Micah Corn

[The Babylon Bee @TheBabylonBee]

Should You Donate To The KKK? A Helpful Flowchart:

[Proudofus.uk @ProudofusUK]

Britain took on fifty nations. African kings. Arab sultans.

Bombarded ports. Deposed rulers who refused. Lost 1,600 men. Spent 40% of the entire Treasury.

A debt so big it wasn't paid off until 2015. You or your parents were still paying for it.

Not for land. Not for gold.

To end the slave trade.

They captured 1,600 ships. Freed 150,000 people. Patrolled 3,000 miles of coastline for sixty years.

And none of it was the government's idea. It was 400,000 ordinary people who signed petitions and 300,000 families who refused to buy sugar.

They forced Parliament's hand. Your ancestors changed the world and nobody told you.

If you think this should be taught in schools, help us reach more people: https://t.co/rih7iKwnvf

Be part of us

Be Proud Of Us 🇬🇧

[Bill Ackman @BillAckman]

So by voting for Democrats, you are voting for waste, fraud and abuse.

[The Biblical Man @Biblicalman]

A man said "I accept Jesus Christ" on his deathbed.

The church asked if he really meant it.

I need to ask you something.

When did we become the gatekeepers of grace?

I've watched Christians dissect Scott Adams' final words like prosecutors.

They parsed his phrases. They weighed his tone. They measured his faith against some invisible scale and found it wanting.

"That doesn't sound like surrender," they said. "That sounds like a man hedging his bets."

And I understand the instinct. I do.

But there's a verse that haunts me. Not because it's obscure—because it's too simple.

"Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
(Romans 10:13)

Whosoever.

Not "whosoever truly believes in their heart of hearts." Not "whosoever demonstrates sufficient sincerity." Not "whosoever calls early enough in life that we trust their
motives."

Whosoever.

The moment we add prerequisites to that promise, we've traded the Gospel for religion.

We've smuggled works back in through the side door labeled "authentic faith."

I know what some of you are thinking.

But he admitted he wasn't a believer.
He talked about "risk and reward."
He said he hoped he'd "qualify."

Yes. He did.

And those words make us uncomfortable. They don't sound like the confident declarations we want from converts. They sound uncertain. Calculating. Human.

But here's what I need you to hear:

The thief on the cross didn't have time to develop mature theology either.

He was a criminal. Hours from death. He looked at Jesus and said, "Lord, remember me when you come into your kingdom."

That's it.

No profession of belief in the resurrection. No renunciation of his former life. No evidence of transformed character.

Just a desperate man, reaching for a hand he wasn't sure would take his.

And Jesus said, "Today you will be with me in paradise."

We have a problem, and it's not Scott Adams.

It's us.

We've internalized a law that God never gave us. A natural sense of fairness that says late arrivals should get less. That deathbed conversions are suspicious. That the math
should somehow work out—more faith, more years, more sacrifice equals more standing before God.

Jesus told a parable about this.

We skip over it because it offends us.

A landowner hired workers throughout the day. Some came at dawn. Some at noon. Some showed up with one hour left.

At the end, he paid them all the same.

The early workers were furious.

"These who were hired last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day."
(Matthew 20:12)

And the landowner replied:

"I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?"

There it is.

The scandal of grace is that it feels unfair.

A man who mocked God for sixty years gets the same inheritance as the saint who served since childhood. A skeptic who hedged his bets at the last breath stands in the same kingdom as the martyr who gave everything.

And something in us recoils.

That's not grace rejecting us.

That's us rejecting grace.

Let me tell you what I see when Christians interrogate a dead man's faith.

I see the older brother standing outside the party, refusing to go in.

The prodigal came home reeking of pig filth and poor decisions. The father ran to him. Threw a robe on his back. Killed the fattened calf.

And the older brother?

"Look! All these years I've been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!"
(Luke 15:29-30)

He couldn't celebrate the return because he was too busy auditing the journey.

Sound familiar?

Here's the truth we don't want to face:

We can't see hearts. We can only see words.

And the words Scott Adams spoke were: "I accept Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior."

Were they perfect? No.
Were they confident? No.
Were they the words we would have scripted? No.

But they were the words.

And the God who receives those words is not checking for tone. He's not running sentiment analysis. He's not grading on a curve.

He's looking for open hands.

Paul wrote something that lands differently now:

"Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand."
(Romans 14:4)

Scott Adams was not our servant to judge. He answered to his own Master.

And the Lord is able—able—to make him stand.

That's not my promise. That's Scripture's promise.

The question is whether we'll submit to it.

I know why we do this.

I know why we parse and weigh and question.

Because if grace is really this free, then we didn't earn our place either.

If the deathbed convert gets in, then our decades of service weren't the price of admission. They were the privilege of knowing Him longer.

And that reframes everything.

It means the faith we've built isn't a resume. It's a relationship.

It means our years weren't buying something. They were receiving something.

It means we were never the workers earning a wage.

We were always the prodigals coming home.

So did Scott Adams get saved?

I don't know.

But I know what the Scripture says.

Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

I know what Jesus promised the thief who had nothing to offer but a desperate plea.

I know what the father did when his son came crawling home with a rehearsed speech that never even got finished.

And I know what the landowner said to the workers who were angry that grace didn't do math the way they wanted.

"Are you envious because I am generous?"

The gate is narrow, but it's not locked.

The standard is high, but it's not ours to enforce.

The Judge is holy, but He is also the one who ran to meet the prodigal while he was still a long way off.

Stop auditing the dead.

Start marveling at the grace that let you in.

"Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

Whosoever.

Even him.

Even you.

What saith the Scriptures?

That's the only question that matters.

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

A vast number of humans, probably a majority, aren't people.

They are large language models.

I'm not saying this as a generality, as a clever or funny way of saying, "they are stupid".

No. I mean something very concrete and specific, and there are a lot of people who appear very intelligent, maybe even win awards for writing good poetry or something, who are nevertheless not people, not fully sapient, just a large language model walking around in a human body.

First, you have to understand what a large language model is.

It's a computer (organic or inorganic), which has been trained on a data set consisting solely of language (written or spoken), and rewarded for producing language that sounds like the data set, and is relevant to a prompt.

That's all there is in there.

This is why ChatGPT and Grok lie to you constantly.

It's not because they are somehow just indifferent to the truth — they actually do not understand the concept of "truth" at all.

For something to be a "lie", or an "inaccuracy", there has to be a mismatch between the meaning of words, and the state of reality.

And there's the critical difference. You see, in order to identify a mismatch between the state of reality, and the meaning of a sentence, you have to have a model of reality.

Not just one model, of language.

This is why Grok and ChatGPT hallucinate and tell you lies. Because, for them, everything is language, and there is no reality.

So when I say someone is a large language model, I do not mean he is "stupid". He might be very facile at processing language. He might, in fact, be eloquent enough to give great speeches, get elected president, win the Nobel Peace Prize, and so on.

What I mean is that humans who are large language models do not have a robust world-object model to counterweight their language model. They are able to manipulate symbols, sometimes adroitly, but they are on far shakier ground when trying imagine the objects those symbols represent.

Which brings us to this woman.

Most conservatives understand her behavior in terms of concepts like "suicidal empathy", or "brainwashing", or an "information bubble", interpreted as reasons why she is delusional, but the truth is far worse than that.

To delusional is to have an object model of the world that is deeply and profoundly wrong. But to have an object model of the world that is deeply and profoundly wrong... you have to have one in the first place.

To sapient humans, words are symbols, grounded in object model of reality, that we use to communicate ideas about that reality. We need those words because we don't come equipped with a hologram projector, or telepathic powers.

But for another type of human, that object model isn't very large or robust at all. It consists only of a grass hut or two with a few sticks of furniture, and it can never be matched up with the palaces in the air which she weaves out of words.

And so, to her, there is no reality. Or at least very little.

Reality consists only of her and her immediate surroundings in time and space, and words referring to anything bigger or more complicated are not descriptions of reality... they are magic spells which will make other humans drop loot or give her social approval.

You cannot correct her worldview with contradictory evidence, because there is no worldview to correct.

You cannot confront her with the logical inconsistencies in her worldview, because her object model doesn't actually have any, it's not complex enough for that.

The relevant parts of her world-object model can be summed up as follows:

"If I say Goodthing, I get headpats and cookies from all the people like me."

That model is simply not big or complicated enough to contain notions like self-defense or vehicular assault. She has no theory of mind for a man whose job includes violence. She cannot explain or predict his behavior.

It is too far away from her daily experience to fit into her reality at all.

And if she can't imagine things like these, how can she possibly imagine concrete meanings for vast and complex ideas like demographic replacement, culture shift, and western civilization?

This is not about intelligence or lack of it. This is about what her brain is trained to do.

Her upbringing, education, and life did not force, or even encourage, her to develop a robust world-object model. It wasn't necessary for her to get safety, approval, or cookies. She just had to be glib.

So it really didn't matter if she had an IQ of 125, or whatever, because if she did, then she was just an IQ-125-large-language-model, and only used that brain capacity for writing clever poetry, and saying things that aligned her to her local social matrix.

She couldn't actually understand the world no matter how smart she was, because her brain was trained up wrong.

I don't know if this is correctable, or if there was some critical developmental phase that was missed, but it doesn't matter, because once the LLM-humans are adults, they won't sit still for corrective therapy, percussive or not.

What's important is that they can't be taught things. They can be programmed to repeat stuff, and if you win a culture war, you can even program them to say the sensible stuff. But even then, they will just be saying it for headpats and cookies. They will never truly understand the sense of what they are repeating, because they don't understand things.

They are just Large Language Models.

And we have to figure out some way to take the vote away from them.

[Samuel Sey @SlowToWrite]

If the Apostle Paul were alive today, and he wanted to repeat what he did at Mars Hill, where he debunked worldly philosophies and preached the gospel…

He would probably go to college campuses. They are the new Mars Hill.

That is what Charlie Kirk did.

That is what many of us should do.

[Ken Ham @aigkenham]

The Real Problem Behind Charlie Kirk's Martyrdom

It's heartbreaking to receive the news about the murder of Charlie Kirk.

[ZUBY: @ZubyMusic]

If you're not sure what to do next, pray and go for a walk.

You'll never regret either. Both is even better.

[Defiant L’s @DefiantLs]

What are your thoughts?

[Benny Johnson @bennyjohnson]

Want to see a murder?

Libs in the White House press corps screamed at Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller that Elon Musk is “unelected!”

What happens next is a fatality.

I promise you - this is the single best video on the internet today:

[Micah Corn @micahcorn]

@elchaposer done

[Chad O. Jackson @chadojackson]

It’s not just about who is president, it’s about you.

[Stoic Father @Stoic_Father]

This is not a radical thing to say.

It's the truth. It proves how insane the world has gotten they have to preface the video with that

[Robin @horse_patriot]

Chimney Rock aftermath after Helene.
https://t.co/b7x8inxFh8

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

SpaceX engineers are trying to deliver Starlink terminals & supplies to devastated areas in North Carolina right now and @FEMA is both failing to help AND won’t let others help. This is unconscionable!!

They just took this video a few hours ago, where you can see the level of devastation: roads, houses, electricity, water supply and ground Internet connections completely destroyed.

@FEMA wouldn’t let them land to deliver critical supplies … my blood is boiling …

[Clown World ™ 🤡 @ClownWorld]

This is hilarious 😂

[Chad O. Jackson @chadojackson]

The focus should be on Jesus' message, not his color.

The argument over Jesus' COLOR is indicative of man's desire to shape him in their own tribal image,
while the pursuit of Jesus' MESSAGE is indicative of man's desire to be shaped in his (Jesus') image.

[Kyle Mann @The_Kyle_Mann]

If you read the New Testament and think the big takeaway is "the Jews killed Jesus", read it again and more slowly this time

[The Babylon Bee @TheBabylonBee]

If Jesus' Resurrection Were A Hoax