Bible Contradictions: Ruth vs. Ezra

How does the Bible reconcile the stark contradiction between Ezra's exclusionary practices and Ruth's story of foreign inclusion? Ezra was a Jewish priest who administered Jerusalem as a province of the Persian Empire in the 5th century BCE, at the start of the Second Temple Period. Ezra set the tone for the era, focusing the religion on sacrifices and festivals at the restored temple alongside the reading of the Torah, which may have been edited together in its current form under his leadership.
Ezra also promoted strict interpretation of religious law and he campaigned against intermarriage between Jews and neighboring peoples. He commanded Jewish men in mixed marriages to renounce their “foreign” wives and children and he rejected the offer of northern Israelites peoples to help rebuild the temple on the grounds that they had intermarried with foreigners, setting up the rivalry between Jews and Samaritans which has continued ever since.
However, not all Jews agreed with Ezra’s interpretation of the law and his strict policies against intermarriage. The author of the Book of Ruth presented the opposite perspective, showing that a foreigner, a Moabite woman, could not only become part of the Jewish community but also an ancestor in the lineage of King David, and ultimately, of the Messiah, according to Christian tradition.
Join the livestream to participate in the discussion and to ask questions to our lecturer during the Q&A.
Other topics covered in this lecture include:
Second Temple Judaism
Intermarriage in Ancient Israel
Women in Ancient Israel
Women in the Bible
Jehud
Persian Empire
Browse our catalogue of free lectures at www.centreplac...
Your generous support allows us to offer these lectures at no cost. Please consider a making donation (tax deductible in the US and Canada) at www.centreplac... ️

[@Mercury-Wells]

Dr Hamer's knowledge and erudition is invaluable for anyone seeking understanding of the biblical texts.

[@mrlume9475]

As always, great content.👍

[@oielvert]

Ruth is one of those books that just gets better as you age. No miracles or prophecies, just a good woman taking care of her mother-in-law. There's a real charm to it.

[@StevenSmolak]

😊❤️🌎🙏🏻

[@nosuchthing8]

I should read it

[@johnhanlon8546]

Thank you John. Really enjoy lectures. Fron an Irish Catholic. God bless you. John

[@cpamacjd]

Best Channell on youtube

[@garymensurati1631]

Yes, John is awesome 💯

[@jacknerdlord3244]

My only complaint is that the editor doesn't boost the sound level. YT ads are 2x as loud

[@peterkatow3718]

Chanel N°5?

[@Cannibaltron]

Some of the deepest analysis of the Bible, Christianity, and the ancient world

[@rayneweber5904]

@@Cannibaltron I got a youtube notification about your comment and it cut off after "some of the deepest anal" just an FYI.

[@bard_of_dundee]

I love these lectures John, thank you so much for recording them for us all! I especially like the ones about obscure Bible topics and books that didn't make it into the Bible.

[@centre-place]

Glad you like them! Thank you for supporting the channel.

[@garymensurati1631]

Always appreciate you're analysis and views. You're research and knowledge on the subjects you discuss are second to none. Thank you John, blessings to you and all. ❤❤❤❤❤

[@MakaiJohnkenneth]

If there's a contradiction do be it nowhere in bible books does any write say his writings don't contradict another nor claim in errancy. This is humanity. Errors be and contradictions which don't change overall narrative and gist of the story is human. Unlike Quran which brags Bring a verse like these If it was not from Allah there would be few contradictions Quran is a miracle This is from creator of universe It's a guidance to humanity These claims can be tested against what Quran says and we observe It contradicts scriptures before it It has internal contradictions It has historical and scientific errors This has been demonstrated by honest Muslims,Arab christians and Best of all ex Muslims turn xtian or atheist. Finally these are puerly historic books not God said. Does the whole book ,places,names of people,events and timing prove it's not historical or contains some narratives which contradict

[@nickmansfield1]

@@MakaiJohnkenneth The contradiction is that of Ezra's faction who orchestrated a coup and it was a Jew who first pointed this out to me. As for The Qur'an, it contains no contradiction, nor could you replicate the codes therein.

[@ObjectiveEthics]

John just gets right into it. No fluff, no soft intro easing people and their sensitivity into the topic. These lectures are excellent.

[@centre-place]

Wow, thank you!

[@abjolm22]

Great channel and brilliant lectures! May I suggest moving the audio from these sessions onto podcast apps (eg Apple Podcast). It would certainly be something that would help me listen to your brilliant content, and I hope expand your reach :)

[@centre-place]

Great idea!

[@dantallman5345]

Man I so like the visuals in these lectures. But yeah, podcasts are a great idea.

[@juliam7586]

agreed! ❤

[@jeffkunce8501]

I listen to many of these lectures like a podcast. (Headphones on, phone screen off.) They work well as audio only, even though the slides are great. I have youtube premium: no ads, enhanced listening controls, download ability. So, that definitely makes it more like a podcast app.

[@jamesd7195]

I listen to these in my car commuting to work. Podcasts would be great.

[@winstonbarquez9538]

There are contradictions because the Bible is a collection of books written during a period of a millenium by different authors in different circumstances not to mention the doctrinal development or evolution of beliefs in the biblical world.

[@garymensurati1631]

Thank you John. Blessings to all

[@bobholderness3913]

Your lectures are amazing & informative. I have one year’s study of the 2:16 Old Testament (60 years ago!); and 1 year of the New Testament ( also long ago). Just enough to be dangerous! Thanks so very, very much. Bob Holderness, Folsom, CA.

[@Carlos-ke3pj]

Best channel on earth

[@jasonbishop5345]

Already over 1600 views. Awesome! What a rockin' team!

[@Kevin_Fiol]

Can you break up the 'Lectures' playlist (or more realistically, create new playlists) on your KZbin channel? There are so many in there, it's impossible to find specific ones I need to watch 😊

[@centre-place]

Indeed, we are working on it. Please feel free to suggest some categories. In the meantime, you can browse our lectures by category on our website www.centreplace.ca/lectures

[@Kevin_Fiol]

@@centre-place chronologically broken down by year, definitely... Off the top of my head... •Lost books of the Bible •'The historical' series (Jesus, James etc) •history (crusades etc) i think you just started another series that's going to be great... •Biblical contradictons •history of the Levant (chronologically go through the history of the region itself... From first known settlement, formation of Judah & Northern Kingdom, Roman occupation and division, the revolts etc) •history of the Jews (Abrahamic religions?... To include Islam?)...(from Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Babylon etc) •history of Christianity (from Pauline v James, Catholics v Protestants, the 'tangential' faith systems... Mormons, Gnostics, cults? •pre history (earlier gods, Sumer, Akad etc) I know I just kind of dropped a bombshell, after preceeding it with 'off the top of my head' 😆. I'd be happy to give you my email, to go over other ideas I have...or possibly even help 😊

[@peter_waldo3715]

Ruth was an Israelite of the Tribe of Reuben. A few centuries before the Israelite conquest, the northern half of the Kingdom of Moab was conquered. The only Moabite subjects that remained north of the Arnon River were slaves. However, when Israel was attacked; the Israelites killed every man, woman, and child; and Reuben was given that northern half that included "The Plains of Moab". Reubenites continued to call it The Plains of Moab, even though no descendents of Lot (Moab was Lot's son) lived there. When Ruth says, "Your people, my people"; she means 'your people' (Judahites) 'my' (I'm a Reubenite) 'people'. When Ruth says, "Your gods, my gods"; the Hebrew word for "god" can mean magistrate, ruler, judge, etc. There is a difference between the meaning of "daughters of Moab" and "Moabitess". One means a descendent of Lot, one means someone who lives on the land formerly known as part of the Kingdom of Moab.

[@peter_waldo3715]

Ruth was an Israelite. Therefore, she was entitled to enter into the congregation of Israel. She was not a Moabite who had to wait 10 generations to be granted "citizenship" and marital rights

[@Kevin_Fiol]

@@peter_waldo3715 great information! But I'm not sure it's relevant to my comment on breaking up the Lectures playlist on their YT channel? I'm thinking you meant to reply in the main comment section 😁

[@Edo9River]

Roughly speaking, from my experience as a Baha’i fan, I agree with all your points…there must be some disagreements, and those points are in the book, Some Answered Questions, which I’ve read long ago.

[@ddennison001]

Thanks!

[@Edo9River]

It’s very good that you’re repeating what you’ve said in previous videos because I don’t go back and Re listen

[@Symes1984]

I always enjoy listening to your lectures. Any chance you could give us a lecture on how the destruction of the Tempe in 70ad influenced the gospel writers?

[@centre-place]

Thank you, that's an important topic to explore in a future lecture. In the meantime, please note most of our New Testament lectures address this development.

[@alangriffin8146]

John makes me wish I was religious I’d love to be a preacher telling the gospel with context Alas, I think Jesus was a good dude, but I will always have doubts about his parentage

[@Edo9River]

It’s so interesting to think back to the 1950s when I was an enthusiastic Presbyterian. The contradictions were all presented as being “true”. But this “truth”. Isnt questioned in public.

[@kpayton2001]

Are these lectures your actual Sunday church services or are they separate from your church functions?

[@HamerToronto]

They are on the same channel and they are entirely consistent with what we say in church. Please join the Sunday services and see for yourself.

[@pendolinoable]

Thank you.

[@hamnchee]

As soon as doordash delivers my oreo shake, I'm settling down in my big chair with the latest Centre Point lecture 🍿

[@hamnchee]

Update: I started the video without the shake because it was apparently stolen by someone before my doordasher got there. They are making a new one and I'm giving a big tip to the driver for excellent communication and problem solving. It has however been rough start to the lecture. Soon I will be in the big chair with my oreo shake. I'll let you know if anything happens.

[@hamnchee]

Guys I got it. Here we go.

[@maxsonthonax1020]

Hmm.

[@peterkatow3718]

Serious question: Did those (eg Athanasius) who decided which books are inspired claim they themselves were inspired?

[@terencenxumalo1159]

good work

[@robdavis5194]

The Bible is not univocal! This series is right down @maklelan 's alley.

[@StevenSmolak]

Thank You! Wow. Wow wow wow...🙏🏻❤️🌎🙂

[@johnfoster6412]

Was it at the time of Ezra that the Temple ceased to be "a house of prayer for all the nations"?

[@Rannsack]

It's interesting that for Christianity (and especially it's critics), contradiction is often taken negatively, while in religions like Buddhism, contradiction and paradox are embraced as the deepest form of spiritual truth. Most Buddhist koans are a contradiction or paradox. And that is the whole point. It's also interesting that often the exact same people who attack Christianity for having "contradictions" will express deep appreciation for the wisdom of Buddhism.

[@EvilXtianity]

_"It's interesting that for Christianity (and especially it's critics), contradiction is often taken negatively..."_ Should the literal words of God have contradictions?

[@synthtonic4954]

Apart from a lot of other very debatable views about the Bible that are presented in the video and if you are a believer or not: It doesn't change at all that at least the big claimed 'contradiction' is based on insufficient understanding of the Scriptures. Ruth (Moabite), Rahab (Canaanite), Caleb (Kenizzite) etc. were all grafted in by faith into YHWH's people. Thus became citizens of 'the house of Israel' and no longer remained foreigners. Even Paul quotes Jacob's blessings (Gen 48) in Romans 11 that through Ephraim - who also was a born Egyptian, but even became a whole tribe of Israel - 'the fullness of the nations' (Gen 48) will come into the house of Israel by promise - not by bloodline. Wild branches grafted into the olive tree. It never was by flesh, but by faith to enter the covenants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Same plan of redemption from Genesis to Revelation. Even in front of Mt Sinai already was a mixed multitude including Egyptians who joined YHWH's people and were part of His chosen people. One people. The Torah forbids intermarrying with outsider pagans, who don't accept YHWH as the one and only elohim, as they would cause the people to worship other false gods. What at least from the perspective of the bible text happened many many times. No contradiction here whatsoever. Quite the opposite, as it intentionally points out that everyone can join and always could. By the way, even Abraham was a former Chaldean.

[@Marcus-rq8bg]

Very well said. I find the general smug nature of the presenter, who presents this unequivocally as an irretrievable contradiction between Ezra and Ruth, rather disappointing. He does not even consider the possibility of a resolution. But given his a priori rejection of the idea that there could be any historical data in the Torah, his smugness in his own narrow minded views become more understandable. He simply hasn’t considered seriously this alternative view.

[@robertcain3426]

Yes, I believe you correct about faith being the true children of Abraham. Yet, there are still contradictions and perhaps errors. No where in the Law and the Prophets is it written that Israel could not marry from the nations around them? Just the opposite. They were alliwed to take wives of the nations tbey conquered round about them. The only nations were not allowed to take wives from were the nations they were about to disspossess across the Jordan, the seven nations inhabiting Canaan. And apart from Moab, which treated Israel badly, they were could take wives from any of the surrounding nations, including Egypt and as Moses did. But, as I said, you were wholely right about faith being the factor which makes a true Israelite. Seen in the combination of the faithful bloodline interwoven with faithful intrusions such as Ruth, Rahab etc. Cheers

[@austinhertell5634]

Oh heck yeah brother!

[@conachehelugo-qz7bf]

great interview but im amazed they didnt talk about new standard tunning at all

[@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095]

Standard tunning? {:o:O:}

[@StorytimeJesus]

Matthew and Luke contradict, but the reason why is they are using Mark's sources differently to expand on Mark. The victorious king riding on a donkey (mule) is reminiscent of Absalom. Absalom two chief helpers in the rebellion died differently. Ahithophel hung himself. Amasa is gutted, his bowels fall out, and he is set in a field. Absalom himself was hung on a tree and pierced through the side. He was mourned heavily by David. All of this is hinted at in Zechariah 9-14, which Mark uses.

[@EvilXtianity]

_"Ahithophel hung himself."_ *hanged

[@StorytimeJesus]

@@EvilXtianity Thanks. I will be writing that a lot. I better get it wright.

[@nickmansfield1]

@@StorytimeJesus Judas hung himself upon a sword. Simple.

[@randyallen2966]

Thanks

[@henkvandergaast3948]

Its rare these two are argued..

[@henkvandergaast3948]

You have a few more watchers in Australia

[@andrewsuryali8540]

Ruth is the one book of the Hebrew Bible for which female authorship has been argued even by rabbis. Generally the same argument has not been made for either Megilat Esther or Judith, but for Ruth this has been considered a distinct possibility for centuries.

[@quakers200]

With a whole world and hundreds f thousands of years God chose this little area and time to take up all his time.

[@davcamp1]

I did extensive looking into Shezbazaar years back. I think that ws the court name of Zerubbabel, lineage of Davis. "Shehz" in near east language may also mean Prince. In Turkish - Persion, "Sheh" 'means "prince." Book of Zechariah says Zerubabel laid the cornerstone of temple, and will cap it off to shouts of "grace . grace to it," I dont think Jewish leaders nor people would ever allow a non-Jew to do so. example Daniel has a court name, as do his 3 companions.

[@jounik8980]

Were they muslims between Iran and india

[@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095]

Not until quite some time after 600 AD. {:o:O:}

[@integrationalpolytheism]

50:00 this section seems to be as relevant today in the land of Israel (in 2024) as they ever were, unfortunately.

[@barnabuskorrum4004]

Almost like proto-fascism. Us vs them.

[@kyrerymmukk7446]

Oh, I thought this was about Star Wars Ezra. My bad. Carry on.

[@longcastle4863]

32:00 ts

[@longcastle4863]

27:00 ts

[@StorytimeJesus]

Ruth (and Rahab) are both mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus of Nazareth's stepfather Joseph. Ezra not only makes a statement against intermarriage, but against one of the Old Testament Jesuses. He starts the divorces with Jesus's sons. Nehemiah goes further, chasing Jesus's descendants out of positions of power in Jerusalem. (Jesus so of Jehozadak).

[@peter_waldo3715]

Rehab the Harlot was not the same woman as Raqab the wife of Salmon. Jahawashai did not descend from Rahab the Harlot. Rehab the Harlot and her family had to wait to be assimilated into the congregation. Yahawashai descended from Raqab and Salmon.

[@StorytimeJesus]

@@peter_waldo3715 interesting

[@EvilXtianity]

@@StorytimeJesus _"...the genealogy of Jesus of Nazareth's stepfather Joseph."_ The Bible clearly asserts that Joseph is Jesus' biological father.

[@nickmansfield1]

@@EvilXtianity The corrupted text of Matthew has significant errors in the genealogy and 28:19.

[@RobertJones-et7gh]

As a Bible student, I admittedly don’t have a rebuttal for everything that is mentioned here, although I am sure they exist. However, regarding Judas’ death, I would like to share a reasonable explanation that I’ve heard. It has been said that he did hang himself AND that the rope apparently broke, which caused him to plunge and rupture. Obviously, the biblical text does not say anything about the rope breaking. But the Bible frequently leaves out many details in many accounts. As a man of faith, I find the above explanation to be quite possible, and, is faith strengthening in regard to the Bible, even when there is no immediate way to harmonize apparent scriptural contradictions. I understand that this is insufficient for those who are critical thinkers who are not faith based. I don’t have a problem with critical thinking. But it must be said that some critical thinkers just want to criticize and find fault, no matter what.

[@KellyBastable-k4l]

Judas fell on his sword the description is very awkward but the sword was usually the way

[@Stadtpark90]

25:15

[@richarddavis8783]

when ruth accepted naomi's GOD as her GOD she was no longer a "strange" woman and thru GOD'S grace and forgiveness she was accepted into the congregation

[@peter_waldo3715]

The word "god" used here can refer to judges, magistrates, rulers, etc. Ruth was saying, "Your judges, my judges". (Your Judahite judges will be my judges [and I will leave my Reubenite judges])

[@richarddavis8783]

@@peter_waldo3715 it may, but very rare. in scripture only 4 times 1. exodus 21:6 הָ֣אֱלֹהִ֔ים (hah-ay-low-heem) the judges: 2. exodus 22:8 same as 21:6; 22:9 one same as 6 & 8 and one as אֱלֹהִ֔ים (ay-low-heem) judges: same as in genesis 1:1. in ruth 1:1 the judges are הַשֹּׁפְטִ֔ים (hah-show-fat-eem) 1:16 וֵאלֹהַ֖יִךְ אֱלֹהָֽי (way-low-hah-yeek ay-low-hey) GOD- of-you GOD-of-me also peter, the reubenites were not mentioned in ruth. naomi was of the tribe of ephraim from bethlehem, judah. ruth was a descendant of lot, abraham’s nephew, from moab; jordan today. GOD bless you for seeking truth!

[@nickmansfield1]

@@richarddavis8783 She was never a Moabite in the first place. No woman can be a Moabite.

[@theophilos0910]

‘No Moabite nor any Ammonite may ever enter into the congregation (‘assembly’ ‘convocation’) of YHWH - nor any of their descendants even beyond the 10th generation, forever.’ -Deuteronomy 23:3 This very troublesome verse has more to do with ‘biqahal YHWH (‘to the congregation of Yahweh’) than anything else - The main question is : does ‘qahal’ refer to ‘qol Yisro’el’ (= all Israel) or perhaps merely to the Zadokite etal. priesthoods actively serving in the temple ? Or as with Judges 20:2 does ‘qahal YHWH’ = assembly of YHWH’ mean ‘national tribal-legislative body’ (i.e. ‘the government’ ) as in (‘No Ammonite or Moabite shall ever be allowed to become part of the government-nor any of their descendants-not even after 10-generations have passed, forever.’) ? Either way it puts David & Solomon and their descendants on the Judean throne into a very tight corner in terms of their ethnic legitimacy- but the apartheid laws & genocidal racist Zionist content found in the modern book of Deuteronomy was probably not even known until the time of Josiah king of Judah c. 621 BCE when ‘a copy of the Torah of Moses was discovered whilst making repairs on the temple’ [2 Kings 22:8 etc] - so David and his descendants before Josiah wouldn’t have even had such a law on their books- Otherwise (presumably) David & Solomon & Reheboam etal. would all have been disqualified to be king (or ‘clan-chief’, ‘chief war-lord’) of Yisro’el-Judah from the get-go - all thanks to Ruth and her pesky Moabite genome ! (and probably a very cool collection of the Moabite national clan-god Chemosh idols !!)

[@nickmansfield1]

Not so, she was never a Moabite but a Moabitess.

[@emilbordon1329]

Happy birthday

[@Edo9River]

There’s a lot of dispute on KZbin about the Bronze Age Collapse

[@AdithiaKusno]

When Bible doesn't reconcile its own apparent contradiction then it's better to leave it as apparent contradiction without attempting to reconciling it. While it might be pious to reconcile it that typically rooted in insecurity and vulnerability of faith instead of maturity. Imagine need to defend God each time. Just as God can defend and clear His name let Scripture speaks for itself without attempt to harmonize it. By letting Scripture speaks for itself we can learn more than our own attempts of reconciling it. Take one example from Leviticus calling bat as bird. Had we tried to reconcile it we would end up missing the point that for ancient people bat does look like bird it has wing. Similar to why whale looks like fish even though it's actually mammals. Just as bully intimidating others to hide insecurity and vulnerability similarly trying to harmonize Scripture only indicates one has crisis of faith. Scripture is not written on eternal tablet but rather written by mankind who received inspiration. People with maturity of faith don't need to harmonize anything but rather accept it as it is. It tells more about the person who needs everything reconciled than about the faith or Scripture. Even St Justin Martyr accused the Jews to alter the Isaiah and Jeremiah texts that we no longer had. St Papias detailed the adultery pericope recorded in Gospel of St Matthew not in Gospel of St John. When we were infants we want everything explained to us. As we grow mature in faith we no longer need anything explained instead we are mature enough to accept reality as it is true. I am a subdeacon in Byzantine Catholic Church. In the Catholic Church infallibility and inerrancy don't apply to factual error. In this context Ezra was mistaken because Samaritans DNA are more closer to true Israelites than diaspora Jews who intermarried in Spain, Germany, and Poland. Ezra as with other priest wasn't protected from making error of judgement probably due to racial bias against Samaritans. To this day scientific evidence has settled that Samaritans share common DNA ancestry with Jews because both are Israelites.

[@EvilXtianity]

_"When Bible doesn't reconcile its own apparent contradiction then it's better to leave it as apparent contradiction without attempting to reconciling it."_ So then why did the King James project make stuff up to reconcile contradictions?

[@nickmansfield1]

A woman can never be a Moabite.

[@joestar6194]

Thank you so much for not bowing down to the Christian status quo.❤

[@Mercury-Wells]

72 scholars, eh?

[@Facerip]

Love u

[@HearTruth]

Your lectures are as if you have to reason why you can't believe Jn 17:17 Hebrews 4:12 “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

[@ChaseGartner]

The contradictions only arise when you look at these books from your Scaligerian timeline, they make total sense in the New Chronology

[@richarddavis8783]

in acts 1:18 judas purchased the field with the deed of his iniquity and not the pieces of silver. after hanging autolysis sets in and then the body swells like a balloon. whatever judas used to hang himself most likely broke and the body fell bursting like a water-filled balloon. there is no contradiction here. i believe hamer is using scripture to fit his criteria not of יהוה such as satan tried with CHRIST and did with eve

[@jm329]

Why would they not mention the hanging? No one talks like that.

[@normative]

You know how John mentioned there are unconvincing apologetic rationalizations that attempt to reconcile the accounts? This is what he meant.

[@richarddavis8783]

@@normative i didn't know you could defend rationalizations

[@funnythat9956]

This may all be true and maybe you can massage the text into consistency, but it is not what is directly obvious from the text itself (and there are many other examples; e.g. who made David count "the people" or the inconsistencies in the creation stories). Then, you would have to postulate that God either is not omniscient and omnipotent and was not able to have a clear cut biblical text composed/written or that God is deliberately misleading/confusing the reader of "his word" by leaving obvious contradictions in it. Either way it does not convey a pleasant god and would be in disagreement with Jesus' teachings about the Father. By and large the way by which most protestant churches deal with such difficult texts is to not to talk about them.

[@richarddavis8783]

@@funnythat9956 would you please point out to me some obvious contradictions: because i started reading scripture looking for some but as of yet found none

[@jounik8980]

Jesus told Judas the truth

[@ventriloquistmagician4735]

cringe

[@pmamonthero6641]

Yesterday my husband told me he didn't like how fat I am getting and that i look like a fatter precious which made me very sad I just love friend chicken 😢

[@pablobalde1121]

Slay kween, how's he gonna like it when a man comes along who likes you for who you are. Friend chicken too.

[@Eriugena8]

We are all friend chicken

[@Mercury-Wells]

Your husband is mean

[@cpamacjd]

Go vegan

[@nickmansfield1]

You: "Yesterday my husband told me he didn't like how fat I am getting and that i look like a fatter precious which made me very sad I just love friend chicken " Answer: Choose your friends carefully.