JackedApologist

Things that don't matter for salvation: Mary being perfect The age of the universe Pre/post/a-millennialism Infant baptism Having church on Sunday vs Saturday Things that do matter for salvation: Belief in the Lord Jesus Christ

@BenjaminYeezus Wrist straps, imo (and you can yell at me if you want, coach, you're the professional), made the biggest difference to my lifts. Not tiring my hands out by taking some of the weight off of them for back movements was a game changer.

Wrist wraps. Liquid chalk. Knee sleeves. None of them are essential. But each can make a difference when used with intent. For hypertrophy, the goal is to challenge the target muscle not have your grip or joints give out first. If your grip fails before your back does, you’re limiting the training effect. If your knees feel unstable or irritated, you’ll hesitate to load the movement properly. That’s where tools can help. Use wraps or chalk on your heaviest working sets to remove weak links and let the muscle take the full load. Use knee sleeves to provide warmth, stability, and feedback through lower body work not as a crutch, but as support. Still, don’t rely on them for every set. Keep warm-ups and feeder sets raw. That’s where you build grip strength and joint resilience. These aren’t performance shortcuts. They’re tools to help you get more out of the work you’re already doing.

@antidoc Refusing to read the comments yet, but, my guess is B. Seems like lower test w/ lower primo mean less sides and long sustainability. The 6iu of gh, if tolerated, **should** make up for the lost gains from lower test and primo. I think?

Which of these cycles is better? (“Better” considering gains, side effects, health markers, etc…) A. 700 test/wk + 350 primo/wk + 2iu gh per day B. 400 test/wk + 200 primo/wk + 6iu gh per day Let me know your reasoning in the replies.

@NotEvolution1 Huh. That's funny. Last time I said these Exact Same Words on one of your posts, I got dog piled. Weird. It's almost like y'all have no grounding standard.

@BenjaminYeezus I hope so. Don't wanna be "that guy" that jumps in on everyone, but also don't just want to be that "scary big dude". 90% of the time, the biggest dudes at the gym are the nicest, and I wanna make sure to continue that stereotype.

@citorueNzzaJ I’m glad you got there and showing others a kindness too. Because of you people will come back.

If you are confident in a gym. Think yourself very lucky. There are a lot out there with Gymxiety. The fear of going through the door. Being taunted for their looks / outfit It’s why we need to be positive when in training. “Doing good there” “Excellent reps” “Way to show up” Think of the positive impact you could have on someone. By saying it they might keep showing up. Congrats. You just saved a life potentially.

@freedooksX My research subject has all his fingers and toes crossed. He has extra, unfortunately, from all the research, but that should make him extra lucky!

@TysonMortonPag1 @metathomist Now you're just making up words, which is hilarious. Let's see the proof you keep touting. You've made both a biblical and ecumenical claim now. Back em up, buttercup.

@citorueNzzaJ @metathomist Now you have a problem with dogmas (that i never referred to)? Anyway, I didn’t say that you needed to be attracted to lust, i said you could, which makes it more complex than your simplistic view. Pope Francis twlked about this, but maybe you are too much of a Radtrad for him.

Sin is when someone freely chooses to go against God. Having the disordered inclination of same-sex attraction, in itself, is not a sin. Many people experience this attraction without choosing it, are uncertain of its psychological origin, and may even find it unwanted. Because sin requires a free choice, the mere presence of such an inclination cannot be considered sinful. However, when a person freely acts upon these disordered desires—or deliberately fosters, entertains, and cultivates them—then it becomes sin. The degree of sinfulness depends on how deliberate and voluntary the person’s consent is, since the gravity can be lessened by factors such as weakness, confusion, or lack of full deliberation.

Oh no. I'm being followed by a dentist.

@TysonMortonPag1 @metathomist Nope, and there is no biblical backing for what you said. You don't need to be attracted, physically, to money to lust after it. Or food. You're making things up to fit your own dogmatic narrative

@citorueNzzaJ @metathomist Neither, thank you. Still, as the bible says, there can be the occasion when sexual attraction can be lustful, compared to other sins where this issue does not appear.

Oh that's interesting, and you're getting a long answer. The short answer is: I don't. Let me explain. My brain is weird. One might say "broken". Don't "feel" nearly as much as most people, and don't much rely on my "feelings" because they're often so muted. So really, I don't often "feel" close to Jesus, but then, I don't really need to. I don't need to "feel" close to Jesus any more than I need to "feel" like I was a paramedic or "feel" like a dad. It simply Is. And that's good enough for me.

More than anything? Complete shock, and concern that they'd been replaced with an evil clone. While I wouldn't say they're "woke proof", I'm confident enough, in them, that they're at least extremely "woke resistant". Mainly because they all have great senses of humor, something that the woke crowd severely lacks. My humor is dark. We tease each other. We're silly and stupid and not afraid to be silly and stupid in front of each other. Going woke would mean they'd lose a base nature of themselves. And I can't see any of them losing their senses of humor.

We do this crazy thing, and it's gonna absolutely blow most people's minds, but here goes: We talk about it. That's really it. They'll ask questions, I'll answer, they'll question more, we'll look up the answers, we'll research or I'll have them research. And depending on the age (have to keep the age spread in mind) it may go deeper. See, once you're past the Basics, I'm much more interested in teaching them How to think, not What to think. Or rather, that they Should think. And that changes depending on the age as well. Youngest gets straight, clear answers with a few questions or contextualization so she can understand Middle gets questions. What does he think? Why would he think that? What's another way to consider it, or where could he go to find the answer, if I'm not around? Oldest? Oldest and I fight. Yes, fight. We fight club through it. I'll challenge him, push him, he'll attack my reasoning and I'll turn it around on him. We'll both break out sources, counter sources, and go back and forth nearly to the point of yelling. And then spend some time talking it through afterwards, debrief, about what we each could have done better, and what, if anything, changed about our opinions and beliefs based on the arguments presented. Why? Because the world doesn't care. Atheists don't play nice. Don't respectfully disagree. Many people, of all flavors, don't (just look at the vitriol on here). Since he has the basics, I don't care in the slightest about the extra bits. What I DO care about is him being prepared to answer any question, any challenge, even one he's never heard about before, in a competent and reasoned manner when faced with people who won't accept "because the Bible tells me so" as an answer. Something I wish I'd had.

Hmmm, yes and no. I think it's easier to lust with arousal, but lust doesn't necessitate arousal. Lusting after money wouldn't entail arousal, but internal desires and priorities. I think that's also the key: lust is an overwhelming desire, but one that's a conscious choice. Arousal can often be involuntary as well. So yes, but no. Kinda?

@RoninOfChrist @citorueNzzaJ I suppose. But I'm saying lust does require some arousal. Attraction does not.

He's 100% right, but the funniest thing about it are the number of radtrads and pornbrains in the comments who IMMEDIATELY conflate "attraction" with "lust". Physical attraction isn't lust. Physical attraction, like any feeling, is based on a number of factors, many of which are out of our control. Being attracted to someone of any sex isn't lust. It's an appreciation for beauty, or personality, or clothing, or multiple factors together that is good, and necessary. Lust is a CRAVING. It's when you let yourself objectify that person (or thing) and CHOOSE to put them higher than anything else. You've given up control to your cravings, to your base nature, and have elevated that thing or person, while debasing yourself and giving up control. Attraction is normal. Lust is a choice.

@TysonMortonPag1 @metathomist "Lusts in their hearts" not "be attracted too". Pornbrain or RadTrad. Which one are you?

@citorueNzzaJ @metathomist It’s not that simple, specifically for lust over other sins like gluttony and envy. Jesus is specific in Matthew 5:27-28.

80%?? I honestly thought it was higher.

Oh baby It's a good day

That being said, if ya wanna talk, just DM. Meeting people is fun!