and.. POOF! Suddenly all the pauls (not including Pail or Theo) are duck taped to FRONT ROW SEATS TO HAMILTON!
— 🎰
no... NO NO.... NOOOOO -☕️/🔪/🐈⬛/🕔
seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from Hong Kong SAR China
seen from Canada

seen from Russia
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Yemen

seen from Germany
seen from Syria

seen from China
seen from Türkiye

seen from Spain
seen from Romania

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Türkiye
seen from Russia
seen from Brazil
and.. POOF! Suddenly all the pauls (not including Pail or Theo) are duck taped to FRONT ROW SEATS TO HAMILTON!
— 🎰
no... NO NO.... NOOOOO -☕️/🔪/🐈⬛/🕔

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
January 6, 1995
Young Aaliyah is interviewed by the contentious UK television program "The Word" in Detroit, Michigan. Throughout the interview, she is seen wearing a Southern University Jaguars hockey jersey.
While Aaliyah believes the interviewers are seeking insights about her album, they are actually intent on discussing the recently surfaced marriage certificate to boost their show's ratings and delve into her past relationship with her former producer, despite Aaliyah's team explicitly requesting that such topics be avoided.
Research indicates that "The Word" was often controversial and, at times, quite distasteful towards its guests and even the audience members.
I appreciate the 1990s, yet I detest how the media attempted to portray Aaliyah as nothing more than a seductress. At just 15 years old, she faced undue scrutiny, while her former producer was lauded as a virtuous figure.
Video footage from AaliyahDaily via Youtube.
Tim's being a bit insufferable...Love the 'Hi Jack!' part to bits though. Should-not-have-cutted-out-bug 🪳
From The Lord, Our God and Savior ✉️
THE ONE WORTHY OF ALL PRAISE - "YAH has spoken it into being, YAHUWAH caused it to be!"
“Thus says The Lord God of Israel: The Days of Noah are here, the Day of The Lord has come in; and behold, the Great and Dreadful Day is very near!...
Therefore hear the Word of The Lord, O peoples of the earth, and gain wisdom: Are not the mountains risen up at the Word of My mouth? Do not the highest peaks break through the clouds at My command? Are not the depths carved out by My knowledge, and the seas filled according to My will? Who causes the clouds to gather together and bring forth rain? Who calls forth the wind from its place and stirs up the hurricane? Who speaks to the horrible mountain, causing it to burst forth, to spew its fervent heat? It is I who has done it, The One who formed it, The One who causes to be! My children, look upon the stars, upon the whole of the heavens, consider the vastness thereof, and know: YAH has spoken it into being, YAHUWAH caused it to be! Behold, I have spread out life like a blanket, and caused it to multiply in all the earth; life fills every corner! And still mankind seeks out its beginnings and longs to know its source, asking in vain, “Where did I come from, and why are we here? From what source did all this life come, and how did it get here? What is the beginning, and how will it end?” Blind and hard-hearted generation, deceived and ignorant peoples, foolish children, LIFE HAS A NAME! The Beginning and The End has walked among you! The Source and The Reason is here, and shall also come in great power and glory! From Him did you come forth, and to Him must you return, all you, His beloved. Behold, His names are many and wonderful![1] That which He is has no end, for as I AM so also is He! The Father and The Son are one, and our name, one - YAHUSHUA-YAHUWAH!
In the beginning was The Word, and The Word Was with God, and The Word was God; The same was in the beginning with God...
Through Him all things came into being, And nothing in all creation was made apart from Him...
In Him was life, and The Life was the light of men; The Light shines in the darkness, And the darkness shall not overcome it...
And behold, The Word became flesh...
Immanu El!”
▶️ Volume Six Video-Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE8FlkxQPQkPq8VQsKdAQxdkiIuP0i4Fb

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
#verseoftheday #Bible #Bibleverse #votd #TheWord #Jesus #JesusChrist #JesusisLord #SonofGod #BibleStudy #JesustheMessiah #JesusMessiah #JesusIsAwesome #FollowJesus #SeekGod #hallelujah #trustGod #faith #trustGodbro #JesusIsRisen #HeIsRisen #ChristIsRisen #Peace #PrinceofPeace #Kingofkings #Lordoflords #hope #fyp #explore #explorepage https://www.instagram.com/p/Cpp_SdXuGgB/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=
Was the Word “God” or “a god” in John 1.1?
By Bible Researcher Eli Kittim 🎓
John 1.1 (SBLGNT):
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς
τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
John 1.1, which is a throwback to Genesis 1.1, aims to define the primordial relationship of “the Word” (i.e. Christ) to God. But certain skeptics have challenged the idea that the fullness of the godhead was in Christ (Col. 2.9), who is said to be “the Word” (i.e. ὁ λόγος). Specifically, Jehovah's Witnesses have raised the argument of “a god” in John 1.1, implying that Christ is a lesser and inferior god that was created. Let’s explore that assertion. John 1.1 is traditionally broken up into three phrases that are separated by commas:
1st phrase: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος,
2nd phrase: καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς
τὸν θεόν,
3rd phrase: καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
First, to suppose that John is talking about many gods, or more than one god, is a theological speculation and a grammatical imposition that is going beyond what is written in the text or what we know about the theology of the Gospel of John.
Second, John *did* mention the definite article τόν in the second phrase, and so he is not obligated to repeat it in the third phrase, as that would be redundant and tautological.
Third, another reason why the third phrase of John 1.1 doesn’t require the definite article (before the term θεός) is because it was already *used* in the second phrase, and therefore it necessarily *carries over.* For example, if I were to write, “I have a pretty good temper, and a very amiable disposition,” I would not be required to repeat the first part of the phrase. In other words, I wouldn’t be required grammatically to write “I have a pretty good temper, and [I have] a very amiable disposition.” The “I have” is *carried over* and doesn’t need to be repeated. It would be considered redundant. Similarly, in addressing τόν Θεόν with a definite article in the second phrase, John doesn’t have to repeat τόν Θεόν in the third phrase, since it is *carried over.* Here’s another example. I could write “God is one being, not two beings.” But that’s redundant. Now, if I were to rewrite the same sentence correctly and say “God is one being, not two,” would anyone argue that the term “two” may not necessarily refer to the concept of being because the word “being” is not mentioned? That’s the same kind of argument that skeptics are raising here in John 1.1.
Since John has already established (as a monotheist) that he’s talking about one (and-only-one) particular God (namely, τόν Θεόν) in the second phrase, then this syntactical construction must necessarily *carry over* into the third phrase. In other words, the term Θεός in the third phrase grammatically refers back to “the God” (τόν Θεόν) mentioned in the second phrase. Therefore, when John writes “τὸν θεόν” (in the second phrase), “καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος” (in the third phrase), the “God” of the third phrase is a direct reference to “the God” of the second phrase. It’s obviously the same “God” in both phrases, not a different one. And given that God is one being, not two, which other god could John be possibly referring to?
In Greek, the third phrase in John 1.1 is actually read in two different ways, not only as “the Word was God,” but also as “God was the Word.” In the third phrase, there’s no ontological distinction between God and the Word——after all, they share one being: “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10.30)——because John already made the distinction (of persons) in the second phrase.
Thus, the “a god” argument of the Jehovah’s Witnesses——which is raised in “The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (NWT)——is totally bogus and unwarranted both grammatically and theologically!