the biblical sense of the word

lily-275  asked:

Can u write a fan fic where the gang have a sleep over and bughead are put in awkward situations and have to share a bed.

Buzzcut Season

Summary: After a relaxing week at the cottage, Betty and Jughead share a bed after sleeping arrangements are disrupted. 

Words: 1,850

Warnings: Smut

A/N: I edited this myself so there are errors. It might seem a little all over the place but I’m just trying to write. I think I obsess over every little thing and then I panic and then I stop writing. I read through this once. I usually do 6 read throughs. The song they listen to is called Moonbeam

It was good to be friends with Veronica Lodge.

Betty had met Veronica her freshman year at college and they became fast friends. It was now the last week of summer break before their senior year and Veronica had invited everyone to her summer home for one last chance to let loose.

Veronica had invited everyone. Her boyfriend Archie Andrews, Cheryl Blossom and her girlfriend Toni Topaz, Reggie Mantle, Moose Mason, Ethyl Muggs, Kevin Keller and Betty’s longtime crush Jughead Jones.

They had spent the whole week down by the lake, swimming, drinking and soaking in as much sun as they could. At night they would build fires and roast marshmallows swapping stories of drunken late nights antics and all the things they were hoping for in their final year.

“I should remind you that it’s all your final years. I have four more years of medical school left.” Betty chimed in.

“It concerns me that my possible future doctor can do a keg stand as well as you can.” Jughead laughed finishing of, what would be, his last beer of the evening.

“What can I say, I’m a woman of many talents.” Betty responded with a tipsy satisfied smile.

By this time all but her, Jughead and Kevin had gone to sleep.

“I personally can’t wait for school to be over. It so exciting to know I’m $50,000 dollars in debt and have a degree that will great me a job that pays $35,000 a year if I’m lucky.” Kevin said sarcastically.

“Well, aren’t you a ray of sunshine.” Jughead grinned.

“I’m a realist. I learned that about myself in college.” Kevin smirked. “I’m so drunk. I need to go to sleep.” He admitted standing up.

“So do I.” Betty agreed shooting up and almost falling over. She was lucky Jughead was there to catch her before she fell into the bushes behind her. “Thanks.” She blushed, looking up at him trying not to thinking about his hand on her lower back.

“And to think you’ll be performing open heart surgery in six years.” Jughead teased with a smile.

“Let’s hope the alcohol is out of my system by then.” Betty rolled her eyes and walked into the house.

Kevin didn’t make it to the room he was sharing with Moose and had passed out on the couch. Jughead and Betty couldn’t help but giggle.

She followed him upstairs.

“Goodnight Betty.” Jughead whispered before going into his room.

“Good night Jug.” Betty responded heading two doors over to her own room.

When she opened the door she saw her roommate Ethyl rolling around in bed with Reggie. Betty’s eyes widened as she closed the door as quickly as she had opened it.

She looked around the darkened hallway and quietly cursed to herself. There were five bedrooms. The two couples took up two rooms, Betty shared a room with Ethyl and Jughead shared with Reggie. The couch would have been an option if Kevin hadn’t passed out on it. She could always wake him up or ask Moose if she could sleep in his room.

She could but she knew she wasn’t going to. Instead she took a few steps down the hall, inhaled deeply and knocked three times on Jughead’s door.

He answered with concerned eyes, toothbrush in his mouth, no shirt and his hair was a mess after being in his beanie all day. “What’s up? What’s wrong?” He asked trying to keep all the toothpaste in his mouth.

“Ethyl and Reggie are in my room.” She informed, taking a step into his room as he ran into the bathroom to spit into the sink.

“So?” He shrugged continuing to brush his teeth.

“They are in my room getting to know each other in the biblical sense.” Betty beat around the bush, her cheeks flaming red that she couldn’t just say the word sex.

Jughead stepped out of the bathroom with his brow knitted together. “What?” He asked before a wave of understanding crossed his face. “Oh!”

“Yeah, so now I don’t have a place to sleep and I was wondering if I could sleep in here. On the floor of course.” Betty finished with a smile.

“Bets, we are adults, we can sleep in the same bed together.” Jughead informed with a roll of his eyes.

Keep reading

trashcanbees  asked:

Can you explain transubstantiation to me in a way that I can understand? Every time I ask I'm given "the church says so" or told to read John 6:26-end but nothing in the scripture that I've read gives me any reason to think it was meant to be literal. Perhaps it's just because of the translation I have, I use NLT, but nothing I've read leads me to believe that was Jesus's intention in saying that. "Jesus said so" is a good enough reason for me to believe it but I struggle to see that he said it.

You’re right of course that not everything Jesus said can be taken literally. We do not believe that Jesus is literally a vine, or that we are literally called to become branches! There are two major clues, however, that in the case of Jesus’ assertion in John 6, “I am the bread of life”, a literal interpretation is the correct one.

The first is a shift in wording in the Greek text that is not reflected in English translations (though good study Bibles will mention it in footnotes). In verses 51 and 53, when Jesus says “I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world” and “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you”, the Greek verb translated as “eat” is phago. But in verse 54, when Jesus reiterates “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day”, the verb being translated as “eat” is now trogo, which is the word used to describe animal eating rather than human consumption. This deliberate choice of words implies a literal meaning.

Secondly, we have to look at the context. Elsewhere in scripture, when Jesus uses a metaphor and it is taken literally, scripture offers straightforward clarification of his true meaning. See John 2:19-22:

Jesus answered and said to them, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews said, “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and you will raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking about the temple of his body. Therefore, when he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they came to believe the scripture and the word Jesus had spoken.

Here, John’s clarification is explicit and incontrovertible. There is no plausible way to argue that Jesus was actually speaking about Herod’s temple in verse 19. The Evangelist has specifically told us that this saying is a metaphor. 

In John 6, the Jews to whom Jesus is speaking again take his words literally: “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph? Do we not know his father and mother? Then how can he say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” (v. 42), “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” (v. 52). But this time, no such clarification is offered. After his initial statement in verse 34, “I am the bread of life, whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst”, Jesus reiterates seven times that it is necessary to eat his flesh in order to be saved (v. 48-50, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, and 57-58), but neither he nor John ever offers an alternate interpretation of these sayings. Even when “many of his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him” because of this teaching (v. 66), no correction of their literal understanding is given.

The most commonly cited objection to this is John 6:63: “It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” But unlike the clarification about the temple in John 2, other interpretations of this verse are possible, and if Jesus is truly speaking of his own flesh here, and it is truly “of no avail”, then the entire Incarnation is meaningless - a conclusion clearly contradicted by scripture. Furthermore, the second part of this verse, “The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life”, reinforces everything Jesus has just said identifying himself with the bread of life by reminding us that his words are the revelation of the Spirit. Catholics therefore interpret verse 63 as an admonition that the doctrine of the Eucharist must be understood as something supernatural rather than natural; indeed, it is only by supernatural means that this man can give us his actual flesh to eat.

While John 6 is the most comprehensive scriptural basis for the doctrine of the Real Presence, the notion of Jesus giving us his flesh to eat is reinforced elsewhere in scripture. The Last Supper accounts in the other gospels (Matthew 26:26-28, Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20) are the source of the actual words of consecration said by the priest. St. Paul reiterates this account in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, then goes on to say in verse 27: “Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.“ This is a rather strong condemnation if the Eucharist is merely a symbol, but a logical one if it is truly the body and blood of Christ.

Additionally, while not substantial proofs, many other biblical images fall into place and make more sense if the doctrine of the Real Presence is true. Jesus is the Lamb of God (John 1:29), the paschal lamb which has been sacrificed (1 Cor 5:7); we eat his flesh just as the Israelites ate the flesh of the paschal lamb in Egypt (Exodus 12:8). Jesus is the Word of God (John 1:1-5, 14), and we are told that man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God (Deuteronomy 8:3, Matthew 4:4). The Church is the Bride of Christ (see Ephesians 5:21-32, Revelation 21:2,9-10), and the bride and groom are not merely united in spirit but “become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:5, Mark 10:7-8, Ephesians 5:31). The full meaning of all these teachings is only revealed by the bodily presence of Jesus Christ in the Blessed Sacrament.

anonymous asked:

Blind has also been used in a poetic sense to mean ignorance since biblical times. The word has multiple meanings and it isn't ablist to use blind in that meaning without referencing visually impaired people. If it was that would mean a phrase such as "do you see my point" would also be.

re: jokes about trump going blind during the eclipse

  • the fact that it’s been used for a long time doesn’t make it any less ableist. that’s a ridiculous argument. i’m totally willing to fight the bible. 
  • it’s disingenuous to act like “blind” has a separate, discrete meaning. that “poetic meaning” you’re talking about is explicitly and concretely based in comparisons to physical blindness/low vision. 
  • the jokes that i’m referencing prove that the association between blindness and ignorance isn’t something discrete and separate from the way we conceptualize the experiences of blind/low vision people. the jokes rely on the basis of an association between physical blindness from looking at the eclipse and whatever metaphorical blindness. that comparison between ignorance and physical blindness is the actual foundation for these jokes. 
  • like, the jokes wouldn’t exist if that connection wasn’t there. if “blind in a poetic sense” was actually a completely different meaning and unrelated altogether, i would have no jokes to complain about here. but that is not the fucking case.

Dumb little Drabble I wrote during break at work today. Lol.



Jughead almost longed for the time before knew how to it feel to know Betty Cooper. Of course he had always known her, for as long as he could remember she had been there right along with he and Archie, whether it was making mud pies or playing Ben 10 in the backyard he had always known Elizabeth Cooper.

However now he knew her in the most Biblical sense of the word. He knew how plush her mouth was on his, the heady weight of her breast in his hand, had the exact octave of her sigh as he sank inside her imprinted on his cerebral cortex.

He knew it all and well, it was hard to know or think about anything else rightfully so.

It was hard to not feel like a downright lech though when his girlfriend was sitting next to him, hand gracefully wrapped around a lightly freckled banana, peeling the skin down with her small elegant fingers as she listened to Veronica talk excitedly about something.

Jughead wasn’t even feigning paying attention as he watched her take the tip of the fruit into her mouth, pouty pink lips enclosed around the white flesh. He groaned involuntarily, his body’s muscle memory causing a shock of pleasure to shoot to his groin. He covered it with a cough but Betty caught the action, giving him a sideways glance and a knowing smile.

Veronica and Kevin shifted their towards each other, thumbing through an encyclopedia sizes Vanity Flair and Betty took the opportunity, straight up licking the side of the banana, torturously slow.

Jughead sucked in a sharp breath as her tongue circled the bitten off tip. Then she turned her head and looked at him dead in the eye as she took the creamy fruit back into her mouth as far as it could go, only gagging a little as she bit down and chewed the fruit slowly.

“Fuck Betts…” He felt himself getting hard and he shifted on the bench to try and adjust himself to no avail.

“That’s the idea Juggie…” she whispered in his ear after she’d swallowed the load in her mouth, her tongue darting out to flick his earlobe. “Meet me in the Blue and Gold office in 5 minutes.”

Betty excused herself, getting up with her tray and dumping the contents into the trash. She looked back at Jughead, biting the corner of her lip before she turned around and strode out of the cafeteria, her hips switching a bit, knowing he was watching her intently.

He made a horrible show of making an excuse to leave, completely sure no one at the table bought it as he saw Veronica smiling around her straw shooting Kevin an amused look. He didn’t have it in him to care as he burst out of the lunch room and took off for the Blue and Gold in search of his girlfriend’s sweet lips.

looking out the window and
god’s standing on the balcony,

prayers answered,
fingerprints smudged into an apology
for everything you’ve ever believed

for every thumb you’ve ever pushed
through the wrist to stop yourself 
from screaming your lungs

open, jaw clenched by the teeth.
biblical, in the most honest

sense. the summer when the river
flooded over, momma got baptized

and the blackbirds stopped singing. 

it wasn’t poetic.
it was silent and 
my heart never knew 
what it meant to ache.


ailichi  asked:

I think you outlined the Catholic Church's attitude to homosexuality well, but I still think it's cruel. What this doctrine teaches is that while is fine to be attracted to people of the same sex, you have to ... repress? that part of your natural personality to be a good Christian? If we're all created in God's image, then why try to change what is already so fearfully and wondrously made? The teaching of the Church is basically asking people to abstain from romantic love for their whole lives.

And Jesus never had any teaching about homosexuality- although he did bless a gay relationship between a Roman centurion and his companion. And ‘sodomy’ just means non-reproductive sex - the sin of Sodom reads to me as the sin of rape. Idk man, ‘love your neightbour’ and all that. I know plenty of gay Christians, and they’re much closer to God than some straight people I know who agree with the (frankly homophobic) teaching of the Catholic Church.

Jesus never addresses homosexuality directly, but he does reaffirm the Genesis story of Adam and Eve before the fall as God’s intended plan for marriage in Matthew 19:4-6. We therefore know that deviation from this model is not in line with God’s plan.

The claim that the centurion and his slave in Matthew8/Luke 7 were in a gay relationship relies on disputed connotations of the Greek word translated as “highly prized” or “highly regarded”. But whether or not this term implies homosexuality, nothing in the account suggests Jesus blesses or condones the relationship between the two men. He heals the slave’s illness and praises the master’s faith, but he does not declare either free from sin. It makes just as much, if not more sense to read this incident as Jesus “blessing” slavery.

“Sodomy” is not a biblical term per se and is used with varying connotations in different sources, but even by your definition of “non-reproductive sex”, any sexual activity between two men or two women would certainly fall into that category. 

Homosexual desires are not the only sort of objectively disordered desires that human beings can experience, and Christ and His Church call on us to resist all such desires. Being fallen means that we will often want things which are not ultimately good for us; being a Christian means that we must “die to self” and live not by our own desires but by God’s commandments. The desire to commit a sin (any kind of sin, sexual or otherwise) is not “part of your natural personality”; it is a result of the fall and precisely that aspect of humanity which is not in the image of God.

The Church asks nothing more of persons who experience homosexual desires than she asks of all the faithful - to abstain from any and all sexual activity outside of the marital act. A priest, a nun, a celibate straight person, and a celibate gay person all have the same call to chastity.

Furthermore, a life of celibacy is not merely a renunciation or denial of the good of marriage; it is a higher good in and of itself. Modern emphasis on the good of marriage has tended to obscure this fact, but both Christ and St. Paul are clear in their teaching that the chaste unmarried state is superior to the married state. In Matthew 19:10-12, Christ affirms those who are “eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom”, and 1 Corinthians 7, St. Paul advises that a Christian should marry only “if they cannot exercise self-control”, and says that the unmarried state is better because it allows an individual to be freer from worldly concerns and focus on pleasing God.

Those who are called to a life of celibacy are not denied the love of God. They are called to an even more perfect union with him than married persons can achieve.

Our Lord himself was celibate, after all.

Scholarly Saturday: Richard the Lionheart and 12th-Century Sex Scandals

Yesterday, we learned about Richard the Lionheart and some of the reasons why he’s a misunderstood and underappreciated historical figure who deserves to be represented as he truly was, instead of a growing trend that continues to generally and pointlessly demonize him as a religious fanatic only interested in gruesomely killing people (if you read my post, you’ll realize why both of these are very incorrect). Insofar as Richard is granted any depth at all, people tend to focus on his contested sexuality. This then becomes a way to “prove” that he was gay or straight, which then become reflections of the author’s sociopolitical feelings and their need for Richard to be one or the other, regardless of the actual evidence. John Gillingham, author of one of the best Richard biographies, unfortunately falls into this trap. Writing a sympathetic and informed work on the king at a time when Richard’s reputation had become quite tarnished thanks to irresponsible scholarship, I feel as if it was necessary for Gillingham to rehabilitate Richard further.  This includes “exonerating” him from any “accusations” about his sexuality and setting the record (so to speak) straight.

In recent years it has become fashionable to claim that a whole roster of historical luminaries were actually gay – William Shakespeare, Abraham Lincoln, so on and so forth – and thus, any similar conjectures about Richard can possibly be dismissed as being in the same tabloid-exposé vein. Gillingham himself takes this approach, stoutly maintaining that all such theories are based on scanty, mischaracterized, or out-of-context evidence, and that there is no reason to think that Richard was anything other than properly heterosexual.

Keep reading

sesaleerose-deactivated20170815  asked:

Could you explain the perífrasis verbal quedar por and quedar sin for me? Some examples that were given to me were el jefe quedó por entregar la documentación and como ella llegó tarde, se quedó sin cenar. I'm having trouble understanding what they mean and how they translate into English. Thanks for your help!

(This answer might be a little all over the place because I feel like I’m going to jump around too much? I’ll try to be as concise as possible but quedar just has a lot of applications idiomatically)

It’s sort of different with quedar vs quedarse in this context but I’ll try.

The first example quedar por entregar shows the function of por is “in order to”, so I would translate it as “the boss stayed behind to deliver the documents”.

In this sense, quedar is closest to its original dictionary meaning which is “to stay behind” or “to remain”… though personally I’d say se queda por “to stay behind for”

EDIT: It could also be “the boss still had to hand in the documents”… queda por hacer algo is “(something) still remains to be done”… this is most likely what your sentence means but I’m not 100% on the context

With the second one, quedarse here takes on the meaning of “was left with”, so I’d have to translate it more idiomatically… “because she got home late, she didn’t get a chance to eat dinner”

More literally it’s “because she arrived late, she was left without eating dinner”

The use of quedarse here is like “to be left with” or it sort of implies that you’re powerless in a situation. Like me quedo sin aire “I’m left without air” is like the air had escaped you. It’s a much more passive expression with quedar, so you might see me quedo sin energía “I run out of energy” or “I’m left feeling really tired” in a way.

There are other applications of quedarse that indicate this kind of powerlessness, and it’s when quedarse can be “to become” or in Biblical senses it’s “to be struck”, so for example quedarse ciego/a is “to be struck blind” or “to end up blind” where it’s more something that happened and now that’s just how things are.

It’s a whole thing, and it’s not really what you asked. Just keep in mind quedar is a word with lots of meanings in different contexts but they almost always have the meaning of “to be left with”, or “to remain”, “to stay behind”, or “to be left as”

You also see quedarse en casa “to stay home” or “to stay in [as in not leaving your house]”

I’d say in this situation it’s closer to “to be left”, sort of like how in English we’d say “to be left holding the bag” or “to be left with nothing”… that kind of passivity.

But for your purposes… quedar(se) por is “to stay behind / to hang back for the purposes of”, OR it would be “still” as in “not yet done”… like nos queda mucho por decir “there’s still a lot left for us that needs to be said” or something along those lines

And here, quedar sin is “to go without”, but it can be translated differently like quedar sin palabras “to have no words” 

Fallen angel of the Lord

Some time ago somebody asked me to write meta on the angel “trials”, which were nothing but ingredients for Metatron’s spell at the end of season 8. I’ve been putting this off again and again because I don’t know how to write this without repeating what others have previously said. I’ve read other people’s theories, and it’s really difficult to write something of my own without letting those theories influence the way I think. However, I’ll try to give my opinion about these “trials” as if I was just an ordinary member of the general audience of the show.

Metatron tricked Cas. He talked about closing the gates of Heaven and there were supposedly three trials to accomplish that. It wasn’t until the very end of 8x23 that we learned they were no trials. They were just ingredients for a spell that would expel all angels from heaven. Let’s analyze the whole thing.

The spell was to cast all angel from heaven. Once it worked, we literally saw the angels falling. If the effect of that spell was to cause angels to fall, that means the ingredients should be related to falling as well. What were the ingredients?

1.       To kill a Nephilim

A Nephilim is the offspring of an angel and a human. I’ll take this from Wikipedia: “According to the Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon, the basic etymology of the word Nephilim is “dub[ious]”, and various suggested interpretations are “all very precarious”. The majority of ancient biblical versions, including the Septuagint, Theodotion, Latin Vulgate, Samaritan Targum, Targum Onkelos and Targum Neofiti, interpret the word to mean “giants” Symmachus translates it as “the violent ones” and Aquila’s translation has been interpreted to mean either “the fallen ones” or “the ones falling [upon their enemies]”. (X)

So yeah. There is at least one translation that makes sense. Nephilim… the fallen one. The result of an act forbidden by heaven. The result of an angel who fell from grace and disobeyed by lying with a human.

2.       To retrieve a Cupid’s bow

According to the lore a person, or even a deity, who is shot by Cupid’s arrow is filled with uncontrollable desire. In 8x23 Metatron said that Dwight Charles was the next on the list to find love. Not for nothing we have the expression “falling in love”, right? The one thing that makes people fall in love is Cupid’s bow, so retrieving it sounds fairly logical. There you have it, another ingredient related to falling.

I’ll just say it’s very interesting that we had this visual when Dean and Cas were trying to retrieve Cupid’s bow.

The arrow was pointing exactly where Dean and Cas were. Coincidence?

I suppose that it’s also a coincidence that Dwight Charles’ love interest wasn’t female. He found love, blessed by heaven and all, in another man. He fell… in love.

3.       To take an angel’s grace

The last ingredient was an angel’s grace. However, it seems that Metatron needed Cas specifically. He could have used Naomi’s grace or any other angel’s. But why did he need Cas’ grace?

Do you remember what Hester told Castiel in 7x21?

“You have fallen in every way imaginable.”

And then she said this to Dean:

“The very touch of you corrupts. When Castiel first laid a hand on you in Hell, he was lost!”

It seems to me that angels think Castiel is a fallen angel. He still has his grace, so fallen in what way? In every way imaginable. Fallen in love? Fallen enough to disobey heaven again and again because of one man? The grace of the angel who has fallen was the cherry on top of the pie to make all the other angels fall as well.

There are other ways to interpret the ingredients, but I decided to go for the falling part because it makes sense to me, considering that what Metatron wanted was to make the angels fall. One way or another, we can definitely agree that Castiel was essential for the spell.

Castiel, fallen angel of the Lord.

Human Origins, The Anunnaki and The Sumerian Tablets

While the true origins of humankind are still very murky and entangled in a never-ending tussle between evolutionists and creationists, there are fascinating clues left behind by ancient civilizations, and they point us in a very specific direction. All of this activity in the distant past cannot be separated from religion. Many ancient religious scripts that have survived from various corners of the world give us remarkable clarity on a multitude of issues. One such issue is the existence of a group of omnipresent gods and deities with advanced powers who seemed to have ruled the world for thousands of years. The Sumerian Tablets called these gods the Anunnaki. Led by a mysterious pantheon of twelve gods, the Anunnaki - in various names - seem to be present in every ancient civilization, scattered across all the continents, separated by thousands of miles. In my research and books I make the intentional distinction between God with a capital ‘G’ and god(s) with a lowercase ‘g’. This highlights the difference between the true divine source of all things in the universe (God), and a group of advanced beings, the Anunnaki gods, who - though technologically advanced and the genetic progenitors of humanity - are not the creators of the universe and the source of all things and therefore cannot be confused with God. For more about this stunning history see my book, ‘Slave Species of the Gods’.

Those who hold the Bible dear should not be surprised to find that these same deities and gods are referred to in the Bible on many occasions. In the original Bible, before it was translated and streamlined, the original word of God was Elohim, which is a plural word meaning ‘gods’. This was always the case, and the biblical God has always been a plural - “the gods.” Suddenly the many references by God to himself if in the plural, like: “lets us create man in our image” (Genesis 1:26) and, “Let us go down and confuse their language.” Genesis 11:7) become less confusing.

When we realize that most of the stories from Genesis and Exodus are translations from their original source written in the Sumerian Tablets, it all starts to make a lot more sense. The same gods that the Sumerian Tablets refer to are the same plural gods that are mentioned in the Bible. All the greatest biblical stories have their origins in the Sumerian Tablets

While the story is often reduced to one line in the Bible, the original Sumerian texts are written in much greater detail: The seven tablets of creation of heaven and Earth; creation of Adamu, the biblical Adam; creation of Eve from Adamus rib; the garden of Eden; the serpent and the tree of knowledge and life; the Flood, Noah(Ziusudra) and the ark; destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; the tower of Babel and its destruction by the gods and many more. The tales are well documented by the Sumerians, and some of the tablets predate the Bible by as much as 3,000 years.

It is also important to note that in Sumerian, Egyptian, Greek and all other cultures, the gods are never considered imaginary, but instead are very, very real. The Annunaki integrated with the people, they informed the people, and they punished the people. The first so-called holy trinity arose in Sumeria. It was Anu - the father -  and his two sons; Enlil and Enki. Together they ruled the roost on planet Earth. We know that Enlil was given the northern half  of the planet to look after, and Enki - who was also known as the creator god, or serpent - was in charge of the southern part of the planet. They were supported by an extended family of a total of twelve deities, each with special tasks and responsibilities. The Sumerian Tablets refer to the sons of the Anunnaki as the Nephilim - who were referred to as the “sons of the gods” in Genesis:

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days - and also afterward - when the sons of God [ the gods] went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

Genisis 6:4

The pantheon of ancient powerful gods or beings was also very active and very present in South Africa under their leader Enki. The evidence is everywhere, especially in the many references of the Sumerian Tablets.

This leads us directly to one of the most misunderstood and misused expressions of our time: “mythology.” This seemingly innocuous word has caused much confusion in our modern times and has caused us to completely misunderstand all of human history. The original meaning in Greek had nothing to do with “imaginary.” In fact, it seems quite the opposite. The original meaning of mythos was “words”: written words, spoken words, legend and tales of historic accounts sworn to be true by kings and priests.

Can you see the problem here? What was taken as part of the daily life of ancient people has been reduced to imaginary fairy tales by modern historians. According to my research, it was around AD 1270 that the meaning of the word mythological was first misused and has subsequently created immense damage in future history books.

Is it possible that all ancient civilizations never had a real history, real experience and real religion? Is it possible that they just imagined things because they could not understand the big bad world around them? This is exactly what some historians would like us to believe. Once we realize that mythology actually means “history” the whole picture changes quite dramatically. We suddenly realize that in the distant past there was a group of powerful beings (gods) who controlled events all over the planet, including South Africa. This is instantly recognized in the the symbols and statues carved in rock in South Africa, which predate the Egyptian and Sumerian equivalents. It is important that the presence of these ancient so-called gods should not be confused with the true creator of the universe and all things in it - GOD.

- Michael Tellinger - African Temples of the Anunnaki - The Lost Technologies of the Gold Mines of Enki

To get married means you are willing to respect our Lord and His decrees that state a couple shouldn’t remarry if they get divorced. Marriage is a sacred commitment not just between two people, but with God as well. A Christian’s job is to be willing to accept God’s Word and His perfect rules and regulations and live our lives according to them.

In Matthew 19:4-6 we are told by Jesus that God created marriage to unite a man and a woman, and once united they shouldn’t be separated. God really dislikes divorces as God had this to say in regards to divorce:

Malachi 2:16
“For I hate divorce!” says the Lord, the God of Israel. “To divorce your wife is to overwhelm her with cruelty,” says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies. “So guard your heart; do not be unfaithful to your wife.”

A Christian may only divorce a spouse for 2 reasons: if one spouse commits infidelity and/or an unbelieving spouse that decides to leave the marriage and in that case you are not supposed to try to save that marriage.

Matthew 5:32
But I say that a man who divorces his wife, unless she has been unfaithful, causes her to commit adultery. And anyone who marries a divorced woman also commits adultery.

1 Corinthians 7:15
On the other hand, if the unbelieving spouse walks out, you’ve got to let him or her go. You don’t have to hold on desperately. God has called us to make the best of it, as peacefully as we can.

In regards to remarriage, a Christian may only be allowed to remarry if their previous spouse has died and even then the new husband must be a believer; or if they got divorced because the spouse was being adulterous; or if they divorced the spouse due to their unfaithfulness to the Lord. Other than those 3 exceptions, a once married person can never marry again before the Lord.

1 Corinthians 7:39
A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. If her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but only if he loves the Lord.

Matthew 19:9
And I tell you this, whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery - unless his wife has been unfaithful.“

So many Christians say "Oh I married so young” and “It just didn’t work out” and say “Why can’t I ever be happy again?” There is no excuse. Are you saying your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, was wrong when he decreed that divorced people aren’t allowed to remarry when He spoke about this issue in Mark 10:11-12? Be very careful if you choose to marry anyone because that will be the person you’re going to be spending the rest of your life with in the eyes of God. Don’t marry just because you hope it’ll work itself out.

The apostle Paul did say in 1 Corinthians 7:9 that if you are unable to wait to be sexually active you should just marry the person you are lusting for, but that doesn’t mean the commandment of Jesus Christ is null and void. Paul was simply stating that you are better off risking being in a relationship that might not work out and getting divorced and never have sex again as punishment, rather than have sex outside the marriage and defile yourself before God. You should respect God’s commandments and respect the institution of marriage. If your marriage falls apart for any other reason and you are single again, you are to never to marry ever again.

What of spouses that molest their kids, or are violent and beat their spouses and kids? In such an instance, the spouse should definitely separate themselves and the children from the abusive spouse. However, even in such a situation, a time of separation with the goal of repentance and restoration should be the ideal, not necessarily immediately beginning divorce proceedings. Please understand that the example mentioned isn’t biblical grounds for divorce, but what I’m simply saying is that a man/woman whose spouse is engaging in such malicious activities should not remain in such situation. If there is any risk to self or children, separation is a good and appropriate step. But if you do get divorced, no matter the reason other than the 2 reasons specifically mentioned in the Bible, you are to remain single for the rest of your life according to God and that’s a truth the vast majority have a problem accepting.

Incompatibility, not loving each other anymore, brutality, and misery are not grounds for divorce, though they may be proper grounds for a separation and consequent “celibacy within marriage” as Paul indicates in 1 Corinthians 7:11. These words of Paul show us that a Christian couple may in fact split up for reasons that do not justify a Biblical divorce. It may be because of a misguided sense of spirituality; it may be because of general unhappiness, or conflict, or abuse, or misery, addiction, or poverty. Paul recognizes (without at all encouraging) that one might depart in such circumstance, but they cannot consider themselves divorced, with the right to remarry, because their marriage had not split up for reasons that justify a Biblical divorce.

These problems that are serious yet fall short of the Biblical permission for divorce may justify a separation, but the partners are expected to honor their marriage vows even in their separation, because as far as God is concerned, they are still married - their marriage covenant has not been broken for what God considers to be Biblical reasons.

What about if 2 Atheists get married again after being divorced from their previous spouses but they both turn Christian during the course of their second marriage? Remember what the Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7:17: “Only let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches.” In the context, one of Paul’s ideas with this statement was a warning about trying to undo the past in regard to relationships; God tells us to repent of whatever sin is there and then to move on. If you are married to your second wife after wrongfully divorcing your first wife, and become a Christian, don’t think you must now leave your second wife and go back to your first wife, trying to undo the past. As the Lord has called you, walk in that place right now.

Can God forgive you if you get divorced other than for the 2 reasons, or remarried other than the 3 reasons that God has commanded? Of course He’ll forgive you. Ecclesiastes 7:20 tells us “Not a single person on earth is always good and never sins.” We all need to repent for our sins. But if we truly accept Jesus as our savior, you will choose the path laid out by God and not remarry ever again.

So, if you are going to marry someone, be sure that’s the person you want to stay the rest of your life with. Remember Jesus Christ’s own words when it comes to divorce:

Mark 10:11-12
He told them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries someone else commits adultery against her. And if a woman divorces her husband and marries someone else, she commits adultery.”

Other than very specific exceptions we are not allowed to remarry and if we get a divorce, other than for the reasons God has told us, we are to remain single forever. Being single isn’t too bad, Jesus had this to say about being single:

Matthew 19:12
Some are born as eunuchs, some have been made eunuchs by others, and some choose not to marry for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.

And then of course there’s the apostle Paul that mentioned many times in the Bible about the greatness that is to be single and that by being single you can focus only on the Lord and won’t have to divide your attention between your family and the Lord. I especially like what he wrote in his letter to the Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 7:32-35
I want you to live as free of complications as possible. When you’re unmarried, you’re free to concentrate on simply pleasing the Master. Marriage involves you in all the nuts and bolts of domestic life and in wanting to please your spouse, leading to so many more demands on your attention. The time and energy that married people spend on caring for and nurturing each other, the unmarried can spend in becoming whole and holy instruments of God. I’m trying to be helpful and make it as easy as possible for you, not make things harder. All I want is for you to be able to develop a way of life in which you can spend plenty of time together with the Master without a lot of distractions.

It’s striking that Jesus took us back to the beginning of it creation so we can learn about marriage in Mark 10:6. Today many people want to say, “We live in different times” or “The rules are different today” or “We need a modern understanding.” Yet Jesus knew that the answers were in going back to the beginning when He was asked about divorce. As the Lord says in Mark 10:9What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.

Society’s views on marriage might have changed but God’s view hasn’t changed nor they ever will. Marriage is a big deal so make sure you are marrying a fellow Christian that absolutely loves God. Chances are that you are only gonna have 1 shot at marriage, so make it count.


Ancient Worlds - BBC Two 

Episode 2 “The Age of Iron”

Megiddo was an important city-state in northern Israel, overlooking the fertile Jezreel Valley from the west. It is thought that the greek word Armageddon is derived from Megiddo (the term Armageddon is used in a generic sense to refer to any end of the world, an apocalyptic scenario).

Megiddo has been identified as one of the most important cities of biblical times. Its strategic location gave the city a great importance. It controlled a commonly used pass on the trading route between Egypt and Mesopotamia, and it also stood along the route that connected the Phoenician cities with Jerusalem and the Jordan River valley.

The site was inhabited from approximately 7000 BC. It is a tell, a hill created by many generations of people living and rebuilding on the same spot. Following massive construction, the city reached its largest size under King Solomon, king of Israel, in the 10th century BC.

Megiddo is mentioned many times in Egyptian royal inscriptions (15th to 13th centuries BC). They attest to the city’s importance as the center of Egyptian administration in Canaan and as a logistical base on the road north. The armies of the Egyptian pharaoh Thutmose III and a large Canaanite coalition led by the rulers of Megiddo fought at the Battle of Megiddo (15th century BC). The city was conquered after a seven month siege. Megiddo has been the site of several historical battles in ancient and modern times.

Excavations have unearthed almost 30 layers of ruins, confirming a very long period of settlement. Finds include monumental temples -an Early Bronze Age sacrificial altar, from the Canaanite period, 3rd millennium BC-, luxurious palaces, a collection of jewelry pieces and ivories, fortifications and remarkably engineered water systems.

The city was abandoned during the Persian rule, in the 5th century BC

Tel Megiddo, Israel

A bit on Christian witchcraft

So, I have come across the Christian witchcraft community on Tumblr. I was naturally baffled by the controversy at first, but then I did my research, and now I believe there is more to it than it seems.

Of course, there are some ideas that I, as a Catholic, honestly fail to see as Christian: namely, perceiving God as a primary chosen deity of many instead of the one and only existant, perceiving Virgin Mary as a goddess (whom She, with all due respect, was not), and divination practices. (I understand, though, that other denominations’ teachings could be much more liberal towards these.) But they’re not universal within the community and, leaving the W-word aside, I should confess there are many ideas within this framework that I share. 

I have no problem with fairy faith, for example, because I believe in the Good People as in neither spirits nor gods, but people, just as Irish monastic texts outline. Since I believe in God Omniscient and Almighty, who am I to deny Him power to create multiple realms and to place a human nation into one of them? And who am I to deny any possibility of occasional interdimensional contact (though I would deny any truly occult, not just under-researched, nature of such)?

I have consulted books and clerics on the matter of spontaneous supernatural experiences that some people claim to have been subjects of. I got a very clear answer that if something just tends to happen to a person and is not a fruit of deliberate occult practice, then it’s not one’s own selfish will, but God’s will and the nature of the person in question. That makes what my Gaelic ancestors used to call second-sight perfectly legit.

I am myself highly sensitive to natural cycles and “bad” and “good” places. I would never call that magick, to me it’s only biology. But I understand how people would describe such experiences as witchy, especially when having grown up in a very buttoned-up religious environment. 

Most of what was described as spells in the blogs I’ve read through, were, in fact, earnest prayers. Obviously, something wrong’s not with them but with how we the mainstream Christians approach our prayers - so that the word is no more strong enough.

Besides, understanding “witchery” in this new non-biblical sense, as a secular and materialistic activity, we’re coming rather close to Buddhism, and you can be Catholic and Buddhist simultaneously - that’s official.

I prefer to call myself just a Pagan-friendly Catholic, but I would definitely like to learn more about the community I find so like-minded.

Hope I didn’t offend anyone and/or sound judgemental (if I did, I didn’t mean to).

So, about Jared Leto’s role as Niander Wallace…

I had no idea he was going to be in BR2049, so I was very surprised when he appeared as Niander Wallace, the new mad genius and producer of androids. I liked his role and performance. He was a totally different beast than the homey nerd Tyrell.

It was interesting to watch the contrast between him and his creations. He makes androids to be “more human than human”, but in comparison even though he is the human, he acts more like a robot - especially when he recites his sermons, there was a robot-like quality in the delivery. He is the human that sees himself as a new God, because he makes sentient life, to the point that he cites Bible and calls his right hand woman “angel” in the biblical sense of the word.

I think Jared Leto did well in this role. His delivery and acting was on point. I’m only sad he didn’t sing anything ;)

Too Hot, Hot Damn - Winterhawk

           Clint is going to die. It’s too damn hot and Clint is going to die and it is all Bucky Barnes’ fault. Now, obviously, Clint is not blaming Bucky for the heat wave currently blasting New York, nor is he blaming Baucky for Stark’s air conditioner breaking; because that would be ridiculous. But, it’s not the heat that’s going to kill Clint. What’s going to kill Clint is the fact that Bucky has taken the opportunity to walk around without a shirt on. Bucky has been walking around the Tower, with no shirt on, all his muscles on display, for two days, and Clint is going to die. He is sure the sheer force of will that he is exerting to stop himself from looking, from drooling, from touching, will eventually cause his skull to collapse and kill him.

Keep reading

List of songs from my riot grrrl special radio thingy

Keep in mind that this show as about like the history, the scene and legacy and whatever, so songs were chosen for different reasons… 

DOUBLE DARE YA - Bikini Kill

COOL SCHMOOL - Bratmobile

WAITRESS HELL - Heavens to Betsy


BROKEN TEETH - Cold Cold Hearts

FAKE FIGHT - Team Dresch


WATCHMAKER - Excuse 17

WORDS AND GUITAR - Sleater-Kinney

YOUTH DECAY - Sleater-Kinney



SUCK MY LEFT ONE – Bikini Kill

DECIDE – Heavens to Betsy

STAB - Bratmobile

CHERRYBOMB – Bratmobile



FLOWER – Sonic Youth


BOOM - Wild Flag

OH COME ON - Julie Ruin

GIRL HATE – Dark Times


BRUISERR - Hissyfit

REBEL GIRL – Bikini Kill


11x17 “Red Meat”
“It’s time. The Empty. It’s waiting,”

for @her-roses-never-fall who asked me about this topic

“His death was only the beginning of his victory”, it is said in the movie Elizabethtown and I had to think back to this line when watching this week’s episode and particularly the exchange between Billie and Dean. Because not only did it imo allude once more to Dean’s inevitable death and “trip” to the Empty, much more than that to me it was yet another nod towards Dean as a christ figure due to Billie openly calling Dean a martyr. Why that is you wonder?

Because commonly in Christianity, a martyr is someone who brings about the “Word of God” (the Word of God, which broke when Dean died in 9x23 “Do You Believe in Miracles” for example and with that has been always linked to Dean in a special way imo). Wikipedia interestingly enough also calls martyrs - and this is important as Dean thinks of himself “as a witness” -

“A Christian witness is a biblical witness whether or not death follows.”

Meaning one could link Dean feeling like a “witness” to martyrdom in th way that Dean himself may become a witness of the divine. What’s also important to note in relation to martyrs is this

“However, over time many Christian testimonies were rejected, and the witnesses put to death, and the word martyr developed its present sense. Where death ensues, the witnesses follow the example of Jesus in offering up their lives for truth.”

In a way we have had this fight already in 9x23 “Do You Believe in Miracles” when Dean as the true christ figure was killed by the one putting himself up to play a christ figure by living among the poor and performing miracles: Metatron.

If we follow through on this, imo it can be analyzed as Dean sacrificing himself for the world while at the same time becoming whole and much like Jesus did in the end returning from the dead and yes, possibly even the Empty…

What are the Imprecatory Psalms?
Imprecatory Psalms, located (naturally) within the Book Of Psalms, are psalms which express harmful intent towards either the enemies of the psalmist, or to people who in any sense defy God. For witches, words packed with the intention to harm are no unfamiliar concept- the Imprecatory Psalms basically serve as the biblical equivalent of a curse. The word “imprecation” itself means “spoken curse”.

Which psalms are “imprecatory”?
There are quite a few Imprecatory Psalms, but the major ones are Psalm 109 and Psalm 69. Psalms 5, 6, 11, 12, 35, 37, 40, 52, 54, 56, 58, 69, 79, 83, 137, 139 and 143 are also imprecatory in nature. These psalms are not the only cases of imprecation in the Bible- the New Testament also includes imprecations: Matthew 26:23-24 and Revelation 6:10 are examples of this. Even Jesus used the occasional imprecation…!

How can I use these in my craft?
Imprecatory Psalms can be used the same way you would use any other curses. This curse, taken from Psalm 58, serves as an example.

Imagine #16 Derek [Requested by telarnidaniela]

Derek’s analytical willow irises glanced toward the bathroom door, following the movement of your retreating frame as you scurried back into the restroom with a towel wrapped around your frame and an arm full of clothing. He wanted to question the mysterious action, inquire as to why he’d yet to share his love in the biblical sense but he didn’t want to pressure you. He was never lucky enough to catch a glimpse of flesh, even by accident, and it made him wonder the origin of the secrecy. He thought you were beautiful in each sense of the word; physically, spiritually and emotionally. The pack often times stated that he worshipped the ground you walked on and he couldn’t honestly say that the statement was that far from the truth. Had he done something wrong to make you feel as though you weren’t safe with him? The bathroom door released an ear splitting squeal, the werewolf’s head lulling to the left as he watched you tip toe into the bedroom, a subconscious smirk on his beige mouth as he witnessed you wearing one of his cotton shirts for the first time.

Keep reading

You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is like an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not be come dirty.” -Mahatma Ghandi 

If I were filling out a form about myself and came to the religious preference section, I would probably check other or no preference or undecided. We didn’t go to church when I was kid, nor was I taught how to pray. However, I was taught how to read at my mother’s insistence. From a very early age I was always keen to words, the way people spoke, and how things were written. Writing has always been something I’ve been drawn to. I often felt some kind of a connection when writing, even if it was just my thoughts streaming down on to the paper without the intention of them ever being read by anyone.

“As I pen these things
It might literally be all I have
Ink on paper
Does any of this matter?
Then I’m reminded of what I’ve seen
The places I love and the people I’ve been “

I’ve never held any religious beliefs of my own, but I’ve always been drawn to the words of others. Some of my favorite musicians have religious backgrounds or used religion as a source of inspiration for their works. I love the raw emotion and passion that I feel in the music. They sing of a force and a being far greater than you and I. They speak of Love and Grace in the biblical sense as things that connect us to each other.

I believe that hope is something that connects us all. Hope is something that holds more power than a single person could comprehend. I have suffered ill at the hands of others, and it has been something I have come to accept and forgive, instead of holding on to anger and bitterness. 

“Only Love could have brought me to this place
Holding in me a joyful heart while spit covers my face
I’ve come to forgive those who’ve wronged me
Knowing that they’ve helped make me into exactly who You intended me to be.“

I have made it through to the other side of my hardest struggles. If you had asked me when I was walking through all of it what kept me going, I probably wouldn’t have had an answer half the time. I just felt this connection to someone, to something. Maybe it was the other people I had never met who were walking through the same sort of darkness that I was. Maybe it was a connection to this idea of hope, that our better days really are ahead. For some people this manifests itself in the idea of faith and believing in a higher power. For some it may be the connectedness of family and community that keeps them going. For me personally I just keep coming back to this idea of hope, that life is a wonderful gift to be treasured. So where my days were once filled with darkness, they are now filled with the light of pursuing and honoring this gift that I’ve been given.


“I’m trying my best to be a better man
Despite all my fears, I really am
I write these things to remind myself
That amidst this darkness, there still remains
Light, Hope, and a perfect plan
For the first time in my life
I am writing for the sake of writing
Living for the sake of living
Loving for the sake of loving
And I’ll live”

 Part of why I wished to pursue this internship was to hopefully make the differences in the lives of others. I wished to say the things I wish I could have said to those in my life that I’ve lost, those people whose memories and stories that are now a part of mine. Explaining how their passing has affected me and why I chose to pursue this opportunity isn’t something that has always been easy for people to understand. I often wrestle with understanding my own spirituality and then finding the words to explain it. I wrestle with finding a way to tell people that I am living for those we have lost. I’m living for hope and this idea that our lives are meant to be truly wonderful. I often find that other people have found far better words to describe it than I feel I could have.


“So you can call this sort of life a hopeless endeavor
That this tiny vessel could ever endure such violent weather
Call it pointless
I’ll continue to carry out Grace none the less
I will scream it till my face is blue
There is a point to all of this and its always been You”


      Kenneth, TWLOHA Fall 2014 Intern