20
Thisisnotanexit 20 points ago +21 / -1

Lord of the Rings original extended trilogy (2001)
Gladiator (2003)
101 Dalmations (1961)

10
Thisisnotanexit 10 points ago +10 / -0

I often think of the knowingly giving allegiance portion of the mark, no one takes it by accident and without knowing who they're serving.. makes ya think

7
Thisisnotanexit 7 points ago +7 / -0

I remember when spaz just meant hyper and kooky, I'm very familar, it's my family's nickname for me, but now I'm a lil spastic too hahaha and I still think it's funny!

6
Thisisnotanexit 6 points ago +6 / -0

Well we're not actually in a Twilight Zone episode, I've checked, but it sure does feel like it, don'it. Do do do do, do do do do

4
Thisisnotanexit 4 points ago +4 / -0

I hadn't thought of it that way but you've hit the nail on the head here. Ooky

-3
Thisisnotanexit -3 points ago +1 / -4

That's a really interesting take that I imagine many will and that makes me wonder other stuff too, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

7
Thisisnotanexit 7 points ago +7 / -0

It's pants with extra pant up top and over your shoulders, it's a full body pant.

2
Thisisnotanexit 2 points ago +2 / -0

I agree with almost everything you've said but Batman did have the power/ability to kill Superman in the Dark Knight Returns part 2, and it was written well, that's my only correction. Sorry we can't have nice things.

2
Thisisnotanexit 2 points ago +2 / -0

I've known Graphe a while but I appreciate your input and careful everyone should be, yes, thank you.

3
Thisisnotanexit 3 points ago +3 / -0

For me, I had to decide that either God is who He says He is or He's a total lunatic and liar to boot.

2
Thisisnotanexit 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ok.
Hope to watch it soon and get back to you. I'd like to keep talking about these things.

6
Thisisnotanexit 6 points ago +6 / -0

I like archealogy so I might see the video, thanks. I actually think it's dangerous to misinterpret God and the bible, and because I'm a very 'something', I've fretted diligently with the Lord for as long as I've been conscious about the nature of Him and me and the world.
God either is or isn't, there is no interpretation and if anyone has wonders and anything, He is taking questions.

Edit: I've heard of the Cathars

5
Thisisnotanexit 5 points ago +5 / -0

If this theory were correct, Jesus would be a liar.
I don't read these gnostic ideas in the tanahk and I try to read what Jesus read as well as the other inspired works of God. (I can glean what He read by what He said, just like I can with authors like Lewis) Doesn't it take a greater jump to imagine the Lord's mind instead of reading what He actually wishes to share with you, the pieces of His mind I mean as well as His nature.
Anything can be misunderstood if you don't know the person behind the words.
To be honest, this idea goes against the nature of who He is and I find it disappointing, even as a thought experiment it does a disservice to Him.

view more: Next ›