all 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 14 points 2 days ago

That's no tattoo, god's in the 'roo style pouch.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago

    I love medieval art, there's nothing better

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 2 days ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago

    Looks like a Shin Megami Tensei demon

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 2 days ago (8 children)

    I like how the mouth is the belly button

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (7 children)

    A seraph presumably has no natural one

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 days ago (6 children)

    I mean they have a mouth hole, two nose holes, and two ear dibbles. I'd be surprised if they dont have other holes and dibbles

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago (5 children)

    Seraphim gotta eat, smell and hear! But they don't gotta get hauled out a vajayjay

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    But, how do we know? Does the bible ever make mention of someone having made a pass at a Seraphim?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    Nephilim are a thing people actually believe in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 child)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim

    The New American Bible commentary draws a parallel to the Epistle of Jude and the statements set forth in Genesis, suggesting that the Epistle refers implicitly to the paternity of Nephilim as heavenly beings who came to earth and had sexual intercourse with women.[34][c] The footnotes of the Jerusalem Bible suggest that the biblical author intended the Nephilim to be an "anecdote of a superhuman race". Superhuman, in this context, refers to the extremity of their wickedness.[d]

    Some Christian commentators have argued against this view, citing Jesus's statement that angels do not marry.[36] Others disagree since Jesus also compared angels to men, thus implying the former's ability to have sex.[37] Angels are also never explicitly described as being incapable of marriage. The absence of marriage among angels can be thus compared to willful celibacy.[38]

    Every time I take a peek into the world of christianity, it looks like a ton of infighting about definitions of who exactly had sex with who, when, how, and why.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago

    Others disagree since Jesus also compared angels to men, thus implying the former's ability to have sex.

    When you're in an overthinking and reading-too-much-into-things competition and your opponent is a Christian 💀

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago

    Fish Gods fear me

  • source