with age differences in relationships we shouldn’t go by years, we should go by percentages
you know why it’s not as weird for a 35 year old to date a 30 year old than it is for a 20 year old to date a 15 year old? because that five year age difference represents a LOT larger of a part of the 15 year olds life than the 25 year olds, a bigger chunk of life experience missing
so like say for kylie jenner. she’s 17, tyga is 25. that eight year age difference is 47% of the time kylie has even been alive
eyes wide open
Or you can just not judge age differences because it’s different for everyone
or you can recognize that psychosocial development and life experience are relevant whether it’s convenient or not and its inherently predatory for a much older person to date a much younger person. “don’t judge” deez nuts honestly like that’s the weakest defense
Isn’t it nice how people twist their religious scripture to suit their weds but when it’s used against them it’s suddenly not okay
I talked to a monk about this quote once (we have mutual friends, and he came to a New Year’s Eve party at my shared art studio). He said this isn’t even talking about homosexuality. That the bible never actually says homosexuality is wrong. What that passage means is this:
Women were treated as subservient and it that you shouldn’t treat other men as subservient, like they are beneath you. It is not talking about homosexuality. If it was, it would say it outright since the bible lists other things outright.
I take the word of a monk who have studied the bible extensively more than a self proclaimed Christian.
The above text, I would like to point out is from the point of view of this translation of the original Hebrew. I spoke with my cousin’s rabbi on the matter and his response was different, saying that it was a mistranslation. See, the true translation says that a man shall not lie with another in the bed of a woman, which is to say, the Hebrews had a shit ton of rules about when a man was or was not allowed in a woman’s bed and private quarters (including, if she didn’t want you there, you weren’t allowed there. Hebrew women were also allowed to divorce their husbands and the image of the ‘oppressive Hebrew people’ is an image that was propogated by Christianity which, historically speaking, doesn’t treat the Jewish people too well and liked to paint them as being rather barbaric and backwards and cultish with their traditions, which, another piece of fun info, their traditions were one of the main reasons why the Jewish people were less likely, in medieval times, to die of the plague. Because washing your hands and avoiding the dead and vermin and the like was a lot of help. Of course the Christians persecuted them for not dying but that’s another matter. I’m sidetracked). So the verse is literally saying ‘Don’t fuck in some lady’s bed because that’s just goddamn rude’
Also, whenever a Christian brings the book of Leviticus up, you should feel free to point out that these are rules that were given to make the Hebrew people prepared for when the son of God came to earth. In Christianity, it’s believed the son of God was Jesus. So by following the rules set in Leviticus or pushing them as things we should follow, they’re saying that Jesus was not the son of God, and that Jesus did not, in fact, die for our sins. Jewish people believe, in their faith, that the son of God hasn’t yet been born, so many choose to follow these rules.
Most people of course roll their eyes when I explain the translation of the verse (full breakdown found here) but it’s always fun to point out the nature of the rules in Leviticus and the implications of following them.
I’m a theology student and I am on the verge of crying because of how accurate this commentary is. Historical context is simultaneously the most interesting and most important part of interpreting any texts.
Most religious people seem to base their beliefs on things that are severely mistranslated. I wish they would do their research before using the bible for hate.
I studied theology extensively and was going to become a theologist until I switched majors. The above commentary is 100% accurate and what I try to stress in a lot if conversations with Bible Thumpers.
Jesus also affirms the homosexual relationship between the Roman Centurion and his “slave”. The particular Greek word used to refer to this special slave was “pais”. Greek language studies and contexts show that a “pais” was a male love slave. Regular slaves were called “dolos”. The Centurion makes this distinction clearly when he asks Jesus to heal his slave (pais), and then to prove his status he tells Jesus that his slaves (dolos) go when he tells them to. But this slave (pais) was special. He was the Centurion’s lover.
Hearing this, Jesus was so amazed he says he had not found ANYONE ELSE who had such great faith. He then blesses the Centurion and heals his male lover.
Matthew 8:5-13
THIS IS WHAT THE BIBLE REALLY TEACHES ABOUT SAME SEX COUPLES.
In short, the English adaptation is a mistranslated farce.
^^^^this
reblogging for the comments ^^^^^^
EXCUSE ME WHILE I REBLOG THIS FIFTY MILLION TIMES
This gets to go on my main blog because this is the most concise explanation of the mistranslation I have ever read and ALL OF YOU SHOULD READ ALL OF IT.
not only the english translation.. not only english speaking people
Sorry for the long-ass post, but I basically knew all this already, if not specifically, but because the bible has been translated so many times and there are tons of different versions out there, and one of the favorite things my brother and father did together was compare different verses in different versions. Anyone, ANYONE, who takes a bible and follows it word-for-word is 99% doing something completely wrong. smh The Bible might be considered the word of God, but it was written by man, and edited by man, and it’s one long game of telephone.
why are people actually fucking surprised about this content being in a disney animated movie
I mean seriously
have people even been paying attention
murder is not a new concept in disney animation
in fact it’s pretty much the standard
it’s in literally every movie
even on-screen deaths
like are we really choosing to ignore a good chunk of animation history
just so we can give half-hearted accolades to a movie that didn’t do anything particularly special
I can’t even with this post
disney villains have always been murderous shitheads
Hans is nothing special he does nothing new
hell he didn’t even die even though most murderous villains end up that way
and in some pretty gruesome ways
so yeah anyway I don’t get that post I don’t get why it has so many notes and I don’t get why people willingly ignore disney’s long history of depicting violence in favor of painting Frozen as some kind of amazing outside-the-box story
Perfect examples but where the FUCK is Ray from Princess and The Frog that was a really gruesome death scene
I am Silver Tongue, I am an artist. I have many characters and you can check out my art in the art tag. I occasionally practice witchcraft though I don't do anything too complicated. I am girl 2 and don't know what else to put here.
