lol
Seriously digging how you keep posting a trans movie during Christian talks.
Next thing we know you'll be posting clips from Wall-E.
Jesus will forgive anyone and everyone
It is not even a trans movie stop lol
also I added more in my edit in the post above this one if you want to read it
I re-divorced Jesus out of s**ual frustration tbh but I asked him to take me back because I am scared of being condemned to eternal hell or anything else bad happening to me
but I am still s**ually frustrated and I feel like it is his responsibility to give me a solution to this problem scripturally
lol
Seriously digging how you keep posting a trans movie during Christian talks.
Next thing we know you'll be posting clips from Wall-E.Jesus will forgive anyone and everyone
It is not even a trans movie stop lol
Clownfish are capable of switching their gender as their needs see fit, and he's playing (subverting) the tropes of a mother looking for her lost child but through a male form.
The choice of fish for Nemo, like every other species of fish in that movie, was intentionally meant to demonstrate their human aspects through the juxtaposition. Even the voice actor has a softer affect than the traditionally cast male by comparison to other Pixar male characters.
It's intentional, just like how Wall-E is a Satanic film.
like if he could actually talk to me with his voice that would be nice and appreciated too especially since he hasn't even had s** with me yet and husbands and wives are supposed to be able to frequently so I am also p***** at him about this because where does it say that a husband can reject his wife s**ually if she is being disrespectful that isnt in the bible Jesus and he knows it
This poses an interesting question: Despite that there is scripture which says that words cannot be added to or taken away from the Bible/Law -- setting aside the Council of Nicaea, for now -- could Jesus (technically God, inspiration for the Bible's authors) add scripture? Arguably, certain cult offshoots have claimed this, such as Mormonism. However, my point here is, even if the scriptures don't expressly say Jesus can reject a disrespectful spouse's sexual advances, doesn't the implication and common sense to that proposition become examinable through other scripture? And if not, the fact Jesus is doing it is sort of "making it scriptural", right?
I re-divorced him out of frustration and out of feeling like he wasn't making his will clear enough for me and was leaving me in too much confusion but then I asked him to take me back because I don't mind being a Christian I just wish that he would make his will for me more clear and understandable
But He's already made excuses over why He must speak in Parables.
To steal a quote from Andy Cohen, God effectively is "so prone to hyperbole that the truth sounds like tall tales".
like if he could actually talk to me with his voice that would be nice and appreciated too especially since he hasn't even had s** with me yet and husbands and wives are supposed to be able to frequently
He never consummated the marriage?
I re-divorced Jesus out of s**ual frustration tbh but I asked him to take me back because I am scared of being condemned to eternal hell or anything else bad happening to me
So you're going back to Him only because you feel like you're at spiritual gunpoint?
but I am still s**ually frustrated and I feel like it is his responsibility to give me a solution to this problem scripturally
The Bible itself explicitly utilizes Marriage to fix this need, even masturbation is questionable.
like if he could actually talk to me with his voice that would be nice and appreciated too especially since he hasn't even had s** with me yet and husbands and wives are supposed to be able to frequently so I am also p***** at him about this because where does it say that a husband can reject his wife s**ually if she is being disrespectful that isnt in the bible Jesus and he knows it
This poses an interesting question: Despite that there is scripture which says that words cannot be added to or taken away from the Bible/Law -- setting aside the Council of Nicaea, for now -- could Jesus (technically God, inspiration for the Bible's authors) add scripture? Arguably, certain cult offshoots have claimed this, such as Mormonism. However, my point here is, even if the scriptures don't expressly say Jesus can reject a disrespectful spouse's sexual advances, doesn't the implication and common sense to that proposition become examinable through other scripture? And if not, the fact Jesus is doing it is sort of "making it scriptural", right?
If Jesus's example is enough to inspire newer texts, then I don't see why anyone else couldn't be chosen by God for the same purpose.
If such a thing were to happen though it'd take Gnosis.
like if he could actually talk to me with his voice that would be nice and appreciated too especially since he hasn't even had s** with me yet and husbands and wives are supposed to be able to frequently so I am also p***** at him about this because where does it say that a husband can reject his wife s**ually if she is being disrespectful that isnt in the bible Jesus and he knows it
This poses an interesting question: Despite that there is scripture which says that words cannot be added to or taken away from the Bible/Law -- setting aside the Council of Nicaea, for now -- could Jesus (technically God, inspiration for the Bible's authors) add scripture? Arguably, certain cult offshoots have claimed this, such as Mormonism. However, my point here is, even if the scriptures don't expressly say Jesus can reject a disrespectful spouse's sexual advances, doesn't the implication and common sense to that proposition become examinable through other scripture? And if not, the fact Jesus is doing it is sort of "making it scriptural", right?
If Jesus's example is enough to inspire newer texts, then I don't see why anyone else couldn't be chosen by God for the same purpose.
If such a thing were to happen though it'd take Gnosis.
So you can't really throw "Not in the Bible, Jesus!" cuz he'll be like "B*tch, I wrote that sh**. Don't make me write you going to hell, too."
like if he could actually talk to me with his voice that would be nice and appreciated too especially since he hasn't even had s** with me yet and husbands and wives are supposed to be able to frequently so I am also p***** at him about this because where does it say that a husband can reject his wife s**ually if she is being disrespectful that isnt in the bible Jesus and he knows it
This poses an interesting question: Despite that there is scripture which says that words cannot be added to or taken away from the Bible/Law -- setting aside the Council of Nicaea, for now -- could Jesus (technically God, inspiration for the Bible's authors) add scripture? Arguably, certain cult offshoots have claimed this, such as Mormonism. However, my point here is, even if the scriptures don't expressly say Jesus can reject a disrespectful spouse's sexual advances, doesn't the implication and common sense to that proposition become examinable through other scripture? And if not, the fact Jesus is doing it is sort of "making it scriptural", right?
If Jesus's example is enough to inspire newer texts, then I don't see why anyone else couldn't be chosen by God for the same purpose.
If such a thing were to happen though it'd take Gnosis.So you can't really throw "Not in the Bible, Jesus!" cuz he'll be like "B*tch, I wrote that sh**. Don't make me write you going to hell, too."
It's a complicated question really, as in one hand over the Purist argument "God doesn't make mistakes", so why would He need to make another book? If one were to appeal to purist ideals though then people'd be becoming Jewish instead.
...but then the New Testament happened, and many ascribe to this book being what saved the religion and it's people, so clearly God does make mistakes and is subject to revision, that said revision is all a part of "God's Plan", meaning that the older texts were needed for older concerns and that it'd be fine for yet more revisions to follow as times change yes?
like if he could actually talk to me with his voice that would be nice and appreciated too especially since he hasn't even had s** with me yet and husbands and wives are supposed to be able to frequently so I am also p***** at him about this because where does it say that a husband can reject his wife s**ually if she is being disrespectful that isnt in the bible Jesus and he knows it
This poses an interesting question: Despite that there is scripture which says that words cannot be added to or taken away from the Bible/Law -- setting aside the Council of Nicaea, for now -- could Jesus (technically God, inspiration for the Bible's authors) add scripture? Arguably, certain cult offshoots have claimed this, such as Mormonism. However, my point here is, even if the scriptures don't expressly say Jesus can reject a disrespectful spouse's sexual advances, doesn't the implication and common sense to that proposition become examinable through other scripture? And if not, the fact Jesus is doing it is sort of "making it scriptural", right?
If Jesus's example is enough to inspire newer texts, then I don't see why anyone else couldn't be chosen by God for the same purpose.
If such a thing were to happen though it'd take Gnosis.So you can't really throw "Not in the Bible, Jesus!" cuz he'll be like "B*tch, I wrote that sh**. Don't make me write you going to hell, too."
It's a complicated question really, as in one hand over the Purist argument "God doesn't make mistakes", so why would He need to make another book? If one were to appeal to purist ideals though then people'd be becoming Jewish instead.
...but then the New Testament happened, and many ascribe to this book being what saved the religion and it's people, so clearly God does make mistakes and is subject to revision, meaning it'd be fine for yet more revisions to follow as times change yes?
Nah, they would likely (and oddly correct in a wrong way) say human beings needed the update. "Wouldn't God have planned for that?" Well, maybe this is the plan.
