Bussy_Getta
New member
So jesus was fucking??!? Catholic church lauce...
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pico Roscoe;4904319 said:So jesus was fucking??!? Catholic church lauce...
Louis Cipher;4904338 said:Louis Cipher;4904338 said:Pico Roscoe;4904319 said:So jesus was fucking??!? Catholic church lauce...
why?
why would this diminish his 'message'?
Pico Roscoe;4904345 said:Pico Roscoe;4904345 said:Louis Cipher;4904338 said:Louis Cipher;4904338 said:Pico Roscoe;4904319 said:So jesus was fucking??!? Catholic church lauce...
why?
why would this diminish his 'message'?
I won't diminish it, I was refering to the fact they won't let women or married men hold preisthood cause they arn't "jesus like"
DROSODAMFUNNY;4904359 said:YALL DO KNOW THAT THE CHURCH IS THE BRIDE OF CHRIST RIGHT?
... IT WOULD LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, AND SPIRITUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR JESUS TO BE HAVING SEX.. IF HE WAS, THE WHOLE BIBLE, CHRISTIANANITY, ECT WOULD BE A LIE
DROSODAMFUNNY;4904359 said:YALL DO KNOW THAT THE CHURCH IS THE BRIDE OF CHRIST RIGHT?
... IT WOULD LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, AND SPIRITUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR JESUS TO BE HAVING SEX.. IF HE WAS, THE WHOLE BIBLE, CHRISTIANANITY, ECT WOULD BE A LIE
Already Home_17;4904376 said:DROSODAMFUNNY;4904359 said:YALL DO KNOW THAT THE CHURCH IS THE BRIDE OF CHRIST RIGHT?
... IT WOULD LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, AND SPIRITUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR JESUS TO BE HAVING SEX.. IF HE WAS, THE WHOLE BIBLE, CHRISTIANANITY, ECT WOULD BE A LIE
um...........yeah
i think thats the point non-believers try to get across
Louis Cipher;4904387 said:Already Home_17;4904376 said:DROSODAMFUNNY;4904359 said:YALL DO KNOW THAT THE CHURCH IS THE BRIDE OF CHRIST RIGHT?
... IT WOULD LITERALLY, PHYSICALLY, AND SPIRITUALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR JESUS TO BE HAVING SEX.. IF HE WAS, THE WHOLE BIBLE, CHRISTIANANITY, ECT WOULD BE A LIE
um...........yeah
i think thats the point non-believers try to get across
my point is...that the bible doesnt necessarily have to be a lie...just a guide...its the people who take it literally that would have a problem with this...
of course people do pick and choose what it is they choose to follow tho...but thats another thread
Louis Cipher;4904331 said:400 yrs after Jesus dies...this was written...
about as valid as the rest of the bible...who knows?
*waits for christians to come and shit on this*
![]()
The Lonious Monk;4905023 said:Louis Cipher;4904331 said:400 yrs after Jesus dies...this was written...
about as valid as the rest of the bible...who knows?
*waits for christians to come and shit on this*
![]()
It was from the 4th century so probably closer to 300 years after Jesus died. That's not that big a deal considering the accepted Gospels were written around 200 years after Jesus died.
I don't think this find is all that significant really. There are a bunch of books that say things about Jesus that aren't widely accepted. This article references the Gospel of Mary Magdalene and I'm pretty sure that book suggests that Mary was either his wife or close to it.