QuickIy, anon! kiss me!

>>26306454
awwwwwwwwwwwwwww

would totally kiss that fox as long as it doesn't bite

>>26306454
this started like a year and a half ago when i just came here and it's still here glad u still post anon

>>26306495

This. These threads always made my day. based foxfucker

File: 1202131 - Braixen Porkyman.png (414KB, 799x930px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 799x930px

>>26306454
why would I kiss this fox? maybe it has rabies or any kind of forest disease, besides he doesn't even look one bit like braixen which I would gladly kiss

>>26306756

because it's a feral semon demon and you want to yiff it

File: ahri.png (624KB, 900x663px) Image search: [Google]

624KB, 900x663px

the only fox for me

In the Bible it's a sin.

>>26306833

so is working on sunday and wearing clothing of two different fabric

>>26306833
Kissing a pet isn't bestiality
>>26306845
>wearing clothing of two different fabric
Ceremonial law fulfilled by Christ

>>26306876
>Ceremonial law fulfilled by Christ
that doesn't make sense

>>26306922
It does
The ceremonial laws are meant to separate the Jews as the people from whom the messiah would come and keep them from adopting pagan practices. The prohibition on mixed fabrics was because pagan priests commonly used them. Now Christ came and fulfilled the law making it unnecessary. That was the point from the beginning

I only do nose to snout with animals, no kissing.

>>26306956
>Now Christ came and fulfilled the law making it unnecessary. That was the point from the beginning

Ok but something rendering a law obsolete does not mean that the law is no longer written and to be abode by. Cops may no longer arrest people for sneezing on tuesday if it were illegal 100 years ago then forgotten, but it is still in fact a law written into your doctrine

FUCCCKKKKKKKK OFFFFFFFF FFUUUUUUUURRRRRRFFAAAAAGGGGGS

>>26307071
>does not mean that the law is no longer written and to be abode by
It is written. And it was written with a purpose that's been fulfilled. We don't need to follow it anymore. There was never any intention for it to be permanent. And you'll find no Catholic doctrine that says it needs to be followed

>>26307102

The worst part of this variety of self-professed furry-haters by far is the fact that they are ignorant of the difference between a furry and a zoophile but care not, since they will tell themselves they are the same and hate one for retaining traits of the other despite that not being inherently true at all, as they are two different things.

>>26307124

Okay mate, just ignore my point completely and instead of even attempting to rebut is just say "okay, but BESIDES that...."

>>26307136
You had no legitimate point

>>26307156

If you must tell yourself that in order to sleep at night then that's fine, but don't assert that to me when my post literally conveyed a singular point and nothing else, and you completely ignored it to say irrelevant bullshit to make yourself feel better about yourself.

>>26307180
You made no point
The law was always meant to be temporary. It being written down doesn't make it less temporary.

>>26307071
Not him, but all you did was prove his point. Just as it is no longer illegal to sneeze on tuesday, it is no longer sinful to wear two different kinds of fabric.

>>26306454
TY LEICESTER FOR MAKING ME $200 LAST NIGHT

Jesus fucking christ, I just typed a fuckhuge post out and accidentally hit backspace and lost everything since I was using the quick reply window.

>>26307222

Bitch, it is literally written into your doctrine that X is a law to be adhered to. Telling yourself it is not to be adhered to is bullshit. It is a LITERAL part of the doctrine of Christianity as it has a written bible including that law, but you are considering it null, for whatever reason. It's bullshit. Your position is bullshit.

>>26307219
>You made no point

Do you even know what a "point" is? Are you really going to pull a No True Scotsman fallacy out of your arse for something like this, too? I conveyed a thought, and inherent argument. You ignored that thought, and inherent argument. You are continuing to ignore the singular thought I conveyed, as you'd only even responded to it with NOTHING that directly addressed it. Kill yourself. This is not how you win arguments. Being an impertinent faggot who tells himself that his opinions are correct while ignoring whatever the opposing party proposes goes completely against the purpose of argument.

>>26307361
>It is a LITERAL part of the doctrine of Christianity
No it's literally a part of old Judaism
Christ saying that the law is fulfilled is also in the bible.

>>26307361
You're ignorance about dogmas in Christianity yet confidence in your statement is pretty hilarious

File: Cu_sith.png (721KB, 1331x629px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 1331x629px

>>26306454
Do you have pets Anons?

>>26307393
>No it's literally a part of old Judaism

I have no idea what the fuck this means, but I haven't read the bible nor can I confirm what is actually in the bible, but if you are going to claim that the entire basis upon which this conversation was based up until this point is completely false despite everyone in this conversation up until this point acting as if it were otherwise then I'm gone, since I don't care about Christianity. I was only arguing in favor of pure logic, since the opposing party was only claiming that "X" is null because they tell themselves it is null, which is bullshit.

>Christ saying that the law is fulfilled is also in the bible.

That means shit if the premise upon which this conversation was based up until this point was true, which you are claiming it's not, so fuck this, as I do not give a single, solitary fuck about the actual breadth of Christianity beyond the premise this entire conversation was based upon.

>>26307439

Kill yourself. This was never about my attempting to prove my knowledge on the true breadth of Christianity, as I was not. I absentmindedly proposed a law that was written into Christianity, and everyone was replying as if it were true up until this point, so I assumed it was. Mines was an argument arguing sheer logic, as your proposition that the law that was supposedly written into the doctrine of Christianity is magically supposed to be ignored because of arbitrary reasons seemed bullshit to me. Nice to know that in the end you were too much of a coward to actually do anything pertinent in this gross back and forth, and that your only reply for me after my raping your asshole is an attempt to climb onto a high horse and prod me with a stick since you have nothing of value to say to me, and are too scared to even try to conceive anything of the sort. Again, kill yourself. My intentions were crystal clear in all regards since the beginning since unlike you I am not an impertinent useless fucking niggerfaggot

>>26307552
And they say furfags are normal lel

File: 4chan_priest.png (595KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 800x600px

>>26307552
>but I haven't read the bible nor can I confirm what is actually in the bible,

>>26307552
What's it like to struggle so hard with simple concepts?

File: 1449043670345.jpg (28KB, 450x300px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 450x300px

>>26306454
>tfw no pet domesticated fox