#modernfaith

[noisycowboyglitter]

Ah. Men: The Significance of Religion in LGBT Pride Events

The phrase "Ah. Men" is a playful twist on the traditional religious utterance "Amen," often used to express agreement or affirmation. In this context, it takes on a double meaning that celebrates masculinity, particularly in LGBTQ+ circles.

Buy now:19.95$

"Ah" suggests a moment of appreciation or realization, while "Men" directly references the male gender. Together, the phrase could be interpreted as an expression of admiration for men, especially in gay or bisexual male communities.

This clever wordplay might be used in various settings:

As a catchy slogan for a gay men's clothing brand or store

The name of a drag king performance group

A title for a photography exhibit showcasing diverse male beauty

A hashtag for social media posts appreciating male aesthetics

The theme for a queer party or event celebrating masculinity in all its forms

Buy now

The period between "Ah" and "Men" adds a pause for emphasis, enhancing the pun and inviting the reader or listener to consider the dual meaning.

While lighthearted, the phrase also touches on deeper themes of identity, attraction, and the subversion of traditional religious language. It exemplifies how LGBTQ+ culture often reclaims and reinterprets mainstream concepts with humor and creativity.

"Ah. Men" encapsulates a spirit of joy, appreciation, and pride in male identity and attraction, particularly within queer spaces.

The "Funny LGBT Gay Pride Jesus Rainbow Peace Flag" concept combines humor, spirituality, and LGBTQ+ pride in a playful, potentially provocative way. It reimagines religious iconography through a queer lens, depicting Jesus with rainbow elements or peace signs.

Buy now

This imagery might feature on flags, t-shirts, or memes within LGBTQ+ Christian communities or among allies. It challenges traditional religious narratives, suggesting a more inclusive, accepting interpretation of faith.

The humor comes from the unexpected juxtaposition of religious and LGBTQ+ symbols. It could show Jesus with a rainbow halo, wearing pride colors, or making peace signs. The flag aspect implies visibility and celebration.

Buy now

While some may find it irreverent, others see it as a powerful statement of divine love and acceptance for all. It's a visual representation of the belief that spirituality and LGBTQ+ identity can coexist harmoniously, promoting peace and inclusivity.

[jambandatl]

John M Allegro's, "The Scared Mushroom and The Cross": A Cordial Response for Chapters Two and Three

John M Allegro’s, “The Scared Mushroom and The Cross”: A Cordial Response for Chapters Two and Three

Let’s continue the work of analyzing the studies and findings of John M. Allegro in his book titled, “The Sacred Mushroom and The Cross”. It has been fun diving deeper into two specific branches of Cognitive Science that have, to me, been like far-distant cousins in my personal journey through life. Linguistics and Anthropology, which are Allegro’s special fields of study, are of equal interest…

[thephonenotes]

#streetphotographers #streetphotography #streetphotographybarcelona #iphonephotography #iphoneography #barcelona #unknownbarcelona #distopia #architecturephotography #architectureporn #architecturephotography #architecturelovers #architecture #church #churchphotography #god #santagema #ascension #contemporaryart #contemporaryphotography #jesus #illumination #modernfaith #modernbelievers #christianchurch http://ift.tt/2yZXd41

[lafrancevraie]

#lafrancevraie #france #gare #lafoimoderne #orthodoxe #pretre #ipad #trainstation #modernfaith #orthodox #priest #garedelest #paris #vsco #vscocam http://ift.tt/2rV5hhm

[worshipminded-blog]

Divine Immigration | John 1:1-18

Preached at First Presbyterian Church of Atlanta, on July 11, 2013 as the second in the Summer Series, Modern Faith: Vignettes in the Gospel of John.

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being 4in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. 5The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. 8He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. 9The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.

10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. 11He came [in]to what was his own, and his own people did not accept[/ receive] him. 12But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, 13who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but [who were born] of God.

14 And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth. 15(John testified to him and cried out, ‘This was he of whom I said, “He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.” ’) 16From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.

John is always just a little bit ... different in how he goes about his task. When it comes to the cohort of Gospel writers, John, without question, is an outsider. Around the year 70 someone who we’ve come to call Mark decided it would be important to write down the stories ... the stories that were certainly told around the dinner table ... the stories that were getting believers in trouble in the synagogue ... the stories of Jesus. In his haste to get words on paper, Mark begins with Jesus’ baptism, calling it “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” Sometime later, Matthew and Luke followed his outline incredibly closely, but aren’t quite satisfied with Mark’s starting point ... and so they decide to put birth narratives in place, because surely the beginning of the good news about Jesus Christ begins with the beginning of Jesus Christ ... with his birth. Even beyond that, Matthew and Luke both begin, not in a delivery room, but with genealogies, angelic announcements, and virginal conceptions ... before Jesus even really appears on the scene, the good news is anticipated in history. The two birth narratives don’t exactly match up with one another, but that’s not the point; the point is that Jesus is a particularly unique and wonderful gift to the world, given to us by the God of David; the God of Abraham ... Luke even takes Jesus’ lineage back to Adam. Within human history, Matthew and Luke have covered just about every base that can be covered in telling the Jesus story.

But then, Some 30 years after Mark was written, John, non-conformist that he is, decides to get creative and start with a poem set outside of history ... outside of existence as we know it! “In the beginning ... was the Word.” This harkening back to Genesis ... “In the beginning” ... is actually John’s way of saying, among other things, that the Gospel has no beginning ... it is eternal ... as eternal as God’s self ... “The Word was with God ... and the Word was God!” This Word is THE Word through which the entire created order was brought into existence. It is a fundamental, theological claim that God is THE creator, and everything and everyone else is A creature.

We are one form of existence; God is another. The Word was God, and so as a creature, we confess and proclaim that the Word ... is OTHER ... The Word is different than you are ... the Word is foreign to me because I am not a God ... but the Word is! The point is the same as that of Genesis 1--that there is a Creator who is distinct from all creation--but John is not simply restating what has already been proclaimed; he is employing that which is familiar in order to introduce what is new ... what is foreign. And so continuing in his departure from the synoptics, which can be a bit unclear in regards to Jesus’ divinity, John makes a scandalous move, and identifies this uncreated, eternal Word with a flesh and blood, born-of-a-woman, creature! “The Word ... became flesh,” he says, “... and lived [literally, ‘pitched a tent’] among us.” It is scandalous because both Jewish monotheism and Greek philosophy understand that God exists in an entirely different realm than does creation ... God does not become anything; and certainly not flesh ... God simply IS in heaven, where the Greeks hope to be finally joined with him, having escaped from the flesh. The Word becoming flesh is, to co-opt Paul’s language, a stumbling block to the Jews; foolishness to the greeks. It is a scandal.

John will go on to name this eternal-Word-become-mortal-flesh as Jesus Christ, God the only Son. I had to double check that phrase when I was reading because we are so used to reading “God’s only son” ... but John’s grammar makes explicit what his poetry has been hinting at for 18 verses. Jesus of Nazareth, the first- century, Jewish man, is the Word become flesh, and the Word is God. Insofar as the Word is God, it is foreign to us, and so Jesus is foreign; Insofar as the Word is flesh, it is familiar to us and so Jesus is familiar. John dives right into the paradox that scares the bejesus out of most of us, without getting too caught up in trying to explain it.

The paradox of the incarnation is that the uncreated Creator came to live among the creatures as a creature. The singular resident of eternity voluntarily moved into history

An immigrant is defined in the dictionary as a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country, and I can’t think of a better metaphor for the incarnation than that.

Verses 10-13, summarizing the rest of the Gospel, tell us that, even though the Word was in the world as an insider ... a flesh and blood family member ... as “one of us,” ... that we did not recognize him; we became afraid of him, and out of our divine xenophobia, made a conscious decision to send this particular foreigner back to where he came from. During his trial, Jesus actually says it himself: he is not of this world. And yet, he is in it. He created it; and interestingly enough, it is only his foreignness ... that which gets him nailed to a cross, that can redeem it. Assimilation was certainly a possibility, and it likely would have saved Jesus, but as we all know, Jesus wasn’t concerned with saving himself.

I had this lovely outline written and got most of the way through it with the manuscript, and then came to the point where I had planned to ground all of this poetic, philosophical mumbo-jumbo with a story.

In order to do what I thought this sermon was supposed to do, I needed a good, heartwarming story about a first generation immigrant to this country. I imagined the possibilities: Maybe she didn’t speak english ... maybe he couldn’t get work, or was living on the streets. Maybe the other kids at school attacked him with racial slurs, the impact of which they could never have understood. Maybe they had come as a family, but had been separated by a legal technicality. The possibilities go on and on, because, as we know, these stories are all real, and there is no shortage of them. But they weren’t working for me. I couldn’t tell any of these stories because they aren’t mine to tell. And I don’t mean that to say that I’m not one of the main characters and so I can’t tell it ... I mean that I honestly don’t KNOW ANYONE for whom these stories are actually a reality. I don’t have friends, or even acquaintances with these kinds of stories, at least none who have trusted me enough to share.

According to an estimate from 2010, there are somewhere around one million foreign born residents in the state of GA, half of whom are undocumented. I don’t know this for certain, but my guess is that the majority of these folks live in or around Atlanta. I’ve had classes with them at GA Tech; I’ve received care from them in doctors offices; I’ve ordered food from them in local establishments, and I’ve walked by them on the street ... but I’ve rarely ever gotten to know someone who was obviously a foreigner. The overwhelming majority of my non-white friends are at least 2nd generation in this country, meaning that they are fairly assimilated to American culture, and fairly easy for me to relate to without encountering too much that challenges my way of life.

In other words, if a person has become enough like me, then I can imagine, and even engage in a relationship with that person. But if someone is wholly foreign, then, as much as I hate to admit it, the possibility of becoming friends with that person typically doesn’t enter my mind.

I am aware of how self-condemning these words are. And in light of our passage this evening it is difficult for me to speak them without a sense of guilt and loss. John’s otherworldly poetry recognizes that the foreigner among us is not often seen for what he or she truly and fully is, and my life could serve as a kind of proof text for that claim. In his recent article, Fear and Wisdom in the Immigration Debate, Raj Nadella says of these foreigners among us,

“They have many labels. Undocumented immigrants. Illegal Immigrants. Illegal Aliens. Wetbacks. Jan Brewer, the governor of Arizona, recently suggested that most of them are "drug mules." Some have even called them "terrorists." But few are known by their real names or treated as people with real lives.”

... A person who comes to live permanently in a foreign land, makes himself a foreigner.

“He came into the world” John says, “but the world did not know him. He came into his own, but his own did not receive him.” Just like me, he became flesh ... I am flesh ... flesh is the realm in which I engage ... I am flesh ... but I am not Word. And as the story will tell us over the next 6 weeks, Word is not welcome here. Word gets betrayed, arrested, tried, and executed as a criminal ... Though it is flesh, it is foreign.

Play it out in strictly human terms ... I am flesh, but I am not brown ... brown is not welcome here. I am flesh but I am not gay ... gay is not welcome here. I am flesh, but I am not muslim ... muslim is not welcome here. I am flesh, but I am not different, I am normal! ... different is not welcome here. We may tolerate different, we may legislate protection for different ... but do we welcome different into the family? Do I welcome difference as flesh, or do I stereotype it as foreign?

The incarnation demands that we welcome at least one who is foreign, and we couldn’t do that ...

The Word became flesh, and as verse 16 tells us, it is from his fullness that we may receive grace upon grace. I will leave us with a question. If we fail to welcome the fulness of the flesh--all colors and contours as children of God, brothers and sisters in the human family--If we fail to welcome the fullness of human flesh without demanding that it assimilate to our likeness can we still claim that we have welcomed the Word? Or have we crucified it?

Selected Bibliography:

• Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel of John I-XII. Yale University Press, 1966. *** • Meyers, Ched. Our God is Undocumented. Orbis, 2012. • Moke, Seka. South Africa - Music Legends - Black Mambazo. YouTube, 2007. • Nadella, Raj. Fear & Wisdom in the Immigration Debate. Huffington Post, 2013. • O’Day, Gail. John: Westminster Bible Companion. Westminster John Knox, 2006. • Pohl, Christine D. Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition.

Eerdmann’s, 1999.

*** - this is a technical, academic commentary, so it may be a bit jargony, but is really, very informative if you are curious about language and historical context. 

[untoldperfection]

modernfaith replied to your post: OKAY WELL MONA’S SECRET MESSAGES ON TWITTER SPELL...

denoflies.com go to it found it out

wait i'm scared is it creepy

[coconu-ttropics]

I’ve been tagged by riskysteps (Alesia).

Rules

Rule 1: Always post the rules.

Rule 2: Answer the questions the person who tagged you has written and write 10 new ones.

Rule 3: Tag 10 people and link them to your post.

Rule 4: Let them know you tagged them.

1. Where do you live?

Brisbane, Australia.

2. Do you like your name?

I guess so. :)

3. Your pet’s name?

I have a cat named Mitzy and a dog named Ollie. :)

4. How many siblings do you have?

two sisters

5. Your last trip?

I went to the gold coast for a week a few weeks ago :)

6. Have you ever friendzoned someone? 

I don't think so :/

7. Are you in love?

No :)

8. Are you a daddy or mommy person?

Ummm... I have a different relationship with both of them so both!

9. How many kids would you like to have?

At least 3, although I will have more if I don't use all the names I want to name them aha

10. Do you practice any sports?

I used to do netball, but don't anymore :(

My 10 questions:

1. What is your ideal Christmas present?

2. If you could live anywhere in the world where would you live?

3. Favourite singers/bands?

4. Favourite season?

5. How are your inspirations?

6. What is your dream job?

7. Who was the last person you saw?

8. What was the last song you listened to?

9. Tea or coffee?

10. One thing you have always wanted to do?

i will tag:

vintage-rose-beauty, riskysteps, modernfaith, indigohurd.

^^idk who else to tag cause I've had a mind blank lol

[la-vita-di-classe]

I call it a wang or a wiener ksldjglkj

JUST SAY PENIS IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL HAHAHAH PENIS PENIS PENIS

PENIS

PENIS

PENIS???????

[jambandatl]

John M. Allegro's, "The Sacred Mushroom and The Cross": A Cordial Response through Chapter One

John M. Allegro’s, “The Sacred Mushroom and The Cross”: A Cordial Response through Chapter One

As a personal admirer of Cognitive Science and all of its branches, it is an honor to study the renowned Archaeologist/Linguist through his collection of writings within, “The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross”. Considering its widespread popularity among the modern independent thinkers and philosophers of twenty-first century secularism, it is essential for a like-minded modern independent thinker…

[worshipminded-blog]

Spiritual But Not Religious | John 2:13-22

Preached at First Presbyterian Church of Atlanta, on June 27, 2013 as the first in the Summer Series, Modern Faith: Vignettes in the Gospel of John.

  John 2:13-22

13 The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14In the temple he found people selling cattle, sheep, and doves, and the money-changers seated at their tables. 15Making a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, both the sheep and the cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. 16He told those who were selling the doves, ‘Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a market-place!’ 17His disciples remembered that it was written, ‘Zeal for your house will consume me.’ 18The Jews then said to him, ‘What sign can you show us for doing this?’ 19Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ 

20The Jews then said, ‘This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?’ 21But he was speaking of the temple of his body. 22After he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this; and they believed the scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.

I remember the first time I heard this particular idea.  I was probably 20 years old, a sophomore in college, and working on a big, hip youth ministry staff full of people from Northern California and Seattle, Washington.  Chad, one of the more punk-rock of my colleagues had just gotten some new buttons for his raggedy, canvas satchel, one of which caught my eye and captured my attention for some time that day.  It was a simple black button with bolded white words reading “Jesus is the Savior, not Christianity.”  

Having been raised right here in the Bible belt, growing up as a member of a Presbyterian Church, and having always located my faith in Jesus squarely in the Christian religious system, it had never occurred to me to establish this distinction ... Sure, Jesus is the savior, but Christianity is Jesus’ religion, right?  If a Christian is a little Christ-person, then Christianity is the whole big group of little Christ people and all of the stuff that they do together ... worship and prayer; service and celebration; buildings and publishing houses, summer camps and singles’ ministries ... Christianity didn’t need to be pitted against Jesus ... actually, quite the opposite - we say that the church, the foremost Christian institution, is actually Christ’s body ... its right there in 1 Corinthians 12!  And yet, it was so obvious, even to 20-yr. old me, that there was something right about Chad’s new button.  

When the two are held up side by side, it becomes quite clear that despite its theological and biblical claim to be the body of Christ, the Church, or the Christian religion, is not the same as Christ, its founder.  Ghandi summed up the issue pretty concisely when he said, “I like your Christ, I just don’t like your Christians.”  And so for many of us, the distinction is not only appropriate ... it is absolutely necessary. From the late Biblical authors on, the Christian religion has proven its sinfulness while holding onto the theological claim that Christ, the founder of the faith and the head of the body, is the one who is without sin.  There is no question for Christians; it is Jesus who saves us--not the religion started in devotion to him--but does that make us not religious?  Is it even possible for us to follow Jesus without being religious?  What does it look like to be spiritual but not religious?  

It seems that Christians, in the last 60 or 70 years have pondered these questions and pursued this religionless option with increasing zeal.  In the mid 1940s, from his prison cell, German Theologian, Deitrich Bonhoeffer wrote of the possibility of a religionless Christianity.  As he saw it, the religion had become so corrupt that if true Christian faith were to continue on at all, it would first have to be divorced from its institutional partner.

Ever since that time, traditional religious participation in the west has declined, and along with it, the Church’s approval rating. The factions of Christian faith that saw growth for a time in the 70s, 80s, and 90s were the movements claiming to be “not about religion, but about relationship.”  Then, when I was in college and Donald Miller’s uncommonly transparent faith memoir, Blue Like Jazz, was exploding the minds of hundreds of thousands of religiously disenchanted twenty-somethings, a huge number of people actually removed the words “religion” and “Christianity” from their vocabulary, and replaced them with the supposedly less offensive term, “Christian Spirituality.”   We were Christians and we were spiritual ... just don’t call us religious!  Religious people are boring and closed minded!

Most recently, and most flagrantly, Jefferson Bethke leveled and all-out YouTube attack on religion in general, and Christianity in particular ... not because he is more opposed to Christianity than to other religions but because he, like Miller and Bonhoeffer before him, is actually a Christian.  If you got a chance to watch the video posted on the facebook event page, you heard Bethke makes some pretty bold claims: “Jesus came to abolish religion”;  “Jesus and religion are on opposite ends of the spectrum”; and he says of himself “I hate religion!”  The video, which has been published for less than a year and a half, has over 25,000,000 views, and over 400,000 have liked it, compared to 66,000 who have given it the YouTube Thumbs Down.  Bethke represents from inside the Christian faith what David Kinnaman exposed as the perception from outsiders in his 2007 book UnChristian ... the belief that the church is most notably hypocritical, judgmental, overly-political, and primarily defined by what and by who it is against... who it keeps out.  And yet, another researcher found that while the PR problem for the church is real, many people who would never set foot in a church building, are big fans of Jesus.  Whether you think it is theologically possible or not, culture has drawn a line between Jesus and religion.

Which brings us to our text... Is Jesus, in this story, pictured as being spiritual, but not religious?  Is turning over the tables, dumping out the money, and running off all of the offenders Jesus’ way of “abolishing” the religion of which he was a part ... the religion of the people chosen by Jesus’ father to be a blessing to the world?  

The temple, in first century Judaism was the center of Jewish life.  Jews from all over the known world would travel for days to gather for Passover, which is the Jewish religious festival commemorating God’s having delivered the Israelites from slavery in Egypt.  At the temple they remembered and they worshipped.  They prayed and acted out meaningful rituals, acknowledging their sins against God and one another, and asking for forgiveness and for the healing of their relationships.  These rituals are established into what we might call a “religion” by God’s own law as it is narrated in the book of Leviticus.  The temple itself was constructed in response to God’s decree, seen first in the books of Samuel and Kings, and then again in Ezra/Nehemiah.  These laws and rituals and buildings are not just whimsical human inventions, but represent and make possible the very heart of Judaism.  For Jews then as now, the religion is the vehicle of faithfulness and is understood as a gift from God.

This Jesus, who we see in tonight’s story wreaking such havoc in the Jewish temple, is Jewish.  He knows that animals are necessary for ritual sacrifice.  He knows that the pilgrims would have been unable to travel with their own animals and so would have to purchase their sacrifice here.  Jesus knows that currency bearing the image of Caesar will not be accepted in the Temple because of laws against idolatry and so money changers are necessary for people who are just getting into town and only have Roman coins.  All of these people and practices come standard with Passover at the temple.  But something is wrong.  The author seems to just take this for granted.

As the cows run off and the money changers look on in horror, the mad-man cries out, “Stop making my father’s house a market-place” or “a place of business”

 Commentators have suggested that Jesus’ rage is directed at the social injustices that were likely taking place ... money changers taking unreasonable profit in their transactions with faithful people who have no other option.  It is this cut-throat side of the market-place, they say, that Jesus finds detestable.  He is reforming the religion, but not rendering it obsolete. And while there is probably some truth to the suggestion that Jesus is concerned with social justice in this situation, it is not made explicit in our text or in any of the other Gospel accounts of this scene.

 Other interpreters read the scene to suggest that Jesus’ body is actually replacing the temple; Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross will replace the sacrificial system.  When the Jewish leaders ask for a sign to justify his actions Jesus challenges, “Destroy this temple ... and I will raise it up in three days!”  And the narrator goes on to tell us that he was talking not about the physical temple, but the temple of his body.  

Most biblical scholars agree that this scene from the temple in Jerusalem is narrating the action that finally got Jesus arrested and executed.  While John places it early on in the ministry of Jesus, the three other gospel accounts all situate the story towards the end of Jesus’ ministry, right before he is arrested, tried, and nailed to the cross.  If you ever wonder how far religious people are willing to go to prevent change and preserve the status quo, you need not look any farther than the Cross of Christ.  While the established religious institution isn’t the only force, or even the most active force, that put Jesus on the cross, it is clear in the Bible that Jesus, the Jewish founder of Christianity, regularly found the institution to be more of a hindrance to God’s mission than a servant of it.

What he didn’t do, however, was give up on it and walk away.  Jesus stuck with Judaism.  He prayed and fasted.  He observed the sabbath and the festivals, worshipped in the temple, allowed people to address him as Rabbi, and flat out said, I have not come to abolish, but to fulfill.  Within the religion of his people, Jesus interpreted and reinterpreted scripture ... as the prophets before him, Jesus called his peers to follow the spirit and not the letter of the law, revealing his Father’s will by becoming obedient to it.  We read that the disciples who were present in the temple that day recalled the words of the Psalmist, “Zeal for your house ... not for some arbitrary spirituality ... But zeal for the house of God will consume me.” Jesus stuck with religion ... until it killed him.  

The heart of Judaism, which is the heart of Jesus, and of Christianity, does not belong to this world.  To give ourselves to it is to upset the status quo ... to eat in public with outcasts and advocate for the sick, the poor, the widow, the prisoner and the prostitute as equally human, equally loved, and equally daughters and sons of God.  When religious folks and institutions fail to live out of this heart, which we often do, you may argue that they have failed to live out their calling; that Will is a hypocritical, judgmental, self-righteous thief ... but you will have a hard time following Jesus if you aren’t willing to stick with his religion.

I get “spiritual but not religious” ... I really do.  I sympathize with it and often wish that I could claim it for myself.  My guess is that Jesus would have liked to have made that claim as well.  But I think he recognized that even for all its corruption, without religion we would all be hopelessly separated from God and one another.  I know I would ... 

So ... what do you think? 

[untoldperfection]

im laughing so hard "wouldnt it hurt?" NO omfg, it's fingers not a fist or a penis it won't hurt. but that's so personal why would someone ask that dsglkjsdf

I DON'T WANT ANYTHIGN STUCK UP IN MY VAGINA THANK YOU VERY MUCH. but idk aksjdhkajfh

[cocaein]

if the world ends, I want you to know I love you. c: send this to the 10 blogs you'll miss the most.

ily more ash! c:

[enzofrnandez]

Alex

1000+

[amourosity]

Second one x10298372292992883

haha! yes, I really like it! you're the 3rd c:

r;100+ omg your icon.

NO MORE. DOING LIKE 2 MORE MAXIMUM.

[thisischuckbass-blog]

Get tumblr user modernfaith to follow me for a message saying "I'm Chuck Bass."

[scrawrs]

He's so cute. He calls me beautiful when he knows im not feeling good, he'll do all he can to make me smile. We're best friends, im scared to lose him, but he's just to perfect, i've had a crush on him for a year c:

my crush, not the best-looking guy, he doesnt even know when i'm upset he goes to a different school. we have severely awkward conversations but i guess we're friends.. im scared to lose him. loved him for not even 2 months yet. AGEJUAHWEKJAasdfghjkl; awhh

rate- 9.5

lets talk about you and your crush for rate