Sotuanduso

Hi, Christian here. I agree that a lot of this is quite fishy. There are a couple things I want to contest though:

Violent prayer. I never heard of it before, but I looked it up. It's a misnomer, and the definition provided here is incorrect. It simply refers to persistent and fervent prayer.

Prayerwalking. Its inclusion implies that there's something creepy or dangerous about it, but it's actually harmless. It's literally just people going for a walk and praying as they go (not making a show of it.)

Hi, Christian here. I can't speak for all Christians, but this isn't accurate to my behaviors or perceptions.

I generally save the "conversion process" as you call it until after I already know someone because there's more trust from a friend. So it's not my immediate action (and also not something I'm trying to force on them.) Also, if they're not my "personal brand" of Christian, I don't feel a need to convert them, because what matters is following Christ earnestly, not checking all the right answers to unclear questions. Unless it's like the World Mission Society Church of God or something.

I don't assume that other religions and ideologies are full of aggressive evangelicals. I do think there are some aggressive evangelicals, but most of the time the pushing of other religions is a slow and passive thing, and the pushing of ideologies is a thing of culture as a whole, not specific agents.

Hi, Christian here. No, we are not called upon to kill our family members for not being Christians. Hope this helps.

And if you'd like to dispute by pointing out verses that imply we should be killing people, please save us both some time and check the context of the verse. Some of them are in parables, and others are of the old law back before there was hope for salvation in Christ. If you find any that are neither, I'd be surprised, but please let me know.

I hear no symphony

Until the third paragraph, it sounded like something you might think was reasonable for lefties to do. Then I got to the bits about cutting regulations to promote fossil fuels and, according to an "anonymous source" (which I frankly don't trust because it's from a biased newspaper,) weaponizing the DOJ and national guard against critics.

I like "yet" as a past tense because it sounds needlessly confusing.

Yeah, he specifically doesn't like guns, and it's because his parents were shot. Other weapons are fine. Even a grappling gun is fine. A gun that shoots bullets is not fine because it reminds him of how his parents died.

Not here, that's for sure, but keep in mind the community you're asking.

It's possible that it was a "see how you react to an impossible task" test, perhaps? I don't like it.

Caught on a landmine

Fair. I just meant that most people are upset at the frequent changing, not the pros and cons of each option.

He doesn't use guns because he specifically doesn't like them. If it were just about killing, he'd use nonlethal bullets. The no killing rule is a separate but related phenomenon.

As for explosives, he generally only uses flash bangs, but when he's fighting someone who can clearly take it (like Superman or Darkseid) or a robot that it's okay to kill, then he uses more lethal bombs.