganism and then Wikken.

All of the extremist Chrstian behavior in the last.. lets say fifty years for a nice round number, almost exclusively quoted or drew from the Old Testament. If the inspiration of this radical behavior was the Old Testament because those same passages didn't exist in the New Testament, that means the New Testament is intentionally less violent than the Old.

Who's to say that the so called 'tone' of the book was less violence? Modernising it to attract more people. It's like how many politicians these days advocate for gay rights when five years ago they would do press releases about how they're a good christian boy with wholesome ideals for the average Australian family.
User avatar #259 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
The bible has not been out-rightly modified for centuries. There have been minor changes, but nothing as major as whatever the hell you're talking about

Yes it is less violent, but thats because times had changed and the new Christians were no longer having to fight for their very existence like the Jews of the Old Testament.

Your issue is that while you have read the Books, you have absolutely no context. You do not understand the context in which these books were altered and were written, otherwise you would understand that the apostles had no need to 'damage control', as things were a lot different back then.

And guess what? I've actively studied the history of the church, and I know for a fact that the Bible has not been edited to make it less violent, but because different branches of the church interpreted it differently

And anyway, this has absolutely nothing to do with my original comment, nor the content. And referring to your original reply:
'The Apostles are less an action in the bible and more so part of the crusades - actual history' shows how little history you know. Can I inquire how the apostles were more in action during the crusades which were a thousand years after they had died?
User avatar #282 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Well hold on, right there you're putting dates on something that is dateless. I've seen many a mathmatical explination of the dates in the bible and they've summarised it with 'so we think it's around THIS time' and each one has been upwards of a half millenium different from the other.
User avatar #283 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. We know for a fact that Jesus lived at the turn of the millenia. There are records from the Romans of a Jewish preacher by the name, and St Peter and the apostles founded a church. We have enough historical evidence that it is fact that Jesus and the apostles lived during the time of the Empire, Jesus likely being born either 4BCE or 16CE, and St Peter the Apostle became Pope, and was then crucified during the great fire of Rome around 64CE.

And we all know the Crusades happen between the 1000s and the 1500s

I'm not putting dates on dateless things. I just know my history
User avatar #284 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
But his name was Joshua. Not Jesus.
User avatar #285 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
No. No where in any bible nor historical document has Jesus Christ of Nazareth been referred to as Joshua.
Both historians who make mention of Jesus reffered to him as Jesus (that being Josephus the Jew and Tacitus the Roman).
And anyway, that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. We were discussing the dates on Jesus and his apostles and I proved you wrong

And how could you even come close to the assumption that the apostles were alive during the crusades? There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that has ever said that
User avatar #286 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The bible and also the book of Jehova were originally written in biblical hebrew, but also ancient greek and sometimes sanskrit. His name in the original books was Yeshua, which translates to Joshua. However, the books were originally translated into Greek and Yeshua was translated into Lesous, which was 'romanised' (translated by syllable rather than by word) into Jesus.

The reason I say his name was Joshua was to poke a hole in your response.

For example, e=mc^2. The theory of relativity basically reads as 'e=mc^2, therefore all bodies with energy have mass and all bodies with mass have energy, therefore this, and therefore that.' However if Stephen Hawking came along today and said 'well actually, e does not equal mc^2' the whole theory of relativity would collapse on itself.

You say that these people knew and refferred to a man named Jesus, but his name wasn't Jesus. Jesus is a mistranslation of a mistranslation.
User avatar #287 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok. Fair enough.
But. You admit it yourself. You just said that to poke a hole in my argument. So I can see theres no point in arguing with someone who looks at the argument, and completely ignored every point that you can't argue against until you find something so irrelevant and small to the argument its ridiculous, and pedantically argue it.
User avatar #290 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Besides that, they've actually found that Islam, Judaism, Christianity (and also Catholocism and Jehova) were originally Islam, which was memorised by elders and passed on generation for generation, and that centuries long game of chinese whispers was actually based on sheep farmers around Egypt (like the family in Exodus)
User avatar #293 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oh god. I can't actually comprehend what you're saying its that wrong.
Ok number one please give me the sources you've gotten your information from.

Right. There is no way, no possible way, that any of them started from Islam. Because Islam is the newest one of the Abrahamic religions.
Islam was started by Mohammed, an originally Christian man who lived in 400 CE. LITERALLY CENTURIES AFTER THE TALMUD AND JUDAISM WAS WRITTEN. Seriously. Judaism had been around for hundreds of years, and there is so much evidence telling you how wrong you are
User avatar #288 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok

Have you seen that video of hipsters coming out of coachella, and this fake reporter asks if they saw a band the reporter had made up on the spot. All of the hipsters in the video said 'yea, totally! They're so down to earth'

So apply that same logic to Josephus. How can Josephus speak of a man named Jesus if his name wasn't Jesus, and if Josephus did not actually speak to a man named Jesus then how can we place Jesus in that time period.
User avatar #289 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Because Josephus lived at the same time (37CE-100CE). Same period for Tacitus. And its quite obviously that fact 'Yosephus' was not Latin.
Jesus is not a mistranslation. It is the Latin version of Yosephus. They make mention of Yosephus, but in the Latin form.
But that was not your point. Your point was that the apostles lived during the crusades, or we don't know when they lived when we do. We do, how can you not understand that.
User avatar #291 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Ok so the Crusades were officiated by the second pope, yea? How can the second pope come a thousand years after the first pope?

The disciples of Jesus were commanded to take the knowledge of his scripture and spread it around the world, that's the Crusades.

You keep dating the bible, but you can't carbon date books that have fallen to bits millenia ago.
User avatar #294 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
What the fuck what the fuck what the fuck
Who taught you history. I legitimately had to take a moment after reading that.
The 2nd pope was St Linus. The Pope who commissioned the Crusades was Pope Urban II, THE 159TH POPE.

We date the books by comparing the events mentioned with historical documents, like all history is dated. And there are some original texts we have dated. Dead Sea scrolls?
User avatar #298 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Sure, let me just pop downstairs to my literal library of about 900 books and pick on off of the entire bookcase dedicated to science and history.
User avatar #300 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Actually they're probably still in the moving boxes in my garage. Never mind.
User avatar #299 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
That from the sound of, you've never read. Seriously you haven't said one correct thing. Anyway, lets end this before my brain explodes
User avatar #296 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
I'm gonna stop this here.

You clearly of the opinion that your religion is the one true religion (like no ones ever said that before) and blah blah blah Jesus exists blah blah.

Is it so hard to believe that maybe you're wrong? Good on you for researching your religion, but don't research your religion to the extent that it agrees with your current perspective of your religion and disregard anything that might oppose it. Then, what's the point?
User avatar #297 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Right, I can see that you're a complete and utter idiot. If you must know, I am religious, but I believe every religion is a valid and legitimate interpretation of God.

Thats funny because its quite obvious that I know more about religions than you, as you've been nothing but wrong.

Its ironic that you're saying I'm wrong when everything you have spouted is such complete and utter bullshit my inner historian is dying. Seriously, you know fuck all about history. This has been the most painful 'discussion' I have ever had the displeasure of being in. Jesus woman, pick up a fucking history book
User avatar #295 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
The dead sea scrolls are the second oldest manuscripts. That means the second oldest copies that have survived to modern era. Not the original. Also the dead sea scrolls were translations of Islam, take to Rome I think it was.

I use the word Islam loosely. Like I said, for centuries before Islam was actually Islam it was a big game of chinese whispers. Have you heard of Sikh? There were a couple of variations of it.

But yea, my bad about the pope. This whole discussion has been for memory on my end.
User avatar #292 - thirdjess (01/24/2015) [-]
Even the 'original bible' set of seven hand written books that cost more than a house in Hollywood is not actually the original bible.
#372 - I just now my Warden Commander is smashing skulls in Weisshaup…  [+] (9 new replies) 01/23/2015 on Video games +1
#373 - namenotallowed (01/23/2015) [-]
They get their griffons back? Either I don't remember this or I somehow completely missed that part when did that happen? Isn't the warden suppose to be searching for a way to cure the blight though? Then again I am sure he/she would return to weisshaupt considering circumstances in the game. It would be great to return to the wardens side of things though, as much as I like my inquisitor I like my warden more. I just feel they need to give some spotlight for such a titanic figure in the story, or more interaction with his son if you opted for that route.
User avatar #382 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Its actually in one of the side books, but it is canon. The last Griffons had caught the taint in the 4th blight I think, and they all died. But in 9:42 Dragon (the year after the Inquisitions victory), a warden-recruit found a last clutch of eggs, and hatched 13 healthy griffons.

Yeh I would've liked to see the Commander in it, but he has to deal with whatever the fuck is happening in Weisshaupt. The Wardens are currently working on a cure to the blight (which is possible, see Grand Enchanter Fiona), but they're having to deal with the incompetence, corruption, and perhaps straight up evil of the Warden command, which is why whoever survived the Adamant (Hawke, Stroud, Alistair) and the Warden have gone to crack some heads, and we haven't heard anything from the Wardens. I mean why have they all dissapeared? Maybe a civil war? But I reckon the next game will be about the Warden's internal struggle, and the Dread Wolf's return and absorption of Mythal and Urthemiel
#390 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oh alright that is interesting I've been meaning to pick up all the books and stuff for DA I just haven't had the money lately. Yeah I would love to see the game take a look some of the political things happening with the wardens especially now that they are out of the blight or at the least face new threats. That ending made me lose it I really want to see where it goes. Would the black city be where the elvish gods were sealed and if so will we actually be allowed to enter? There is some supporting evidence for the black city being the place Solas did his deed and how he regrets it.
User avatar #391 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
The whole thing with Solas will be interesting. I mean hes obviously got a plan. I reckon the next game will be dealing with the Wardens and Solas
#392 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Yeah I just hope his plan doesn't turn him into a full on antagonist. I grew really fond of him between his cool head and that hint of underlaying sadness he always seems to have he quickly became a favorite of mine. I imagine DLC coming soon anyway because of how the game went and DA Keep having a inquisition tab on the tapestry.
User avatar #393 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oo. I forgot about dlc. I honestly wonder what they're going to do.
Solas's betrayal angered me so much that I honestly hate him now. I liked him when he was with us, but I can't stand traitors.
#394 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
I don't know I have a hard time thinking of it as a betrayal considering his back story and the exchange he had at the end. He seems to have good intentions and Mythal forgave him saying what he did was right. So it makes me wonder if he feels he is the only one able to correct his mistake or a motive that remains unseen. There is a lot of things going on behind the scenes yet and I am really hoping Solas doesn't turn out to be like what the stories say his nature is.
User avatar #395 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
The thing is he is the Elvish equivalent of Loki.

Another thing I loved about Inquisition is the wider roleplay thing. I got to play as a religious nut, it was great. Even better when the truth about the Inquisitors survival in the breach was discovered
#396 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Yeah when you take the dalish interpretations of stories he is essentially Loki. How he acts though and what you learn in the temple speaks of a much deeper character than simply a trickster. As well as the "gods" being less grand than the dalish remember them. Information from the temple and other sources leads me to believe that Solas whatever he did to the gods was a act made of desperation hoping to stop something rather than a act of pettiness or spitefulness.

Yeah I agree Inquisition gave you plenty of options to develop your character. My main character I went with a willing skeptic outlook on religion with a slight reluctance to lead.
#250 - Well, the man who overcomes is own nature shows what goodness … 01/22/2015 on Video games 0
#246 - In war, victory. In peace, vigilance. In death, sacrifice  [+] (12 new replies) 01/22/2015 on Video games +3
#257 - namenotallowed (01/22/2015) [-]
Aww shit son that is my jam. Though the wardens in the game lately have been demonized I feel. I just wish I could see my warden again taking care of his kid hopefully they will do that in some DLC.
User avatar #372 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
I just now my Warden Commander is smashing skulls in Weisshaupt. I'm certain the next game will be about the Wardens. I mean the Wardens do have their griffons back now
#373 - namenotallowed (01/23/2015) [-]
They get their griffons back? Either I don't remember this or I somehow completely missed that part when did that happen? Isn't the warden suppose to be searching for a way to cure the blight though? Then again I am sure he/she would return to weisshaupt considering circumstances in the game. It would be great to return to the wardens side of things though, as much as I like my inquisitor I like my warden more. I just feel they need to give some spotlight for such a titanic figure in the story, or more interaction with his son if you opted for that route.
User avatar #382 - theshadowed (01/23/2015) [-]
Its actually in one of the side books, but it is canon. The last Griffons had caught the taint in the 4th blight I think, and they all died. But in 9:42 Dragon (the year after the Inquisitions victory), a warden-recruit found a last clutch of eggs, and hatched 13 healthy griffons.

Yeh I would've liked to see the Commander in it, but he has to deal with whatever the fuck is happening in Weisshaupt. The Wardens are currently working on a cure to the blight (which is possible, see Grand Enchanter Fiona), but they're having to deal with the incompetence, corruption, and perhaps straight up evil of the Warden command, which is why whoever survived the Adamant (Hawke, Stroud, Alistair) and the Warden have gone to crack some heads, and we haven't heard anything from the Wardens. I mean why have they all dissapeared? Maybe a civil war? But I reckon the next game will be about the Warden's internal struggle, and the Dread Wolf's return and absorption of Mythal and Urthemiel
#390 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oh alright that is interesting I've been meaning to pick up all the books and stuff for DA I just haven't had the money lately. Yeah I would love to see the game take a look some of the political things happening with the wardens especially now that they are out of the blight or at the least face new threats. That ending made me lose it I really want to see where it goes. Would the black city be where the elvish gods were sealed and if so will we actually be allowed to enter? There is some supporting evidence for the black city being the place Solas did his deed and how he regrets it.
User avatar #391 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
The whole thing with Solas will be interesting. I mean hes obviously got a plan. I reckon the next game will be dealing with the Wardens and Solas
#392 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Yeah I just hope his plan doesn't turn him into a full on antagonist. I grew really fond of him between his cool head and that hint of underlaying sadness he always seems to have he quickly became a favorite of mine. I imagine DLC coming soon anyway because of how the game went and DA Keep having a inquisition tab on the tapestry.
User avatar #393 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Oo. I forgot about dlc. I honestly wonder what they're going to do.
Solas's betrayal angered me so much that I honestly hate him now. I liked him when he was with us, but I can't stand traitors.
#394 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
I don't know I have a hard time thinking of it as a betrayal considering his back story and the exchange he had at the end. He seems to have good intentions and Mythal forgave him saying what he did was right. So it makes me wonder if he feels he is the only one able to correct his mistake or a motive that remains unseen. There is a lot of things going on behind the scenes yet and I am really hoping Solas doesn't turn out to be like what the stories say his nature is.
User avatar #395 - theshadowed (01/24/2015) [-]
The thing is he is the Elvish equivalent of Loki.

Another thing I loved about Inquisition is the wider roleplay thing. I got to play as a religious nut, it was great. Even better when the truth about the Inquisitors survival in the breach was discovered
#396 - namenotallowed (01/24/2015) [-]
Yeah when you take the dalish interpretations of stories he is essentially Loki. How he acts though and what you learn in the temple speaks of a much deeper character than simply a trickster. As well as the "gods" being less grand than the dalish remember them. Information from the temple and other sources leads me to believe that Solas whatever he did to the gods was a act made of desperation hoping to stop something rather than a act of pettiness or spitefulness.

Yeah I agree Inquisition gave you plenty of options to develop your character. My main character I went with a willing skeptic outlook on religion with a slight reluctance to lead.
User avatar #251 - Daemon Lord (01/22/2015) [-]
A warden's duty is never done
#233 - Mopey snipers and awkward punchers are where its at 01/22/2015 on Video games 0
#539 - ok I'm sheepshepard I don't use my fj name for anythin… 01/22/2015 on finblob's profile 0
#537 - Hey man, whats your steam id? I'll send you a friend request?  [+] (2 new replies) 01/22/2015 on finblob's profile 0
User avatar #538 - finblob (01/22/2015) [-]
finblob
my profile pic is of some weirdo in a christmas hat
User avatar #539 - theshadowed (01/22/2015) [-]
ok
I'm sheepshepard
I don't use my fj name for anything cause its cringey as fuck lol
#1156611 - I have not heard about that but omfg that sounds cool as … 01/22/2015 on Video Games Board - console... 0
#1156610 - Thanks man, nice to have a more in depth answer. Any personal…  [+] (2 new replies) 01/22/2015 on Video Games Board - console... 0
User avatar #1156616 - dasistwunderbar (01/22/2015) [-]
I personally preferred the NC, but that's just because they suit my playstyle of walk in a straight line blowing stuff up. I'd recommend trying them all.
User avatar #1156615 - spaceking (01/22/2015) [-]
They're all pretty well balanced, really comes down to personal play style.
To put it in overly simple terms, Blue hits hardest, Red hits fastest, Purple hits farthest.
Each faction has unique vehicle abilities and weapons however, so I'd recommend trying them all.
#1156547 - Downloading Planetside Anyone give me a basic rundown of factions?  [+] (6 new replies) 01/22/2015 on Video Games Board - console... +2
User avatar #1156585 - dasistwunderbar (01/22/2015) [-]
Vanu Sovereignty (purple): Like their technology, worship aliens. Gameplay means vehicles that can strafe because magnets, and guns with no drop-off because lasers.

New Conglomerate (blue): Rebels, absolutely radical faction music. Gameplay means big meaty weapons with slow fire rate, and tanky tanks.

Terran Republic (red): Old empire, all about that nazi ideology. Gameplay means not much damage, but shooting 400,000 rounds a second and fast reloads, and very fast vehicles.
User avatar #1156610 - theshadowed (01/22/2015) [-]
Thanks man, nice to have a more in depth answer. Any personal recommendations on which is best?
User avatar #1156616 - dasistwunderbar (01/22/2015) [-]
I personally preferred the NC, but that's just because they suit my playstyle of walk in a straight line blowing stuff up. I'd recommend trying them all.
User avatar #1156615 - spaceking (01/22/2015) [-]
They're all pretty well balanced, really comes down to personal play style.
To put it in overly simple terms, Blue hits hardest, Red hits fastest, Purple hits farthest.
Each faction has unique vehicle abilities and weapons however, so I'd recommend trying them all.
User avatar #1156573 - sircool (01/22/2015) [-]
purple got flying tanks and spam it
blue got freedoms and awesome infantry
red got lotsa bullets and air power
User avatar #1156554 - focalanemo (01/22/2015) [-]
Purple faction is lazorrss and stuff
Blue faction is firepower
Red faction is firerate
#1156380 - Is it good? Would you recommend getting it?  [+] (2 new replies) 01/22/2015 on Video Games Board - console... +1
User avatar #1156381 - notred (01/22/2015) [-]
It's free.
User avatar #1156517 - playercz (01/22/2015) [-]
free p2w
#1156378 - What game?  [+] (4 new replies) 01/22/2015 on Video Games Board - console... +1
User avatar #1156379 - notred (01/22/2015) [-]
Planetside 2.
User avatar #1156380 - theshadowed (01/22/2015) [-]
Is it good? Would you recommend getting it?
User avatar #1156381 - notred (01/22/2015) [-]
It's free.
User avatar #1156517 - playercz (01/22/2015) [-]
free p2w
#1156377 - he all know we'd much prefer to see Sten and Oghren 01/22/2015 on Video Games Board - console... 0
#1156376 - a moody, whiney terrorist 01/22/2015 on Video Games Board - console... 0
#1155929 - I had 3 sons. First was a great commander, gonna be a good Bas… 01/21/2015 on Video Games Board - console... 0
#1155928 - Inquisition Letting Stroud die over Hawke … 01/21/2015 on Video Games Board - console... 0
#1155927 - hes dead lol  [+] (2 new replies) 01/21/2015 on Video Games Board - console... 0
User avatar #1155944 - finblob (01/21/2015) [-]
hawke said he was alive and healthy so quit your lies son
User avatar #1156377 - theshadowed (01/22/2015) [-]
he all know we'd much prefer to see Sten and Oghren
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 10 / Total items point value: 10

Comments(107):

[ 107 comments ]

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
Latest users (1): theshadowed, anonymous(2).
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#140 - pugsworth (01/17/2015) [-]
Hey dick smoker
User avatar #130 - warioteam (10/22/2014) [-]
you mentioned me on that gearboy post and i didnt get a chance to read it cause it was deleted
or the post
gimmee a run down, was i involved and/or mentioned in said post?
User avatar #131 to #130 - theshadowed ONLINE (10/22/2014) [-]
The post was deleted? Why?
It was just revealing gearboy for being a lying bastard who traces the majority of his work if not all from another artist
I mentioned you in a comment because some guy posted the post you made about gearboy being a bit of a cunt
User avatar #129 - schnizel (10/21/2014) [-]
Do we hate eachother.
User avatar #136 to #129 - theshadowed ONLINE (01/01/2015) [-]
Dude why did you block me again
User avatar #137 to #136 - schnizel (01/01/2015) [-]
i habe been haxd
User avatar #138 to #137 - theshadowed ONLINE (01/01/2015) [-]
thanks friend
I was going to compliment your racism on your new years post and then I saw the block
User avatar #139 to #138 - schnizel (01/01/2015) [-]
<3
the fire rises
User avatar #132 to #129 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/01/2014) [-]
Oh hi dude
I don;t hate you. I come across as a pathetic child when arguing with people who hold your anti-semitic beliefs, its thoroughly embarrasing

I just believe everyone is equal, and the Jews aren't to blame for anything, we just blame them because its the easy way out
#134 to #133 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/03/2014) [-]
u schnizel no homo
User avatar #135 to #134 - schnizel (11/03/2014) [-]
Homo maximus.
User avatar #127 - warioteam (09/06/2014) [-]
After all this time?
User avatar #128 to #127 - theshadowed ONLINE (09/06/2014) [-]
Always
User avatar #112 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/23/2014) [-]
ARE YOU READY FOR TONIGHT? ARE YOU READY????
IT'S IN LIKE 1 HOUR 40 MINUTES I'M SO EXCITED.
User avatar #113 to #112 - theshadowed ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
I ******* KNOW
Sorry haven't replied, been at Dad's. He kinds has a thing about being on technology
I love Capaldi and his eyebrows. He really needs to be angry though, thats going to be great

Have you seen Guardians of the Galaxy? I love it its amazing
User avatar #114 to #113 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
AND SCOTTISH ACCENT YEEEEESSS AND HOW HE INSULTED EVERYONE BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T TALKING SCOTTISH WAS GREAT
His eyebrows are ******* great omg

And nooooo I'm broke, can't afford to go see
User avatar #115 to #114 - theshadowed ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
Hes brilliant. And hes got such a range
Hes in Into the Loop and hes hilarious in that, and then look at him in the Musketeers.
Severely underestimated actor.
They've said they're writing him as a 'raging Billy Connoly'
DALEKS BACK TONIGHT
User avatar #116 to #115 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
oh god a raging Billy Connoly. Just what DW needed.
I've got church friends screaming about how the Vastra/Jenny kiss was inappropriatefor a children's sci fi show. SO WHAT? IT'S FANSERVICE FOR THE OLDER FANS WHO WERE SHIPPING THEM BEFORE THEY WERE EVEN ANNOUNCED CANON. jfc tbh.
And yes, oh god yes. I started working with an icon blog on Tumblr and it's great because I get all the Musketeers requests regardless of which musketeers tbh and it's great
AND YES DALEKS
User avatar #117 to #116 - theshadowed ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
They're complaining about the kiss? what about that one matt smith episode where vastra showed off her extremely long tongue to jenny?
I seriously love the musketeers, its great
THo I couldn't see those weird super daleks in the trailer
User avatar #118 to #117 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
I know right. Idk I just noticed it and I was there like "you what? It's fanservice, and there is still a severe underrepresentation of LGBTQ in TV, even if we're aware they exist. Great."
User avatar #119 to #118 - theshadowed ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
Definitely. And the BBC don't just force the relationship in our face or anything, which I know some people bitch about. Its just a couple. And they would be exactly the same if one of them was a man.
User avatar #120 to #119 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
Yeah
But when Vastra got all flustered because she was posing Jenny in underwear for no reason. That was great
User avatar #121 to #120 - theshadowed ONLINE (08/30/2014) [-]
AND CAPALDI GOES FOR ******* GOLD
I love him.
'Wheres Ross (or whatever his name was)?'
Hes one the top if you want to pay your respects
User avatar #122 to #121 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/31/2014) [-]
I love Capaldi so much tbh
User avatar #123 to #122 - theshadowed ONLINE (08/31/2014) [-]
Its refreshing to have a serious face. I liked Matt and all but he was kind of a cbbc doctor. I feel like Capaldi and Moffat are starting a darker spin, which will be nice
User avatar #124 to #123 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/31/2014) [-]
A friend from church was saying that Capaldi seems fairly similar to Bill Hartnell, a grumpy Doctor. Which I think we need.
He'd forgotten what he'd done in the Time War and the 50th anniversary served to remind him what he'd done again. People are commenting that 12 seems similar to 9 and I think that's probably why. He got a reminder.
User avatar #125 to #124 - theshadowed ONLINE (08/31/2014) [-]
Yeh, being reminded that you committed the biggest genocide in the universe would kind of sober you up. And last nights episode served to remind us that the doctor is not perfect, but he a 2000 year old man with 2000 years of hatred bottled up inside him
User avatar #126 to #125 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (08/31/2014) [-]
I don't think he really knows how old he is. It'd get kind of confusing when you can travel anywhere you like in time.
But yeah, I get you. I mean, 9 was told by a Dalek that he'd make a good Dalek, and he's been told the same thing again with his 12th face.
User avatar #109 to #108 - theshadowed ONLINE (06/23/2014) [-]
Wow I kind of thought you forgot
User avatar #110 to #109 - soundofwinter (06/23/2014) [-]
no, 7500 is just a ibig numer
User avatar #111 to #110 - theshadowed ONLINE (06/23/2014) [-]
Hey, well nice of you to get round to me. You're definitely my favorite dictator now
User avatar #107 to #106 - theshadowed ONLINE (06/22/2014) [-]
Thanks
#104 - minibeep (02/24/2014) [-]
no offence
but you are sheep
User avatar #105 to #104 - theshadowed ONLINE (03/01/2014) [-]
lol why
User avatar #102 - schnizel (02/18/2014) [-]
Comment number 69
lel 69 get it its a sex pose get it get it
User avatar #103 to #102 - theshadowed ONLINE (02/18/2014) [-]
ehehehehehehehehehehe

THo seriously interesting talk
User avatar #84 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/25/2013) [-]
are you dead
i'm dead
User avatar #86 to #84 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/25/2013) [-]
I know. I ******* know
Twas a good episode

omfg my house at the moment though. So in my lounge there is my younger sister and brother, and my pissed step-brother, 2 step-sisters, step-dad and mum who have been doing Karaoke for the past 2 hours. I don't think my ears will ever truly recover
User avatar #87 to #86 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
oh sweet jesus
i feel bad for you man

But yeah. The episode itself was **** imo. Too much going on, not enough explanation. Clara was a brat/twat/prat whatever you want, as usual. "OH DOCTOR WHY DID YOU MAKE ME LEAVE OH DOCTOR WHY"
i get like he was trying to save her, and **** , and he didn't say, because she'd object, but like. wow. shut up you twat. let me just take your wardrobe so you can die already **** off.
It was rescued by the last 10 minutes, though.
User avatar #88 to #87 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
I dunno. I liked the whole Doctor as a defender part, that was nice. i think the aliens should've started beating the **** out of each other as well though
User avatar #89 to #88 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Would have been amusing
User avatar #90 to #89 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Cybermen vs. Daleks Round 2
User avatar #91 to #90 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Yeah man
xD
I'm waiting for this damned game to finish downloading I want to play iiiiit
User avatar #92 to #91 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Which game?
User avatar #93 to #92 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
DMC3
User avatar #94 to #93 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Did you manage to get L4d2 when it was free?
User avatar #95 to #94 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Oh yes.
User avatar #96 to #95 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Dude we'll have to play it sometime
User avatar #97 to #96 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
We should yeah
I'm still figuring **** out
I warn you though
I'm a cautious gamer
I get too immersed in games and treat it as though it's real life.
User avatar #98 to #97 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Cautions good. Means I won't have to keep healing your sorry arse
I've played it before, and I always pick up some kind of melee weapon. So I am constantly accidentally pissing of witches, tanks, etc by running into them
User avatar #99 to #98 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
I've not played it. Heard about it though so I got excited when it was free.
Closest thing I've played to it's probably Hellgate.
User avatar #100 to #99 - theshadowed ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Its a good co-op game
User avatar #101 to #100 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (12/26/2013) [-]
Idunno I've never played any co-op
User avatar #69 to #68 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
Danke shun
User avatar #70 to #69 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
Enjoy your feels, sweetcheeks.
User avatar #71 to #70 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
Awww, and it was going to be such a happy evening
User avatar #72 to #71 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
The Sherstrade is a Tumblr exclusive.
Shipping Out is also on You need to login to view this link
User avatar #73 to #72 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
Its good. Very good
User avatar #74 to #73 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
Spasiba.
User avatar #75 to #74 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
Gern geschehen
User avatar #76 to #75 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
Dude
I'm apparently going to be on tv
like woah
User avatar #77 to #76 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/20/2013) [-]
wat. explain. now
User avatar #78 to #77 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/21/2013) [-]
young carer's thaaaaang
charity gala bc the co-op raised money for us awyiss
User avatar #79 to #78 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/21/2013) [-]
Like with your school, or a group of friends? Tell me when its on, and I'll cheer you on
User avatar #80 to #79 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/21/2013) [-]
idk but the gala itself is on the 5th of December in Manchester
we're doing a lantern parade
BUT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED IN THE GALA ITSELF
WHICH IS KIND OF STRANGE BECAUSE LIKE
IT'S IN OUR HONOUR???
User avatar #81 to #80 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/21/2013) [-]
Whos honour is this now. I am slightly confused. Like, just you, or you and friends, or some kind of group?
And wtf why don't they let you in the gala. Is it in school time or some **** ?
User avatar #82 to #81 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/21/2013) [-]
It's in the evening as far as I know You need to login to view this link
But it's the young carer's group bc the charity the coop is supporting is the carer's trust
which yc is part of
User avatar #83 to #82 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/21/2013) [-]
Oh. I didn't know what yc was. That looks cool. I found their website. Is it just online?
I almost got to be on itv around February. I was doing F1 in schools and at the first round I was talking to the itv guy about it and he asked for an interview with me but then i got called off for the presentation part and i didn't even start until a half hour later and then he had left. I'm still pissed off
User avatar #55 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (10/30/2013) [-]
WE HAVE A DATE FOR SHERLOCK
THERE IS A UK DATE FOR SHERLOCK
User avatar #58 to #55 - theshadowed ONLINE (10/30/2013) [-]
Yeh I am pretty ashamed I haven't watched Sherlock yet
User avatar #57 to #55 - theshadowed ONLINE (10/30/2013) [-]
WHAT? WHEN? THIS HAS CONVINCED ME TO WATCH IT
On the other had I found this really website, just watched Man o' Steel and Kick Ass 2. **** Kick Ass 2 is a lot more depressing that its predecessor.
User avatar #59 to #57 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (10/30/2013) [-]
29TH DECEMBER
THIS YEAR
User avatar #60 to #59 - theshadowed ONLINE (10/30/2013) [-]
THATS GOOD. I AM PHYSCHED FOR A LOT OF THINGS. LIKE DA INQUISITION. BUT THATS NEXT ******* AUTUMN.

On the topic of games, I just got the Witcher 2 on steam. Its pretty good.
User avatar #61 to #60 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (10/31/2013) [-]
DRACULA TONIGHT
User avatar #62 to #61 - theshadowed ONLINE (10/31/2013) [-]
**** I'll record it. I'm actually socializing tonight
User avatar #63 to #62 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (10/31/2013) [-]
I was socializing on Saturday last week
and probably will be this weekend too.
User avatar #64 to #63 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/01/2013) [-]
I'd never actually been to a house party before. Fun ****
User avatar #66 to #64 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/01/2013) [-]
also Dracula is a piece of **** don't watch it
User avatar #67 to #66 - theshadowed ONLINE (11/01/2013) [-]
I just watched World War Z. Not as good as the book, but **** yeah, Wales and Capaldi
User avatar #65 to #64 - infernalinsolence ONLINE (11/01/2013) [-]
Yah
User avatar #53 - forkutensil (10/06/2013) [-]
What in Davy Jones’ locker did ye just bark at me, ye scurvy bilgerat? I’ll have ye know I be the meanest cutthroat on the seven seas, and I’ve led numerous raids on fishing villages, and raped over 300 wenches. I be trained in hit-and-run pillaging and be the deadliest with a pistol of all the captains on the high seas. Ye be nothing to me but another source o’ swag. I’ll have yer guts for garters and keel haul ye like never been done before, hear me true. You think ye can hide behind your newfangled computing device? Think twice on that, scallywag. As we parley I be contacting my secret network o’ pirates across the sea and yer port is being tracked right now so ye better prepare for the typhoon, weevil. The kind o’ monsoon that’ll wipe ye off the map. You’re sharkbait, fool. I can sail anywhere, in any waters, and can kill ye in o’er seven hundred ways, and that be just with me hook and fist. Not only do I be top o’ the line with a cutlass, but I have an entire pirate fleet at my beck and call and I’ll damned sure use it all to wipe yer arse off o’ the world, ye dog. If only ye had had the foresight to know what devilish wrath your jibe was about to incur, ye might have belayed the comment. But ye couldn’t, ye didn’t, and now ye’ll pay the ultimate toll, you buffoon. I’ll **** fury all over ye and ye’ll drown in the depths o’ it. You’re fish food now.
User avatar #54 to #53 - theshadowed ONLINE (10/06/2013) [-]
Have I irritated you in some way? In that case, please hold. There are currently 1.234.908 people with a grudge in front of you. We appreciate your choice of disliking us, and your anger is important to us
User avatar #31 - ariusbrightwing (04/29/2013) [-]
Ohh "Darkness" and "shadows". Go hide, coward shade.
#27 - backinsack (12/04/2012) [-]
just wanted to say I've discovered this site recently and has good as the content is you guys are serious asshole's,
I've never seen such stupidy and people getting so upset about a 'repost'...its the ******* internet, do u seriously get upset after seeing something than once...anyway i wanted to join but once i saw how much of an asshole even ur kim jong...wow...the cooliest thing here is honostly the brony community that lead me here
#19 - cakefaceify (10/25/2012) [-]
The butthurt was very strong with that one.
User avatar #14 - martinapplejack (09/02/2012) [-]
Oh, I see you're British. I apologize if I've come across as being a bit if an ass. I thought I was arguing with an American (no offense to them, but I've found them to be the most unbearable group on the internet and have very little patience when talking to them)
PS Is that a dildo in the previous comment?
User avatar #15 to #14 - theshadowed ONLINE (09/02/2012) [-]
Are you British as well? The Americans don't seem to know the definition of tolerance, I agree
User avatar #16 to #15 - martinapplejack (09/03/2012) [-]
It says so on my passport
#12 - bacterialmetal (06/12/2012) [-]
no
no
User avatar #30 to #12 - theshadowed ONLINE (01/24/2013) [-]
Do not think I have forgotten this attack. I WILL have my revenge, criminal scum
User avatar #13 to #12 - theshadowed ONLINE (06/13/2012) [-]
Who ARE you?
User avatar #11 - bacterialmetal (06/12/2012) [-]
no
User avatar #10 - bacterialmetal (06/12/2012) [-]
no
[ 107 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)