You know what is the problem with trust??It really stops the conversation, because you take the things for granted,Things value less to you because you know that, that thing is going to be there for you, no matter what,You stop talking about love because you believe that you've got the saturation point in your relationship,And you've got her completely,And that is the problem. You don’t own her,Because sometimes love is not enough,And bad is strong to iterate itself with you,It is much stronger to come back.
The truth is not always what you see. It is about what you actually want to see. You cannot let go your whole life based on truth. Because, sometimes, it is a lie that we count on for our togetherness.And when I said that I do not need you, I actually wanted to keep us together, with that lie.
Red eyes, clogged vessels, tanned cells and septum holes, She came up to me with an ashtray, and a bunch of tobacco rolls,I mean, how can I fill the gap that you've created?? How could I switch the clock back to the past, for the time I have wasted? I have gone a sedate now; the heart has stopped pumping zeal into my head,And for the hole in my heart, which is so dead now, which has run out of life now,I carry the loads of moments that you've endowed.
You may be operating from the belief that you must do everything yourself because no one will ever be there for you. Or you may think that if you never speak up you’ll avoid being rejected. Both these fears no longer apply to you today as an adult. If you never reach out for help, you will continue to deprive yourself.
Any perceived 'rejection' is simply a 're-direction'.
The traditional arguments for the existence of God have been fairly thoroughly criticised by philosophers. But the theologian can, if he wishes, accept this criticism. He can admit that no rational proof of God's existence is possible. And he can still retain all that is essential to his position, by holding that God's existence is known in some other, non-rational way. I think, however, that a more telling criticism can be made by way of the traditional problem of evil. Here it can be shown, not that religious beliefs lack rational support, but that they are positively irrational, that the several parts of the essential theological doctrine are inconsistent with one another, so that the theologian can maintain his position as a whole only by a much more extreme rejection of reason than in the former case. He must now be prepared to believe, not merely what cannot be proved, but what can be disproved from other beliefs that he also holds.