Lady madonna

omg yes

Tue, 21 May 2013 15:59:21 -0400

omg yes

Photo

Tue, 21 May 2013 15:57:46 -0400

cumaeansibyl: Ruby Rhod is one of my favorite characters in...

Tue, 21 May 2013 15:52:16 -0400

Ruby Rhod is one of my favorite characters in sci-fi ever because he is Luc Besson’s vision of the hetero sex symbol of the future: a flamboyant, emotionally labile man who wears skin-tight leopard print or decks himself in roses, a man who accessorizes with big jewelry and dabbles in cosmetics. And the ladies love him. Everything about him screams “gay” according to our stereotypes, but he’s portrayed as a 100% straight sexual dynamo.

Besson is one of the few directors I’ve seen who actually recognizes that our ideas of sexuality and gender performance might have changed drastically in the future.

desertmanian: victoriasavill: stephnrice: glassmountain: stfu...

Sat, 11 May 2013 20:12:32 -0400

desertmanian:

victoriasavill:

stephnrice:

glassmountain:

stfuconservatives:

nextyearsgirl:

This is an enormous chain and I’m sorry, but I need to say this:

The laws in the Old Testament were set forth by god as the rules the Hebrews needed to follow in order to be righteous, to atone for the sin of Adam and Eve and to be able to get into Heaven. That is also why they were required to make sacrifices, because it was part of the appeasement for Original Sin.

According to Christian theology, when Jesus came from Heaven, it was for the express purpose of sacrificing himself on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven. His sacrifice was supposed to be the ultimate act that would free us from the former laws and regulations and allow us to enter Heaven by acting in his image. That is why he said “it is finished” when he died on the cross. That is why Christians don’t have to circumcise their sons (god’s covenant with Jacob), that is why they don’t have to perform animal sacrifice, or grow out their forelocks, or follow any of the other laws of Leviticus.

When you quote Leviticus as god’s law and say they are rules we must follow because they are what god or Jesus wants us to do, what you are really saying, as a Christian, is that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was invalid. He died in vain because you believe we are still beholden to the old laws. That is what you, a self-professed good Christian, are saying to your god and his son, that their plan for your salvation wasn’t good enough for you.

So maybe actually read the thing before you start quoting it, because the implications of your actions go a lot deeper than you think.

/An atheist who understands Christian theology better than Bible-thumpers do.

^

(mic drop)

boom

whoa.

i mean yeah that would work except homosexuality being a sin is mentioned in the New Testament, not just Leviticus.

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (NIV, 1st Corinthians 6:9-11)

Just to add to what Victoria said, even if the new testament said nothing about homosexuality specifically(it does) it would still be a sin. When Jesus warned against adultery and lust in the heart(Matt 5:27-30), that includes the sin of homosexuality because He was using the the common Jewish understanding of sexual sin.

Also, in the OT there are moral, civil, and ceremonial laws. There isn’t just one kind of law. The civil and ceremonial laws are no longer binding because the types were fulfilled in Christ or they were only in the context of the ancient theocracy of Israel.(Meaning the purpose of these laws was fulfilled and that’s why they’re no longer binding) As for the moral law, Christ died to free us from the condemnation of transgressing the law but the moral law is still binding. Christ fulfilled it, he didn’t come to do away with it. This is affirmed numerous times in the New Testament in various ways.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” - Matt. 5:17

So the moral law is still binding. Everything that was morally a sin in the OT is still morally a sin now. The difference is that those who trust in Christ are freed from the condemnation of the law. They receive forgiveness of transgressions on the basis of Christ’s sacrifice… nevertheless the moral law is still the standard for godly living. So the moral law is still binding it’s just that our relationship to it has changed. Thus, homosexuality and any other deviation from God’s moral law is still forbidden.

I hate to break it to the athiest who posted above but… you don’t understand Christian theology as well as you think you do. In fact, you misunderstand it. Have a good day :)

too-stoned-to-remember: Requested by anon

Sat, 11 May 2013 19:46:17 -0400

too-stoned-to-remember:

Requested by anon

Photo

Wed, 08 May 2013 17:46:45 -0400

Photo

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 08:47:27 -0400

janecrocker: lunapics: laughingsquid: Friend Makes a Woman...

Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:26:46 -0400

janecrocker:

lunapics:

laughingsquid:

Friend Makes a Woman Hospitalized with Short-Term Memory Loss an Informative FAQ

This is the best friend a person could ever have.

the last one though

Photo

Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:54:01 -0400

aw :l

Wed, 24 Apr 2013 23:48:39 -0400

aw :l

Photo

Tue, 23 Apr 2013 22:52:37 -0400

“The closer he looks at the child, the less he sees … The more...

Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:35:53 -0400

“The closer he looks at the child, the less he sees … The more he looks at it, there’s nothing there. He fears that the more you look at him the less you see. There isn’t anything there.” - John Hughes

hoaxtheory: flower exposed to radiation from #fukishima nuclear...

Thu, 18 Apr 2013 13:42:06 -0400

hoaxtheory:

flower exposed to radiation from #fukishima nuclear facility Japan

Photo

Thu, 18 Apr 2013 13:37:15 -0400

gingeritt:

Thu, 18 Apr 2013 13:32:51 -0400

gingeritt:

Christopher JonassenDevour, 2013 At first glance, these objects...

Mon, 15 Apr 2013 19:53:52 -0400

Christopher Jonassen
Devour, 2013

At first glance, these objects may look like planets but they are actually photos of the bottoms of frying pans.

Photo

Mon, 08 Apr 2013 13:45:58 -0400

Photo

Mon, 08 Apr 2013 13:38:00 -0400

sociopathsanonymous: Tell me, do you like Neutral Milk...

Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:46:58 -0400

sociopathsanonymous:

Tell me, do you like Neutral Milk Hotel?

Their early tapes were a little experimental for my taste, but when Avery Island came out in ‘96, I think they really came into their own, both commercially and artistically. The whole album has a fuzzy, trumpety sound, and a new sheen of consummate professionalsim that really gives the songs a big boost. He’s been compared to Four Volts, but I think that Jeff has far more crazed, over-the-top vocals.

In ‘98 Jeff released this, In The Aeroplane Over The Sea, their most accomplished album. I think their undisputed masterpiece is “Holland, 1945”, a song so catchy, most people probably don’t listen to the lyrics. But they should, because it’s not just about Jeff Mangum’s obsessions with Anne Frank, it’s also a personal statement about abuse and incest brought about by his dad!

Hey Paul!

Photo

Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:20:49 -0400