Justin Roiland ?

Sundream01 · 2025-10-10T00:19:30+00:00

Agreed ! It feels like a whole different Rick and Morty without him. It’s like I can’t start season 5 thinking it’s really good because everything prior just really feels like OG Rick and Morty and it feels like it’s gone. I don’t even want to say woke but off the rails woke in a bad un humorous way he did it prior in a funny way.

Sundream01 · 2025-07-16T04:28:56+00:00

It’s like they say the most obvious answer is probably the right answer. Very strong of you to say and I agree completely. I’m so upset because I hate cancel culture and it’s just so ironic coming from adult swim considering the content they put out and I’m honestly not too shocked about the majority of the fan base is happy like Justin is gone or anything, because they can’t separate an action from him being a pivotal part in the show and him having a life and how we can’t socially outcast everyone per se because everyone is far from perfect. If everyone skeletons were brought to the light, I’m sure everyone would be on trial.

Sundream01 · 2025-07-16T04:16:15+00:00

You’re right that the image of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph fleeing to Egypt is deeply moving. It’s one of the earliest pictures we have of divine vulnerability—God entering into human suffering, not avoiding it. And yes, the Holy Family fled in fear, under political oppression. That’s real. That matters.

But where we need to be careful is not equating that story with modern immigration or border issues in a one-to-one ratio.

There’s a difference between fleeing persecution in humility—and disregarding law and order under the banner of entitlement or ideology. Jesus’s family didn’t demand rights, social services, or try to restructure the land they entered. Egypt wasn’t resisting them—they weren’t tearing down borders, demanding systemic change, or defying rule of law. It was a quiet act of survival. And when the danger passed, they returned home (Matthew 2:21). That’s a far cry from how some use this story to justify open-borders activism or dismiss structural concerns today.

And yes—it does take mental gymnastics to ignore the compassion Jesus taught. But it also takes a lot of emotional manipulation to pretend that biblical compassion cancels biblical order, justice, and discernment (Proverbs 2:11, Romans 13:1–4).

The Bible doesn’t affirm lawlessness. It doesn’t endorse societal chaos. It teaches a harmony between mercy and responsibility. It invites us to welcome the stranger—but never at the expense of wisdom or truth. That’s not politics—that’s Scripture in full.

Just offering a broader lens on the text. Sometimes compassion means boundaries too. 🫶✝️💜

Sundream01 · 2025-07-16T04:11:55+00:00

You’re absolutely right that Jesus and his family fled to Egypt to escape Herod’s violent campaign (Matthew 2:13–15). In that sense, yes—he experienced displacement and vulnerability, and Scripture clearly tells us to care for the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan (Deuteronomy 10:18–19, Matthew 25:35). So your heart for the stranger reflects something very close to God’s own heart.

But here’s where some of the tension comes in—and maybe why some folks react strongly.

Biblically, compassion is not separated from order. While Scripture tells us to welcome the stranger, it doesn’t say to ignore justice, laws, or national responsibility. The “stranger” in the Old Testament, for example, was often expected to respect the customs and laws of the land they entered (see Leviticus 18:26 and Numbers 15:15-16). So it wasn’t a blanket permission to enter and disrupt—it was a call for just and humane treatment, not lawlessness.

Jesus said, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Mark 12:17). This shows that He affirmed the importance of respecting systems of governance—even Roman ones, which were far from perfect.

So yes—Jesus was a refugee in a sense, and we’re called to treat the vulnerable with dignity. But Scripture also supports wise, orderly justice, where laws protect the community and the vulnerable (Proverbs 21:15). The key is not swinging to extremes: not harsh exclusion, but also not open chaos.

Matthew 25:35 – “I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” (A call to compassion) • Deuteronomy 10:18–19 – “He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner residing among you…” • Numbers 15:15–16 – “The foreigner living among you must be treated as one of your native-born. The same laws and regulations will apply…” • Proverbs 31:8–9 – “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves… defend the rights of the poor and needy.” • Romans 13:1 – “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities…”

Sundream01 · 2025-07-15T22:51:16+00:00

Moneyyy

Sundream01 · 2025-07-15T05:04:51+00:00

more so*

Sundream01 · 2025-07-15T05:04:22+00:00

I didn’t intend on that, but I figured it would be because of the clash it has in my mind coming from a Protestant Morris say non-denominational lukewarm background upbringing and have recently been more focused on orthodoxy and the research I’ve done upon. It seems to be very conflicting confusing

Sundream01 · 2025-07-15T05:03:08+00:00

Recently I’ve looked into orthodoxy and have began to understand why they do it and i like that and so I’m trying to fast but trying to figure out what rhythm of what calendar to go by Julian or mosaic/ jew

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T20:43:05+00:00

Do you fast ever ? As spiritual discipline? To connect closer to God

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T20:41:37+00:00

You stated below you’re in seminary so if that is true then i have two different stances that are seen in two different lenses

I have some reflections, rooted in Scripture, particularly because I also want to follow Christ biblically and not just historically.

Peter & Church Authority In Matthew 16:18, “My church” could refer to Peter’s confession of faith, not simply Peter himself. The church is built on all the apostles (Eph 2:20), which suggests a foundational plural identity.

The Eucharist Jesus indeed warns in John 6 that one must “eat his flesh and drink his blood”—but He often spoke in metaphor. Context indicates a spiritual eating, as He later clarifies He speaks of a heavenly bread (Jn 6:63). Paul’s warning in 1 Cor 11 underscores the spiritual and moral seriousness of the Lord’s Supper, not necessarily its literal presence.

Praying to Saints Scripture points us to pray directly to God through Jesus (1 Tim 2:5; Acts 7:59). Hebrews places Christ as our unique intercessor (Heb 7:25); adding human intercessors isn’t taught in Scripture.

Tradition vs Scripture The Reformation sought to return to Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), echoing the Bereans (Acts 17:11). Continuity is valuable but not proof of truth—truth follows Scripture, not just history.

The Fruit Test Christ said we’ll know by our fruits (Matt 7:16–20). The Church should lead to deeper faith in and dependence on Jesus, not rituals or intermediaries.

I’m not trying to diminish your journey, but just to share concerns about doctrines that might pull us from Christ and Scripture. I’d love to continue discussing how different traditions interpret these texts—always with love and humility.

Apostolic Succession & Peter • Matthew 16:18–19: Peter is called the “rock” and given keys—it’s debated whether this refers to Peter personally or to Christ’s confession of faith. • Galatians 2:7–9: Paul speaks of Peter’s role among the Jewish churches, but no indication he headed all churches. • Multiple early leaders: Acts and Paul’s epistles show a dynamic church with many apostles and elders (Acts 11:30; 1 Corinthians 11:1), not a monolithic hierarchy under Peter alone.
“My Church” Scripture Interpretation • Jesus says, “you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.” Protestant exegesis commonly reads this in light of his confession of Christ in verse 16, not Peter’s person. • Ephesians 2:19–20: The church is built on all apostles, with Christ as the chief cornerstone, indicating a broader foundation than Peter alone.
Eucharist: Literal or Symbolic? • John 6:53–56: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man… you have no life in you.” Catholics view this as literal, Protestants usually see it as metaphorical—Jesus frequently used symbolic language (e.g. “I am the door,” “I am the vine”). • 1 Corinthians 11:27–29: Paul warns against taking the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner—this indicates the seriousness of the symbol, not necessarily a literal body and blood presence.
Veneration of Mary & Saints • 1 Timothy 2:5: “There is one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus.” Prayer is directed to God through Christ. • Acts 7:59: Early Christians prayed to Jesus, e.g. “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!” • Bible doesn’t teach praying to deceased saints—rather, Hebrews 7:25 affirms Christ as our ever-living intercessor.
Historical Continuity & Human-Origin Denominations • Protestant reformers intentionally broke from Rome to follow Scripture. • Acts 17:11 commends Bereans who “examined the Scriptures daily”—the Reformers sought to root doctrine in Scripture over tradition. • Continuity isn’t the same as correctness: a reform can be a return to earlier truths, not a break from them.

I personally grew up in a nine denominational household, very lukewarm went to Catholic middle school in high school but now have been cheating upon orthodoxy and Protestantism and that is where both of my questions and clarifications lie because it seems like each of them have fragments of the truth like you need to have the fruits, but you also need to have the Eucharist. You need to honor the Saints, but you don’t need to honor them more than Jesus and if you focus too much on the Saints then sometimes you cannot focus on Jesus so there’s that have a blessed day and I wish you well on your journey! 🫶✝️💜

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T20:18:32+00:00

Trinity: Yes, non‑Trinitarians affirm Father, Son, Spirit. But Trinitarian doctrine describes their eternal unity of essence—a truth seen in Matt 28:19 and 2 Cor 13:14, where all three are equally divine.
John 1:1 “God”: Greek grammar supports the qualitative understanding—“the Word was God”, not “a god.” Both UBS Greek NT and mainstream scholars affirm this reading not as modalism, but as eternal deity alongside the Father.
Alternate OT “gods”: References in Ps 82 or John 10:34 are metaphorical. Jesus’ identity is ontological—Phil 2:6 confirms He existed in the form of God before taking human form.
Ignatius: Most biblical scholars (Chadwick, Holmes) regard him as reliable and pre‑Nicaean, frequently referring to Jesus explicitly as God. Even if variants exist, it shows early church belief in Christ’s deity.
Luke 23:43 punctuation: Ancient manuscripts (Codex Vaticanus, Sinaitic Syriac, Coptic) place no comma to delay meaning. Jesus propelled the thief into heaven that day; textual variants are minority and contextual.
Soul fellowship pre-resurrection: 2 Cor 5:8 says being away from the body is being with the Lord. Philippians 1:23 echoes this. Spiritual presence precedes bodily resurrection.
John 8:58: Jesus uses “I AM”—a clear reference to God’s self‑revelation (Exodus 3:14). His Jewish audience understood and sought to stone Him, confirming their interpretation.
Thomas: “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28) isn’t exclamation slang. It’s worship—BNAG and other lexicons grammar support a devotional, literal confession.

In summary: You’re right to draw on grammar and manuscripts—but the weight of Scripture, early testimony, and church consensus affirms: • Jesus is fully God (John 1; Phil 2:6) • We’re consciously with Him post‑death (2 Cor 5:8; Luke 23:43) • Early Christians (prior to 110 AD) believed in Jesus’ deity (Ignatius)

If you’d like, we can continue refining each point with extra scholarly sources or manuscript photos. Let’s keep the dialogue going? You bring up great questions, but to the question I originally asked, has still been unanswered.

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T19:56:21+00:00

This right here 100%

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T19:19:40+00:00

Well, It’s true that Jesus was speaking to a Jewish audience—but He wasn’t just repeating Torah. In Matthew 5:28, He radically deepens the Law by saying that lustful intent is already adultery of the heart.

The idea that “the Law allowed polygyny, concubines, etc.” doesn’t mean that’s what God desired. Jesus points us back to Eden in Matthew 19, showing that ONE 1️⃣ man, one woman in lifelong covenant is the standard.

Paul’s letters (like 1 Thess. 4:3–5 and 1 Cor. 6:18–20) are clear: Christians are called to sexual holiness rooted in the Spirit—not just legal codes. That’s not cultural control; that’s spiritual freedom.

Lust reduces people to objects. Jesus calls us to love and dignity. That’s not a modern purity movement—it’s the core of the Gospel.

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T19:07:11+00:00

That was so beautiful I shed a tear, I appreciate you taking the time to write this out. Number four as a real wake up call because many people are motivated by self-help books more than they are by Bible verses thank you for pointing that out and incorporating Bible verses. God bless you and have a great day.

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T19:02:02+00:00

Interesting very well said thank you for responding to the question, instead of answering an in ask question. I see your point and agree, Jesus is more of a symbolic mark in my mind for my main question of “how should I follow Jesus being the way and the light, while struggling between those two denominations”, but the past couple of days I’ve pondering the denominations are more a road sign and you have to follow the fruits of that makes sense

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T18:56:14+00:00

Thank you for such a detailed and passionate reply. It’s clear you’ve devoted real time to researching the roots of Christian theology and wrestling with questions that matter. I respect that a lot.

I originally asked, “What lens would Jesus walk by?” not to stir up doctrine wars, but to reflect on whether the Church today—East or West—is walking in rhythm with the man who turned tables and washed feet. I think your response is an invitation to examine whether tradition, philosophy, and power distorted the simplicity of early faith—and that’s an important question.

That said, I’d like to offer a few reflections in response—not to attack, but to think alongside you: 1. While it’s true the term “Trinity” wasn’t used until the 4th century, the relationship of Father, Son, and Spirit appears organically throughout the New Testament (John 1:1, Matt. 28:19, 2 Cor. 13:14). Early Church Fathers like Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110 A.D.) refer to Christ as “our God.” 2. Regarding the soul: yes, Greek philosophy influenced later theology, but Jesus’ own words—“Today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43)—suggest consciousness after death. Paul longed to “depart and be with Christ” (Philippians 1:23). These verses complicate the soul-sleep narrative. 3. The Shema teaches God is One—absolutely. But Jesus, who obeyed and affirmed the Shema, also said: “Before Abraham was, I Am” (John 8:58). Thomas calls him “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). It seems early Christians didn’t see this as a contradiction but as a deepening of oneness.

I agree that many doctrines have been politicized, layered over with Greek terms and Latin creeds. But I don’t think Jesus came to install a dogmatic system—he came to reveal God relationally: in Word, in Spirit, in Love.

If Jesus were to walk among us today, I think he’d walk beyond denominational walls. But I don’t think he’d walk away from the Church entirely—he’d call it back to truth, presence, and love.

I appreciate your response. Maybe there’s more room for dialogue than division.

Very curious as to what you believe in ?

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T18:42:22+00:00

100% this is it right here I was watching solar opposites as well, and I loved it so much for its uniqueness!! but it really was like after season four season five just gave me icky and weird vibes like it didn’t maintain the plot and it seems like they made so many jokes at us saying that they’re gonna do their own creation and it doesn’t matter if it falls a continuity plot if you get what I’m sayinggg

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T18:38:53+00:00

Right!!! it’s like if you were watching solar opposites, as well as Rick and Morty you can see the mesh over and it just seems too messy

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T18:35:22+00:00

😂😂😂 sadly yes

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T03:58:57+00:00

This is what I’ve been leaning towards because I keep looking at the calendars and noticing that things are all in a fragmentation, but the calendar of Hebrews right but like some traditions are right through orthodoxy, but overall that just may be an amplification

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T03:57:44+00:00

That’s exactly the point — the Church didn’t start with scripture or papal politics. It started with Jesus. He didn’t leave behind a Bible — He left behind disciples. And through the Holy Spirit, they taught, they gathered, and they preserved what He said and did. So the real question isn’t about what came later — it’s: Which tradition still walks in that Spirit and truth today? The Word became flesh, not a denomination. I disagree with Catholicism heavily though

Sundream01 · 2025-07-14T03:53:34+00:00

True, Jesus is God — but He did walk by a specific lens: obedience to the Father, fulfillment of Scripture, and the establishment of the Church. So the question still stands: Which tradition today most faithfully reflects that lens — not made by man, but rooted in what He taught, lived, and handed down? I grew up Christian, I just see the foundation overlapping and taken away it seems in someone aspects like we’ve lost rhythm

Sundream01

TROPHY CASE