[Still2Updt] Oneness Of Flesh & Dating "Issue" - Communication & Intimacy Confines of Intersexual Sobriety
***Still to Update & Updating***
Oneness of Flesh & "dating issues/problems" in Overview of Context & Meaning, Communication & Eternaly Intimate Confines
In Spirit and Truth, there is no such thing as "dating" members of the oposite sex, there being "endearment communication" problems in "specification of the nature concerning defined interaction amongst members of the oposite sex.
[PREFACE CONCERNING ONENESS OF FLESH]
What the world considers as "dating", or "courtship", being considered "potential" marriage activity mongst all people, being made in God's image, from Genesis 1:26-27, concerning ONENESS OF BEING, is something that people aught to consider even with the angels adressed by "Let US" when God said "make man in OUR IMAGE", then as he dictated and is written ">>IN HIS IMAGE<< HE MADE THEM, MALE AND FEMALE", which is directly correspondent with the Book Of Revelation Chapter 19 where John almost knelt before the angel to worship him, and THE ANGEL SAID TO HIM "See to it that YOU DO NOT DO THAT, >>>FOR WE ARE FELLOW BRETHREN IN CHRIST<<<, *WORSHIP GOD*, FOR THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST IS THE SPIRIT OF PRPOHECY".
With this understanding from the begining to the end all into eternity, and in the midst of time, between male and female in the flesh manifest on the face of the earth, there becomes the essence of "communication", which INHERENTLY AS WE ARE MADE, we have in Christ, the man made doctrinal world that is corrupt being the only thing that changes anything towards missunderstanding that "BROTHER AND SISTER TRANCEND TO BECOME ONE FLESH",(singularly), just as Adam said when God took a rib from Him and presented The First Woman, "Eve later named", before so having shared namesake WITH HER ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING (Just because he hadn't yet called her "Eve" DOES NOT MEAN that she was not yet his other half of being, HIS FIRST WORDS SAYING OF HER "This is Bone of My Bone and Flesh Of My Flesh", even revealing concerning the rest of mankind, "FOR THIS REASON, A MAN AND A WOMAN (initialy brother and sister in spirit and truth, wether having not shared the same womb, close "geneology", or "the same"<something the worlds ideology can fail to understand and terms negatively>) : WILL/SHALL : "LEAVE THEIR MOTHER AND FATHER" (it does not say "house", or "financial capacity", or "social/laborious confines", but means "INTIMACY<obviously not sexual of any kind knowing a girl child develops bodily significantly as well as should be with from parenting, the self oriented understanding of being a female, the same for a male, and AT THEIR OWN MUTUAL LIBERTY OF TWO AS AND IN SUCH COMMITMENT should be celebrated, facilit-ably considered by the "loin-age from" and all surrounding community, as well as understood by their mutual commitment) AND BECOME BECOME ONE FLESH.
[REVISING BIBLICAL REFFERENCE TO "MARITAL MATTERS" - "BEING GIVEN IN MARRAIGE" VERSUS 'BEING AS THE ANGELS']
With that said, not suposed to sound ackward for sakes of worldly teaching which seems politicaly correct in its many terminologies such as "no sex before marraige", focusing it's thinking that the binding of oneness of being is within simply and as if "most importantly" the "ceremonial" <it could be walking down an aisle handed to by father/brother/mother/sister-such is "GIVEN"> oriented by a ring on a finger and a certificate, other people think of the concept of what is known and identifed what some would do in the old testament as "dowry", concerning "payment" to parentals or relative geneology concerning anything to do with the union, and variations of these which are actualy similar e.g. those that term "when ones brother's wife passes on, he becomes her sister's husband, or when a sister's husband passes on she automaticaly becomes her brother "in-law's wife" (the problem with this concerning "even if they are priorly married", using any "if not's as though any kind of excuse concerning this being a "Law", and not communaly honouring ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING, such "re-marrying" (WHICH IS ONLY SOMETHING OF MAN MADE DOCTRINE, IN CHRIST WITH GOD THERE IS FIRSTLY THE 1ST RESURECTION) - (Revelation19-20) and seccondly ETERNITY OF THE NEW, HEAVENS AND NEW EARTH (Revelation 21 & 22) - the Promise that is and is to come, the nature of which is also in the 1st Resurection, EVEN NOW, AS IT HAS BEEN FROM THE BEGINING <as Jesus said when "trick question-ed by the pharisees and saducees concerning a woman whom had 5 husbands whom passed away one after the other and lastly herself, who's wife she will be, his answer "neither, none of the unions having been on the basis of, or understanding FAITHFULNESS INSIDE AND OUT, ETERNAL ONENESS OF BEING AND THE REALITY, but we're infact TJOSE VERY KINDS OF "DOWRY BASED"/geneological inheritance maintainance reason for marriage/material possesion and the "children" portion of there having been none amongst the 5 brothers also noting from the answer for any that have had past relationships where one has DEPARTED FROM THEM HAVING HAD CHILD OR MULTIPLE CHILDREN, which in some cases can be from multiple relationships WHERE THE PERSON OR PEOPLE KEPT CHANGING THEIR MIND ABOUT EACH UNION FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAT.<as noted by Jesus concerning divorce-SEXUAL IMORALITY1-Corinthians7-departure>
Looking at matters of "RAPE in The Bible
[having been raped (DOESN'T INDICATE A WANT FOR IT)]-There are too many diviert-ant discrepancies of man made description between the use of the word "Rape" in Genesis34 and other considered reffences, "The Dinah Incident" of Genesis 34, which was consentual between the two of any intimate time spent though no details of their conversation and interaction, has the word "rape" translated in the ESV or whatever other than from the KJV which has the word "defiled", THE ONLY THING DEFILED BEING "The Marrying into the same family BASICALY WHAT THE WORLD DESCRIBES AS INCEST (e.g. the inscestual tradition of her expectation OF OTHERS to be GIVEN IN MARRIAGE TO A BROTHER/COUSIN<close or distant designated by bloodline IS WHAT WAS "RAPED/DEFILED">, this evident that "HIS SOUL/HEART CLEAVED UNTO HER AND "wanted to marry her"(this "marriage" now of ceremonial traditional refferencial THEM HAVING ALREADY BECOME ONE FLESH-which is interesting concerning the chapters story IN HIM ACTUALY DOING THE CIRCUMCISION AND GOING BACK WITH HER, one can read the story for the obvious nature of outcome that also reveals this).
This Genesis 34 "The Dinah Incident" is not the same as some many other kinds of actual acounts of rape in the Old Testament Record Keepings, such as amongst the concordance of happeing in the synonymity of Samuel 1( & 2) Kings (1 & 2) and Chronicles (1 & 2), where amidst all the other chaoses exempalary to Elijah dealing with ahab and Jezabel, there is the recorded accoint of the certain prophet's concubine, firstly indicated as a one he took of wife that commited harlotry towards him and herself deaprting even domesticaly to her father, even in his pursuit, when on return with her, her having been molested and sodomised to death outside the door of the old man's house whom he turned in for an overnight, the man's wife as well because this man "gave those sodomites at the door to give them his wife and this prophet's concubine, again concerning Lot's daughters, his wife and himself whom we're molested just before escaping, but his wife turning back, and being left with his daughter's dwelling in a cave, & them doing such imorality to their father, this him being molested and raped by his daughter's in deception, them having lied and it having nothing to do with the wine they made him, which when anyone looks at balak & bakaam/jezabel doctrine, such is the usual basis concerning FOODS SACRIFICED TO IDOLS, not about any food or drink itself, the causing of and believing of lies abusing "respect of persons", sexual engagement and interaction, also any communicability, revealed in Revelation 2-3 HOW MUCH GOD HATES THE NATIONALIZATION <nicoliatan> of this).
For some people that ask more in depth, the answer of Lot's daughters who we're NONSENSICAL to say "since there is no man to bear seed with them" besides their father, IS NOT A REASONING CAPACITY ON ANY LEVEL CONCERNING ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING, and even thinking about them either "not being patient enough to even WAIT FOR FAITHFUL MEN" and just tell themselves that there are none at all <a usual statement concerning people today>, ALL THESE THINGS DO NOT FOCUS ON ANYONE UNDERSTANDING AND REALISING EVEN THE MATHEMATICAL DIRECTIVE OF EITHER MALE OR FEMALE PERSON'S (what the world calls "reproductive/sexual organs) ALL BEING SINGULAR, there no woman with two wombs, or any man with two loins, diverting any reasoning right back to ONE-NESS OF BEING, any "time-frame" only TRYING TO BE LESS THAN ETERNITY, considering that THERE IS NO TIME THAT CAN EXIST WITHOUT AN ETERNITY EXISTING FOR IT TO EXIST IN, OF WHICH ITS LENGTH IS CLEAR IN SUCH UNDERSTANDING.
THE MEANING OF "DATING", COMMUNICATION AND MEANINGFUL ADDRESS IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH CONTEXT OF ANY LANGUAGE
For sakes of understanding "tones of endearment", meaningful use of words and address amongst male and female persons, specificaly concerning "intimate communication", when considering "dating", rather as it actualy is, being the nature of ONENESS OF FLESH.
By Disecting/DISCERNING in Spirit and Truth any matters of Communication, and defining the term "Dating", to reveal 'the dating issue/problem', the wording is "DEFINITION OF SPECIFIC RELATIONSHIP", the confines and kind of intimacy an extention from brother and sister relationship, needing heed to the overall LITERAL MEANING.
Defining "Dating"
When a man says he is "dating a woman", or a woman says "she is dating a man", because worldly man made doctrine acts as though calling it "courtship" seems "politicaly correct", THERE IS NO ESCAPING that "DATING IS TRANCENDING BROTHER AND SISTER RELATIONSHIPS", otherwise any activity done withva singular brother or sister would have to be called DATING, even if it is one taxi driver taking a sister home, from wherever she got the taxi, just because they are the only two, it would end up being the case. Here is the reason why it is not.
People's arguments are ALWAYS based on ALLOWANCE OF "multiple dating(s)", saying that "THEY ARE TRYING TO FIND ANY KIND OF "SUITABLE" PARTNER/PERSON OF THE OPOSITE SEX for "marital purposes", the already evident problem is that the terminology "dating" IN ITSELF >>IMPLIES<< AS THOUGH it is not about oneness of flesh, in the pretence of avoiding commiting to someone's uncomitment, so to term it "dating" in order to "test out intimacy" and decide later if suitable concerning whatever else BESIDES FAITHFULNESS INSIDE AND OUT.
Faithfulness, Fidelity & Inwardly Outworked (Sexual) Commitment of Oneness of Flesh/Being
FAITHFULNESS INSIDE AND OUT, is something which absolutely everyone can do, and are only convinced otherwise of each other or themselves because of unrelated "man made imaginary standards" basing their oneness off flesh and marital commitment ON ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING ELSE BESIDES FAITHFULNESS AND COMMITMENT OF ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING (so many yet to even consider eternity or any kind of forever-ness-THE WORST KINDS IN HOPES OF SOME KIND OF "AFTERLIFE POLITICALY CORRECT SWAPING OF PARTNERS" if at least escaping ideological oblivion <nothingness outcome of time> concerning Life and Existence, time needing Eternity to Exist in order for any measure of it to ever be).
All ulterior/"other" temporary/tenporal reasoning for marital engagement and interaction can range from looks or apearances, money and material wealth, appearance concerning other people of geneological family and community or society, dreams/hopes/want or reality of childbearing (which are infact a fruit of the intimatcy's faithfulness and commitment), all sorts of kinds of "status" that cause there to be NEED FOR ANY OTHER INITIAL REASONING besides Faithfulness and Commitment which is What God Has Given all as THE MARRIAGE BED between a single man and woman concerning the given interaction of ONENESS OF FLESH & BEING.
If speaking of any concerns about testifyable and shareable past history or other concerns of INFORMATIONALY AND EXPERIENTIALY "GETTING TO KNOW" ABOUT ONE ANOTHER, THIS STILL ACCOMPANIES AND RESIDES WITHIN THE INITIATED REASONING FOR SO CALLED "DATING", being IN PURSUIT OF oneness of flesh intimacy, why it even expressed of adam or anyone biblicaly written using the word "knowing"/"knew" His Wife (this meaning the act of reproductive sexual activity, not meaning he did not know who she was or about her), additively speaking because concerning people today and their fears of communication and time spent, and should consider that both and experiential informational knowledge is shared over time, confirmations and such provided FIRSTLY BY THE TWO TO EACH OTHER (Assuming both are ENTIRELY HONEST AND HAVE NOTHING TO, AND WILL NEVER WANT TO HIDE ANYTHING FROM O.NE ANOTHER), since there is no other closer connection of people, other's perhaps possibly dishonest and destructive to these oneness of flesh and being interactions of others, "informationaly" and experientialy this absolutely becomeing AN ONGOING THING, EVEN IF TWO PEOPLE WE'RE TO KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT EACH OTHER FROM CONCEPTION OF THE WOMB TO THE POINT OF DECIDING ANYTHING CONCERNING MARITAL ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING INTERACTION, the only refference and mater of necesity is ABSOLUTE, COMPLETE, UN-AUGMENTED/BIASED/OPINIONATED ENTIRE AND NEVER ENDING TRANSPARENCY, both parties of the male and female considering "oneness of being", analog-icaly "does not make sense for a person to keep what is in the left side of their brain from the right side of it.
When someone has begun DATING, that means ALREADY, there is a CONSIDERABILITY, to even date the person and "find out more about them", THIS BEING AN ACTUAL GROUNDS CONCERNING INTIMACY, LITERALY FOUNDED IN THE WORD "DATING", WHICH EQUATES TO THE MIND AND HEARTS DESIRE TOWARDS (the PROBLEM is the back and forth, back and forward "should i, should i not), and any capacity of reasoning BASIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP FROM THE HEART AND SOUL'S FOUNDATION, a usualy worded question is "can i commit to this person", the truth being that "EVERYONE CAN ETERNALY COMMIT TO A PERSON ETERNALY COMMITING TO THEM IN RECIPROCAL SPIRIT AND TRUTH WHOLE-HEARTEDNESS BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM MUTUALY WITH NO ONE OR ANYTHING ELSE'S PROVOKATION (not even circumstancial reasoning or anything attached to it), BUT THEIR MUTUAL CONSENT, BEINT THE MARRIAGE BED WHICH <GOD HIMSELF HONOURS>, also noting that oneness of flesh is the greater "two where the Spirit of God is", in any physical question of "where there are two or more, there is the lord's spirit", this going for them no matter what physical demographic they are at, them no longer being two but one, no man able to separate them even by force, the actual people in oneness of flesh relationships FROM THE INSIDE OUT <of this very mutuality ARE THE ONLY MENTION IN "let no man", as they don't, NO OTHER BEING ABLE TO DO SO EITHER>.
COMMUNICATION IN EXAMPLE OF - Tones of Endearment:
The world:
The way the world corruptively teaches of them is "bluring the lines of any specification" concerning words used in communication, something obviously done by members of both the same and oposite sex.
A Basic List of IDIENTIFICATION can be as thus between 3 (Male, Female, & General Person), as will always start with "Male & Female":
-Male, Boy, Man, Brother, Father (Meaning Male Parent)
-Generaly For all Person's only indicating Age : "Baby" (meaning or indicating a new born), "Child" (younger person), "Person" (being 'in general' of both male and female)
-Female, Girl, Woman, Sister, Mother (meaning female parent)
(****HEART-SOUL-SPIRIT AND TRUTH DISCLAIMER****):
For anyone that can understand when the actual words "Brother" and "Sister" are used yet people's hearts and intention being otherwise, IT IS ENTIRELY AND EXTREMELY EASY TO DIFFERENCIATE concerning the same exposing in "CONTEXTUAL MEANINGFULNESS", in example of "physiology's" thinkiny as though soft toned low volume communication means, speaks, and signifies peace and love, the volume of "i hate you" being low does not make it respectful, presentable, decent or acceptably good in any comparison, the words "i love you" at high volume "heavy rock n roll metal vocal screaming tone" do not make them angry, violent, disrespectful or indecent, the same way someone saying "i love you" and meaning in their heart that they hate you is still evil, and someone saying "i hate you" and trying to "infer" or explain they mean that they love you, is rather particular between a deed done and the person having this said to, in the wording, no differentiation made of clear meaning between the two, for the most of anyone understanding that "from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks", understands as well the inversly seeming reveal of the phrase "actions speak louder than words", this ultimately meaning "words produce actions, our own ears EVER THE CLOSEST TO OUR MOUTHS than those of others even if they we're screaming right into them, loud speakers, earhpones or headphones, again bringint forth the abundance of the heart that we are intentively made in Christ by God being Light and not darkness of otherwise.
From this basic is where now, any kind of "ENDEARMENTS APPLY with MEANINGFULNESS":
Basic Tones Of Endearments can vary as such:
(This is for the sakes of modern english, & meaningfuly-usefuly applies for others)
**Note that these below are ATTACHED TO THE ABOVE to conclude meaning**
Blessed,
Dear,
Beloved,
Loving
(if they are actualy being loving, knowing they are fully capable of being so made in God's image)
Lovely
Sweet
Darling
Special
(everyone is special, no need to argue that "no one is special because everyone is special"
It is best for now to keep this list as is, a few other words to note for example, that some would/do use :-
-Nice
-Jolly (Usualy defining happy or identifying one's cheerfulness),
Cool
-meaning "good" and not covetously competetively feroucious to cause jealousy towards others by charachter and description of actual nature
"Dope"
-not suposed to mean 'druging-ly adictive' and causing forgetful drunkeness in harlotry because of them <"dope guys-girls/dudes-chicks">
[dude's having come from refference to male horses, & chicks from the latin spanish worded slang of "chic(k)ita" (later refferenced concerning "chickens", but the female of "hens laying eggs"), frankly speaking, these "pop-initialy", or at times used for harlotry male or female derivatives (by those who engaged in fornical drunken parties), "dudes" by the time of 'popularizing the sport of the surfing watersport, and 'chicks' for the same between "surfer dude(s)", and "surfer chicks"]
What the World uses from the "Basic List(s) of endearment" given above that the world uses WITHOUT SPECIFICATION, TEACHING THE NON-SPECIFICATION SPECIFICALY TOWARDS ONLY THE OPOSITE SEX <there is proof in examing the uses & attempted excusability>:
Here are examples from the above:
(-) Blessed -> Knowing we are all blessed people in Christ, of course.
(-*-) Beloved -> I am starting with this one as well because of it's biblical use IN THE MULTIPLE but being Beloved of God, also that "Beloved means 'Loved' ", which some have attempted to put in the context of the use of the slanged word "Lovey" from it, & give in context of the point, "Lovey" already in question between men only or women only aside from what Beloved would be concerning "Group Adress", usualy in letter form or adressed towards multiple public amongst, which Biblicaly and thankfuly always means "Beloved by God". (There would be need for more written to give the fullness of the point)
(1) :[ "Dear" *blank* ]: from a brother to a sister, or a sister to a brother, "Yes Dear" so often used by husband and wife in acknowledging response to one another, "My Dear" as well in its adressing of one another, though "My Dear" often attemptedly used in context concerning the elderly adressing younger people, often caught in use amongst the same sex.
(2) :[ Darling *blank* ]: from a brother to a sister, or a sister to a brother, if indeed innocent of any sexual bias or intimate trancending above brother and sister, simply "darling" > on its own < for two males of adult age to use amongst each other would be considered normal, yet it is never done so comfortably or appropriately.
(3) :[ Sweet *blank* ]: does not quite go anywhere, across the board, from a brother to a sistet, or from a sister to a brother, otherwise needing to pre-preface itself with "My" then "Sweet", needing specific identification between "brother" or ""sister".
Some of the world's endearments of "BLURINESS" (which consist of much harlotry IF NOT SPECIFICALY AND SOLELY BETWEEN ONENESS OF FLESH):
(1) Sweety
-This word was used popularly during times of its prior listed "sweet", being a "commentary" endeared "word to describe" concerning the deeds, words, or kind of person that someone was, "what a sweet person", perhaps being helped with something, "oh that was sweet of him/her/them" for the same reason, maybe told that they loved those commenting as such, it being "enphasized" by use of the word "sweetest", usualy in the same sort of description of deeds, doing, or kind of person, an obvious disintegration of concern for the most on this specific portion of understanding, "sweetest" meaning "most sweet", in other words "in-comparable to none", the uses of sentences such as "...the 'sweetest' male/female....", often concluded with "....i've ever met....", ".....i've ever seen....", other obvious indications of suffixing with ".... i've ever dated...", or ".... i've ever been with....", will now be broken down to pieces of blatency concerning what some innocently call normal in the "male to female/female to male" endearment of "best", for the most use as "best friend", when anyone looking at the word "friend, this suposed to mean 'brother or sister' OTHER THAN ONES ONENESS OF FLESH", it is interesting how even in comparison to Jesus' closest 12 known as "disciples", that they we're all males just like him, which brings us in definition of "defin-ance", that when now adressing cross sexual communication "male to female or female to male", there cannot be a "best friend" of male sort, that is closer/better than ones oneness of flesh as a woman, nor for a male having a "best friend" closer than his oneness of flesh, ALL OTHERS FOR BOTH OF THESE ARE SISTERS AND BROTHERS, any distancing, untrustworthiness, or "enem-izing" only able to come from those who consider themselves such, the words "best friend", as anyone has ever used them, if firstly according to male best friends of a or males, would describe those whom are trustworthy even with vulnurable intimate secrets that only actors of wickedness would take advantage of, them being, once again, BROTHERS, to this brother considering them such, or each other amongst, IF EVER NOW ANY REFFERENCE CONCERNING SISTERS OR FEMALE'S, there would need to be answer for any trancendance FROM TRUSTABLE REGULAR SISTER JUST AS ALL OTHERS AMONGST, ALSO THE SAME AS BROTHERS, the issue with this "best" trancending, THE EXACT SAME MATTER CONCERNING "THE DATING ISSUE/PROBLEM" adressed in this writting and truth of the utmost, where infact DATING IS ALREADY ENGAGEMENT OF ONENESS OF FLESH, IN ITS EXCLUSIVITY, MEANING, AND TERMINOLOGICAL UNDERSTANDING, any suposed concepts of "speed dating" not making sense, "online dating", or what some term "long distance relationships"(which are ever only temporary AND MEANT TO IMEDIATELY BE FACILITATED FOR AND CELEBRATED MOST IMPORTANTLY AND MUTUALY BY THE TWO INVOLVED) only in answer of THE OPENESS, COMMITMENT FAITHFULNESS AND FIDELITY BETWEEN THE TWO OF EACH OTHER'S MUTUALITY AND HONESTY, CONFIRMABLE FOR EACH OTHER BY EACH OTHER IN CHRIST AND GOD.
(2) Sugar/"Shug"
- the history of the endearment "sugar" came from times of infidelity where certain fornic-al neighbour's wives or husbands <regardless of race> in the united states would either when, or create as if they ran out of sugar, in order to "ask the person next door" of the oposite sex whom was either a supposed husband, wife, or "struggling/succeful bachelor" of "helpfulness" in this small gesture, truly a "front" for infidelity and fornication, multiple reports of "how long it takes to ask for and receive a cup of, or a little portion of sugar", at times after its "trending", being used by the actual neighbours purposefuly concocting forced entry into the houses that we're asking for sugar to make it less or "suspectfuly overnight" missing, whichever way the biased suspicion, reality, or imposition was to force the person "to ask for some sugar", the word now sometimes used in the phrase "....give me some sugar....", suposed to be strictly between the confines of oneness of flesh, meaning the want of "sexual intimacy", at times a kiss on the cheeck in form of what is termed "PDA" Public Display of Affection, but in the sorts of "Love Parading itself" concerning "inordinate affection", not having anything to do at all with the two involved showing each other affection, but in order to purposefuly stir up jealousy and sexual covetousness using/according to/by/beacause of seeing the sexual intimacy of another's oneness of flesh and being displayed, this beint entirely different from any preaching the word of God concerning knowingcthat oneness of flesh is an eternal affair and reality, displaying actual faithfulness IN REALITY (and not an act of social porn/provokation), where even in Proverbs 31 are basic examples knowing one's fruit of the womb and the caring for any part of household amongst community of brothers and sisters in christ young and old even those younger from the loins of others, why there is mention of the womans works of her hands and making of tapestry, the husband being "known in the gates", for both sakes of what anyone knows about them, even if not having mention of any children, their faithfulness and fidelity, the sexual confines of their intimacy not public, their apearing together, at any time each alone and amongst other people having no publication of their nakedness and union of that oneness of flesh, loving God and loving their neighbours as they love themselves and each other.
(3) Honey/Hunny/Hun/Hon
-The History of Honey is similar tc that of "sugar" and the prior listed "sweety" with their timeline variations, now commonly used to prefix brother or sister, just as "dear brother", or "dear sister", "blessed brother" or "blessed sister", with due cautioun of course towards elements of the actual nature.
(4) Baby
-This obviously supoosed to be strictly for the confines of oneness of flesh and being communication, given the nature of "child borne of the endeared use of the word", "baby" in refference concerniny new born children male or female, one at an age of being a child, youth, or adult, cannot be calling any other person "baby", which is not excusable concerning peoples use of the word "baby" in sentences like "dont be a cry baby", or "dont be a baby" seeming in refference towards adressint or actualy supposing immaturity, but rather truthfuly insulting anyone's growth in experience and knowledge of anything concerning their reaction perhaps being emotional.
(5) Babe
-"Babe" again strictly concerning the confines of oneness of flesh and being, at times used for animals, for example those still feeding at any "baby stage", but this having come across as a "slang" derogitory, that in the same context and use of "Baby", still applies to communicating "bearing of child between communication and communicators".
(6) Boo
-This, before the latter mentioned "bae", was a recent modernization of very darkened mixing of suposed reference towards oneness of flesh and being, use of the word "boob" concerning "Mamaries" being of a females chest/breast(s), somewhere-a-time used as a derogitary reference for someone of foul mood/attitude/tresspass of others in commentary sentences such as "...what a boob...", in the same context of what would be the equivalent of "...what a jerk...", suposed to remain in its confines of oneness of flesh and being given this break down, yet used profanely often during multiple sexual intersectings or fornication and sexual imorality, using the reference in the utmost "LOOSEST fashion", during the same time and period of the outright public mongering or harlotry and red-light district lifestyle, with the same word used for "female dog" reffering to women, this word being used as a massive cover-up public communication to apear as though otherwise, yet for the most indefinately the oposite. Many attempts at "cleansing any use of this word" failed concenring the popularized fornic-al ongoing use, though there we're few whom kept it in such presumably designated confines.
(7) Bae
-Again, from the same kind of "manifest" as "Boo", with the same issues surrounding contextual use and people's individual definition, all the same NEVER ABLE TO EQUATE TO "BROTHER OR SISTER" for its coming from "Baby", "Babe", "Boo" also in the same context.
Contextual Conclusive Spirit And Truth Reality Overall
In this overal given reality of information above, the two outstanding exposings of "Best Friend" being used for members of the oposite sex, nothing being closer than brother or sister other than ones other companion of eternal oneness of flesh/being, the seccond consistency of any of the worlds ideologicaly "normal" tones of endearment as though sincerely innocent, for example "darling, sweety, hunny, baby", for the sakes of the 3rd component being of "identification and specification" between "darling and sweet" being either "darling brother", or "sweet sister", the first sobering "ideological breaker" consists of the idea of "Beauty", when someone see's people, firstly to note 'individual address' and "POINTING OUT" of members of THE SAME SEX, to bring to any realisation as a man or woman for any reason (which should be known and is with reasonable outworking and follow-through) to say to them SPECIFICALY OTHER THAN ANYONE ELSE that they are Handsome/Beautiful, remember here we are starting with members of the same sex, if this normal, then for men to always and at every initial meeting between a day's passing, address each other as "Handsome", let alone "Beautiful", OF WHICH IN SUCH REALITY MEANING **EVERY SINGLE PERSON YOUNG OR OLD**, only such making sense, because "all are Beatifuly and Fearfuly as well as wonderfuly made in God's image in Christ Jesus".
The Next step of seeing the issue, is concerning member's of the oposite sex, and within the entire context of adressing Beauty/Handsom-ness, where the "refferencial" is coming from, the most "obvious-ness/obviou-c-ity" that the world considers being that of "outward apearance", as though "some are beautiful and others ugly", with in-between "debates or arguments concerning 'how', 'where', insulting 'why' and 'where' ".
In the context of the world's idea of the word "Sexy"(which in words, is an address of admiration for the sexual confines of others), this being made out to be as though a "common" word usage for anyone or everyone, already knowing what the word "sex" means in description, firstly of the kind of person male or female, the meaningful identic forwarding of "sexy", identifying one's communicational adress towards SPECIFICALY the person's sexual orient of being, it obviously being a "subliminal concern" of anyone's oneness of flesh otherwise of them being male or female, when "if a male", considering as though this is speaking of any innocent beauty's identification, AGAIN JUST AS ACROSS THE BOARDNESS, people should be able to say to their own mothers such tone of endearment with the same word's identification of context, grandmothers, grandfathers, and all the way down the line in accordance, where IN ALL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF GOD IN CHRIST JESUS AND TRUE BEAUTY, it is "as though" gone unsaid to have to "EMPHATICALY (emphasizingly) SPECIFY" such address for anyone INDIVIDUALY ABOVE OTHERS, OTHERWISE BEING A NECESSARY CONSCIENE AND ONGOING FOR EVERYONE INCLUDING NEW BORN BABIES, the words "a beautiful chair" in appreciation of someone's craftmanship of making a chair, and frankly the word itself TOTALY OUT OF BOUNDARIES will consider "more or less" for the chairs "objective", more so "AMONGST PEOPLE", who's SEX is designated of such "trancendance" only in the confines of oneness of flesh and not amongst brothers and sisters or any other people.
The same concept of "best friends" concerning members of the oposite sex, concerning those who have "PREFFERENCIAL BIAS TOWARDS members of the oposite sex", with as though casual "statings" such as, if being a man, "i prefer to spend time with females because ALL MEN are liars/thiefs/cheats/harlots" WHICH IS NOT TRUE, not one person being made that way, and even if ever surrounded by as any many, FOREVER SO NOT ALL ARE INFACT THESE WAYS, the same going for Women's preferencial of the same sort, with the same sort of "stating" and reasoning conclusion(s), these often (if HONESLTY DISCERNED BY THEMSELVES) signs of being in want of a husband or wife as ETERNAL ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING JUST AS WE HAVE ALL BEEN MADE PREDESTINELY AND ACCORDINGLY WITH OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN'S HONOUR UPON THE MARRIAGE BED OF FAITHFULNESS AND FIDELITY, only the devil and spiritual adversity hating every and any person's REALITY OF SELF AWARENESS, SELF KNOWLEDGE OF THIS, SELF CONTROL, ETERNALY MUTUAL SELF COMMITMENT, and thus-forth REALISATION OF CHRIST IN THEMSELVES AND THEY IN CHRIST OF OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN AND HIS ANGELS, OUR FELLOW BRETHREN AND SISTEREN IN CHRIST MADE IN HIS VERY RIGHTEOUS ETERNAL IMAGE.
The last "adressable aspect" being "comparison of oneself to others", when Christ Jesus Himself, God's Spirit in the flesh amongst us CAME TO SERVE US AND TO PREFER EACH OTHER, if in comparison to him, still in him serving us through our service amongst one another, this not being a "you are more beautiful than I am", but God Himself telling us we are Just as Beautiful as He Is, even Christ not considering it "robery" to be "equal with God", whom in Himself as just noted CAME AS EQUAL TO US, even written and "a little lower than the angels".
1 Peter 3:3 is clear that Beauty IS OF >>THE INWARD MAN<<, WHOM IS RENEWED IN CHRIST, SPEAKING OF THE HEART AND OUTWORKING OF ONESELF AMONGST.
The world's idea of beauty is based on "selective/selected/man made/varying-divisive-dividing-opinionated/niche-ly-partialy biased" KINDS of outward apearance, always based on "temporary trending of such" whatever it may be.
This is not anywhere the same as biblical mention of "comely members" (some making attempts at comparing this wording with meaning "outward beauty" for sakes of the word "comely") speaking of the body of Christ's individual amongst collective numerous "duties/positions/individual placements" on the face of the earth in spirit and truth amongst one another, some making it seem as though trivial <basic examples> to sing and dance containing the gospel, some making it seem trivial to seek those who are hungry or thirsty even just for basic things each passing day, finding anyone that needs transportation even to the least, communication, any kind of facilitation one might have for others/another at whatever time, yet ongoingly, God has made people who love doing all these things in life for and to His Glory, even just the eating of someone's cooking whom passionately loves and enjoys cooking for other people, all in all as Sheep in Christ *Hungry, Thirsty, Naked, Homeless, Daily Visitation of The Sick and Imprisoned* being our nature in all we do, even informationaly, teaching which can have word(s) of knowledge, helping of others whom lack even basic company and general interaction or specific experiences in life that we can provide or help at any time, THIS BEING THE OUTWORKING OF LOVE from 1 Corinthians 12-14.
All in all understanding that our sisters are our brothers' other halves and oneness of being each one eternaly, and our brothers are our sisters' other halves of oneness of flesh and being each one eternaly, young or old, even those from our own loins (NEVER BEING ONE FLESH WITH THE FRUIT OF OUR LOINS KNOWING CHILDREN ARE AN HERITAGE TO THE LORD), GOD AS WELL THEIR FATHER JUST AS MUCH AS OURS NO MATTER THE AGE EVEN UNTO ETERNITY IN CHRIST.
We find the truth of Life in the Lord's prayer in the Words "On Earth As it is in Heaven", any consideration of the reason for any schisms amongst mankind being any people that promote or side with evils that are ungodly (un-Heavenly), an obvious portion within the same context and consideration of what the problem is concerning "the dating issue", even that which people term in concern about "sex before marriage", of which there can be no such thing, since the understanding of Eternal Oneness of Flesh and Being which is marriage/union/unification of a man and woman in God's Eyes just as 1Timothy4 speaks of these time having people commanding/teaching people against "*ETERNAL* ONENESS OF FLESH & BEING", even though the word used is "marriage", and correctly so without the word "GIVEN" as Jesus Himself spoke of when saying "...they are as the angels, for they are NOT 'GIVEN IN MATRAIGE'....", the clear difference between mutualy consented and commited "MARRIAGE", and ceremonialy aproved by any other 3rd party besides the man and woman in answer of Union, is precisely why so many fail to understand that there is no such "THE ONE", apart from that person being "THE ONE WHOM YOU AND THEY MUTUALY AND ETERNALY COMMIT TO INSIDE AND OUT", God Honouring the mutuality and commitment by the MUTUAL CHOICE AND COMMITMENT IN COMMUNION OF UNION.
This is why again, that concept of "the one", when termed and presented by the world's attempted understanding, always using OTHER ELEMENTS of Comparison and consideration for anyone's "idea" of what that means for a relationship, WHICH ARE ALL BESIDES AND OTHER THAN THE FAITHFULNESS AND FIDELITY IN UNDERSTANDING OF ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING, biblicaly with Spirit and Truth and reality's acknowlegement of ETERNITY ITSELF, which completely changes from all the Short-come "Temporal Reasonings" that anyone even consists their considerable reasoning towards the heart and mindfulness concerning ONENESS OF FLESH AND BEING, this ETERNAL REALITY BEING THE PIVOTAL FRUITION OF FOUNDATION concerning the Peace and Sanctity of what such Mutuality actualy is, all this being of and in Christ of course.
This also why the overcoming of temptation necesary of life on earth in this time, knowing there is always the door of escape even if any attempts are ever presented, which in the very companionship's REASON FOR EXISTING AND ITS COMPRISING EVEN EXACTLY FOR THAT VERY SAKES OF OVERCOMING SUCH, 1Corinthians7's introductional words "...because of fornication (IN THE WORLD'S MAN MADE DOCTRINES/REALM) Let Each Man Have His Owm Wife, and/that Each Woman Have Her Own Husband...", the words "...because of fornication..." NOT MEANING "the reason for a man and woman to become one flesh is 'because of fornication' " as if to suggest that "if there was no fornication on earth, even then there would be no reason for marraige", but understanding anyone AS ALL IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH DO ACKNOWLEDGE AND EMBRACE the knoweldge of their Predestinate Ordinance of being either a male or female of Oneness of Being Destiny in Christ, wether in this present time desiring to remain as they are, or chosing to engage in the mutual consented commitment of eternal oneness of flesh and being WHICH GOD HONOURS amongst all brothers and sisters, even the Heavenly Angels with the same kind of oneness of being whom are our fellow brethren and sisteren in Christ (An Angel consisting of "ONE MALE AND ONE FEMALE", God's Head Count being "1 male and female, 2 male and female, 3 male and female, 4 male and female).
-----------------
#Revelation18SnapBack
#RevelationMusicFam
#RevelationMusicFamily
#RevelationMusicZim