2
murderhydrant 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not exactly what you asked but they need a mission or goal that facilitates the idea of being healthy and if they are unhealthy now it's unlikely they have one.

Finding one depends on the person but it should transcend the person, so simply obtaining health or for finding a spouse isn't good enough. If they are a Christian this becomes alot easier frankly.

2
murderhydrant 2 points ago +2 / -0

Church is important but knowing God comes first. You should consider writing down what you don't agree with and why and try to have a conversation with people about those points. Bring them to church with you.

As you are not a christian (excuse me if I'm wrong, that's the impression I get) I'm reluctant to advise you to find a biblical church because frankly I'm not sure you would know what that is. I'll also say alot of churches will not allow non christians to volunteer for them.

Put bluntly I think you should seek God first and fellowship second.

-4
murderhydrant -4 points ago +3 / -7

Order isn't important. Duplicates don't count. 1 minute later added arbitrarily so has no significance.

Not seeing the mathimatical impossibility but I appreciate your zeal.

2
murderhydrant 2 points ago +2 / -0

Man that video shows alot.

It shows he is a totalitarian (because he agrees idealogicaly), that he knows most people hate totalitarians, and that he was willing to try and frame Stephen as one to look better. This video is a perfect summary of who he is.

1
murderhydrant 1 point ago +1 / -0

Church I've been going to has grown during covid, and I know of one more that has grown even more and it's been pretty vocal against lockdowns.

Lots of people go to church as a sort of social event first so maybe it's good that is exposed. Minor note but when I was looking for a church I found some crazy nice places with coffee bars and smoke machines but the preaching was never convicting and always topical.

by Quelle
2
murderhydrant 2 points ago +2 / -0

You're the expert here but I'm pretty skeptical any attack would happen classically like that.

In WW1, Germany thought the best way to win would be to go all out immediately. They did, but lacked the capability to mobilize to the extent required to end it quickly.

In WW2, same thing, again same issue.

Consider the destructive capability we have now combined with the intelligence, accuracy, and range. If China is serious and actually engaged in a war of force, I expect thousands of simultaneous strikes to destroy any ability for Taiwan to survive without outside assistance followed by a blockade until they capitulate. These "meat grinder" cities just wouldn't happen, Stalingrad happened because Hitler thought if he took it Russia would collapse, China would have no need for any such invasion. Besides that, China probably would take how America did in the Pacific in WW2 into account and just bomb the shit outta Taiwan.

Really the main challenge for China in a physical war is forces outside Taiwan itself, otherwise it just comes down to cost. As it is I think China wants a Taiwan with an intact infrastructure. Probably China will just continue with their current information and economic war as it's working pretty well, but if China ever does attack it will be a blitzkrieg up till then unimagined. So anyways I agree China probably won't attack but for different reasons.