'Repent'...not 'Keep on Repenting'.

[Michael Christ]

Mat 3:1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the
wilderness of Judaea,

Mat 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Did you see the word "REPENT"?

Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:
for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Jesus BEGAN TO PREACH and the FIRST word He says, "REPENT".

Notice John in preparing the way of the Lord and the Lord Jesus say
the same thing, "REPENT" and not 'keep on repenting'?

You see, God's standard is not the standard of man. His ways are not
our ways.

And that is why there is so much confusion in religion, there is a
clash between what God says the true meaning of what His Word is, and
what man likes to water it down to mean by virtue of his own fleshly
contrivance.

But the Lord will have none of that, repent means repent, it does not
mean leaving the door open to swing both ways by seeking to establish
a convenient 'keep on repenting' standard.

When God says something He means it.




Michael Christ

[Linda Lee]

On May 20, 1:52 am, Michael Christ <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Michael NOT-Christ


You claimed of me within the last 24 hours, that I am "determined to
slam down endless Bible verses at will and at whim", which you claim
is me being of self, rather than of the truth, but if you quote the
Scriptures in support of what you want to say, that is 'a different
story'. What a hypocrite you are.

[Michael Christ]

On May 20, 4:59 pm, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
> On May 20, 1:52 am, Michael Christ <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mat 3:1  In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the
> > wilderness of Judaea,
>
> > Mat 3:2  And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> > Did you see the word "REPENT"?
>
> > Mat 4:17  From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:
> > for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> > Jesus BEGAN TO PREACH and the FIRST word He says, "REPENT".
>
> > Notice John in preparing the way of the Lord and the Lord Jesus say
> > the same thing, "REPENT" and not 'keep on repenting'?
>
> > You see, God's standard is not the standard of man.  His ways are not
> > our ways.
>
> > And that is why there is so much confusion in religion, there is a
> > clash between what God says the true meaning of what His Word is, and
> > what man likes to water it down to mean by virtue of his own fleshly
> > contrivance.
>
> > But the Lord will have none of that, repent means repent, it does not
> > mean leaving the door open to swing both ways by seeking to establish
> > a convenient 'keep on repenting' standard.
>
> > When God says something He means it.
>

> > Michael Christ

Linda wrote:
> You claimed of me within the last 24 hours, that I am "determined to
> slam down endless Bible verses at will and at whim", which you claim
> is me being of self, rather than of the truth, but if you quote the
> Scriptures in support of what you want to say, that is 'a different
> story'.  What a hypocrite you are.

They scriptures were appropriate to what the Lord showed me in the
Spirit about repentance.

It is about TRUTH, not about you and your feelings.

Again the Lord shows you. Your affection for TRUTH is not the
priority of your life, Linda, it sits in the wake of 'self'.




Michael Christ

[H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.]

On 5/20/2012 1:52 AM, Michael Christ wrote:
> Mat 3:1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the
> wilderness of Judaea,
>
> Mat 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> Did you see the word "REPENT"?

LOL

John was the last Old Testament prophet, teaching that legalism was the
way to salvation.

Then came Jesus, whose use of the term "repent" was the OPPOSITE of the
Old Testament concept of repent. This ultimately left John totally
confused...

Mt 11:
2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent
two of his disciples,
3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for
another?

> Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:
> for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Yes, repent of HARD-HEARTEDNESS and JUDGMENT of one's fellow man, and DO
THE WORKS OF THE GOSPEL, i.e. to visit the wrongfully imprisoned, teach
the fatherless, defend the widow, etc, etc.

> Jesus BEGAN TO PREACH and the FIRST word He says, "REPENT".
>
> Notice John in preparing the way of the Lord and the Lord Jesus say
> the same thing, "REPENT" and not 'keep on repenting'?

No, they were NOT saying the same thing.

But thanks for demonstrating that you can't hear Jesus when He speaks,
cultist.

If you could hear Him, you would realize that this is about you...

Mt 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay
tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier
matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have
done, and not to leave the other undone.

[snip the rest of the Pharisee's lies]

Ike

--
http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.html
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657386473773

[Michael Christ]

On May 20, 7:03 pm, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeicklebo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 5/20/2012 1:52 AM, Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > Mat 3:1  In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the
> > wilderness of Judaea,
>
> > Mat 3:2  And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> > Did you see the word "REPENT"?
>
> LOL
>
> John was the last Old Testament prophet, teaching that legalism was the
> way to salvation.
>
> Then came Jesus, whose use of the term "repent" was the OPPOSITE of the
> Old Testament concept of repent. This ultimately left John totally
> confused...
>
> Mt 11:
> 2  Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent
> two of his disciples,
> 3  And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for
> another?
>
> > Mat 4:17  From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:
> > for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> Yes, repent of HARD-HEARTEDNESS and JUDGMENT of one's fellow man,

Nonsense.

Repentance is unto God, and Him alone. All else flows from that.

If not, well then, don't let me stop you. :-).



Michael Christ

> and DO
> THE WORKS OF THE GOSPEL, i.e. to visit the wrongfully imprisoned, teach
> the fatherless, defend the widow, etc, etc.
>
> > Jesus BEGAN TO PREACH and the FIRST word He says, "REPENT".
>
> > Notice John in preparing the way of the Lord and the Lord Jesus say
> > the same thing, "REPENT" and not 'keep on repenting'?
>
> No, they were NOT saying the same thing.
>
> But thanks for demonstrating that you can't hear Jesus when He speaks,
> cultist.
>
> If you could hear Him, you would realize that this is about you...
>
> Mt 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay
> tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier
> matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have
> done, and not to leave the other undone.
>
> [snip the rest of the Pharisee's lies]
>
> Ike
>

> --http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.htmlhttp://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657...

[Barry OGrady]

On Sun, 20 May 2012 02:49:25 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
<jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Repentance is unto God, and Him alone. All else flows from that.

God repented then went on being evil.

>Michael Christ

=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
God is a spirit. 0% proof!

[Linda Lee]

On May 20, 4:34 am, Michael Christ <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com>

And the Scriptures I quote are appropriate to what the Lord showed me
about various things, you hypocrite.

> It is about TRUTH, not about you and your feelings.
>
> Again the Lord shows you.

You're not the Lord, you fraud.

> Your affection for TRUTH is not the
> priority of your life, Linda, it sits in the wake of 'self'.
>

> Michael NOT-Christ

You're a damned liar.

[Barry OGrady]

Please watch and ponder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLBDFe3mDtk

>> It is about TRUTH, not about you and your feelings.
>>
>> Again the Lord shows you.
>
>You're not the Lord, you fraud.
>
>> Your affection for TRUTH is not the
>> priority of your life, Linda, it sits in the wake of 'self'.
>>
>> Michael NOT-Christ
>
>You're a damned liar.

And you are not? LOL!

[Linda Lee]

On May 20, 7:23 pm, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 May 2012 13:23:37 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

No, I'm not, but we all know YOU are, godhater.

[H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.]

On 5/20/2012 5:49 AM, Michael Christ wrote:
> On May 20, 7:03 pm, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."<xeicklebo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 5/20/2012 1:52 AM, Michael Christ wrote:
>>
>>> Mat 3:1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the
>>> wilderness of Judaea,
>>
>>> Mat 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>>
>>> Did you see the word "REPENT"?
>>
>> LOL
>>
>> John was the last Old Testament prophet, teaching that legalism was the
>> way to salvation.
>>
>> Then came Jesus, whose use of the term "repent" was the OPPOSITE of the
>> Old Testament concept of repent. This ultimately left John totally
>> confused...
>>
>> Mt 11:
>> 2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent
>> two of his disciples,
>> 3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for
>> another?
>>
>>> Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:
>>> for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>>
>> Yes, repent of HARD-HEARTEDNESS and JUDGMENT of one's fellow man,
>
> Nonsense.

Thanks for demonstrating that you don't know Jesus, and He doesn't know
you...

Lk 10:
30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to
Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and
wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.
31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he
saw him, he passed by on the other side.
32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on
him, and passed by on the other side.
33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and
when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine,
and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care
of him.
35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave
them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever
thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that
fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him,
Go, and do thou likewise.

> Repentance is unto God, and Him alone. All else flows from that.

Mt 18:
21 ś Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother
sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but,
Until seventy times seven.
23 Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king,
which would take account of his servants.
24 And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which
owed him ten thousand talents.
25 But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be
sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be
made.
26 The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord,
have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
27 Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed
him, and forgave him the debt.
28 But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants,
which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him
by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest.
29 And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him,
saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
30 And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should
pay the debt.
31 So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry,
and came and told unto their lord all that was done.
32 Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou
wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me:
33 Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant,
even as I had pity on thee?
34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he
should pay all that was due unto him.
35 So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from
your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

All of your cult nonsense comes crashing down in light of the Word.

>> and DO
>> THE WORKS OF THE GOSPEL, i.e. to visit the wrongfully imprisoned, teach
>> the fatherless, defend the widow, etc, etc.
>>
>>> Jesus BEGAN TO PREACH and the FIRST word He says, "REPENT".
>>
>>> Notice John in preparing the way of the Lord and the Lord Jesus say
>>> the same thing, "REPENT" and not 'keep on repenting'?
>>
>> No, they were NOT saying the same thing.
>>
>> But thanks for demonstrating that you can't hear Jesus when He speaks,
>> cultist.
>>
>> If you could hear Him, you would realize that this is about you...
>>
>> Mt 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay
>> tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier
>> matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have
>> done, and not to leave the other undone.
>>
>> [snip the rest of the Pharisee's lies]

Ike

[Michael Christ]

On May 22, 8:23 pm, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeicklebo...@gmail.com>

> 21 ¶  Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother

> --http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.htmlhttp://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657...

Your personal context bible 'picks' don't rearrange truth, Ike. God
is always first...always, He has to be.

Like you were told...

Michael Christ wrote:
> > Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:
> > for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Ike wrote:
> Yes, repent of HARD-HEARTEDNESS and JUDGMENT of one's fellow man,

Nonsense.

Repentance is unto God, and Him alone. ALL ELSE FLOWS FROM THAT.

If not, well then, don't let me stop you. :-).

Here, by the grace of God, is your opportunity to walk in YOUR
'repent' talk...

Michael Christ wrote:
>That can only happen through the total surrender of
>your life to the Lord Jesus...as is right and only a 'reasonable'
>service. You need Him to show you what you must do in your daily
>life...and then do it.

Ike wrote:
> Notice how the cultist keeps trying to lead people into self reliance.
> You don't "show Him" anything, cultist; He shows you.

Notice...read again what I actually said.

We'll play your game. Now...folks...let's see where Ike's religion is
at.




Michael Christ

[Terry Cross]

On May 20, 2:03 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeicklebo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 5/20/2012 1:52 AM, Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > Mat 3:1  In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the
> > wilderness of Judaea,
>
> > Mat 3:2  And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> > Did you see the word "REPENT"?
>
> LOL
>
> John was the last Old Testament prophet, teaching that legalism was the
> way to salvation.
>
> Then came Jesus, whose use of the term "repent" was the OPPOSITE of the
> Old Testament concept of repent. This ultimately left John totally
> confused...
>
> Mt 11:
> 2  Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent
> two of his disciples,
> 3  And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for
> another?
>
> > Mat 4:17  From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent:
> > for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> Yes, repent of HARD-HEARTEDNESS and JUDGMENT of one's fellow man,

That is just plain silly, Ike. Utterly and completely silly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repentance_%28theology%29

Repentance is the activity of reviewing one's actions and feeling
contrition or regret for past wrongs.[1] It generally involves a
commitment to personal change and resolving to live a more responsible
and humane life. In religious contexts it usually refers to confession
to God, ceasing sin against God in order to gain forgiveness or
absolution. It typically includes an admission of guilt, a promise or
resolve not to repeat the offense; an attempt to make restitution for
the wrong, or in some way to reverse the harmful effects of the wrong
where possible.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/repent?s=t

re·pent verb (used without object)
1. to feel sorry, self-reproachful, or contrite for past conduct;
regret or be conscience-stricken about a past action, attitude, etc.
(often followed by of ): He repented after his thoughtless act.
2. to feel such sorrow for sin or fault as to be disposed to change
one's life for the better; be penitent.

You can't repent OTHER PEOPLE's activities. You can only repent of
your own sins. That is the way it works. Your idea that getting all
stiff-necked and self-righteous about other people's sins is just
laughable -- it is also the very worst of "Christianity" as it has
been practiced for hundreds of years.

No wonder you think you are doing the "lord's work" by barking like a
baboon at people in these discussions. You probably thinking you are
"repenting" their errors! What amazing foolishness people get into
when they read instruction manuals without understanding the words.

TCross

[Linda Lee]

I believe he meant repent of being hardhearted towards others and
repent of being judgmental of others. It's certainly ironic that Ike
would say that since he often appears rather hardhearted and
judgmental, but I don't believe he meant it the way you understood it
i.e. repent of other people's sins.

[Linda Lee]

On May 20, 5:03 am, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr." <xeicklebo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 5/20/2012 1:52 AM, Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > Mat 3:1  In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the
> > wilderness of Judaea,
>
> > Mat 3:2  And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
>
> > Did you see the word "REPENT"?
>
> LOL
>
> John was the last Old Testament prophet, teaching that legalism was the
> way to salvation.

No, he wasn't! The Messiah said John's way was the "way of
righteousness" and what John taught was to believe in the Messiah as
the Son of God and "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the
world" - THAT was the "way of righteousness".

Joh 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith,
BEHOLD THE LAMB OF GOD, WHICH TAKETH AWAY THE SIN OF THE WORLD.
Joh 1:30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is
preferred before me: for he was before me.
Joh 1:31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to
Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.
Joh 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending
from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
Joh 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with
water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit
descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with
the Holy Ghost.
Joh 1:34 And I saw, and bare record that THIS IS THE SON OF GOD.
Joh 1:35 Again the next day after John stood, and two of his
disciples;
Joh 1:36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, BEHOLD THE
LAMB OF GOD!
Joh 1:37 And the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed
Jesus.
Joh 1:38 Then Jesus turned, and saw them following, and saith unto
them, What seek ye? They said unto him, Rabbi, (which is to say, being
interpreted, Master,) where dwellest thou?
Joh 1:39 He saith unto them, Come and see. They came and saw where he
dwelt, and abode with him that day: for it was about the tenth hour.
Joh 1:40 One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was
Andrew, Simon Peter's brother.
Joh 1:41 He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him,
WE HAVE FOUND THE MESSIAS, WHICH IS, BEING INTERPRETED, THE CHRIST.

In Matt. 21:32 the Messiah said, "For John came unto you in the WAY OF
RIGHTEOUSNESS, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the
harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not
afterward, that ye might believe him."


THE _ONLY_ "WAY OF RIGHTEOUSNESS" is through repentance of sins and
turning to the Messiah for forgiveness of sins.

> Then came Jesus, whose use of the term "repent" was the
> OPPOSITE of the Old Testament concept of repent.

Both John and the Messiah preached the SAME THING - "the way of
righteousness" i.e. repentance of sins and turning to the Messiah (the
Son of God and the Lamb of God) for forgiveness of sins.

>
>This ultimately left John totally confused...

John was not confused; he simply wanted confirmation from the Messiah
that he/John was right about Yahashua`/Jesus being the Messiah (the
Son of God and "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the
world") who was foretold to come.

[Linda Lee]

On May 20, 7:04 am, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> God repented then went on being evil.

Projection.

[Michael Christ]

In this instance I would agree with Linda here, Terry.



Michael Christ

[Terry Cross]

On May 22, 11:16 pm, Michael Christ <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

We'll see what Ike says. I certainly hope you are right, but I truly
fear I have heard him as he meant to speak. I believe he and I have
been over this ground before.

TCross

[Terry Cross]

Nothing in the Gospels indicate that John was "confused." Good grief!

Next we will learn that Moses wandered 40 years in the desert looking
for his car keys.

TCross

[Barry OGrady]

Its in the bible.

[duke]

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:48:54 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindag...@juno.com>
wrote:

HUH????

duke - American American

*****
2012 - end of an error
Vote Republican in 2012
*****

[Terry Cross]

On May 24, 9:17 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:48:54 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com>

Yup, Ike actually wrote that on May 20: "Yes, repent of HARD-

HEARTEDNESS and JUDGMENT of one's fellow man, and DO THE WORKS OF THE
GOSPEL, i.e. to visit the wrongfully imprisoned, teach the fatherless,
defend the widow, etc, etc."

Great stuff, eh?

TCross

[Linda Lee]

The Gospel according to Ike.

[Terry Cross]

Ike baptized Jesus, didn't he? And when Jesus was confused, didn't
Ike straighten him out?

TCross

[duke]

On Thu, 24 May 2012 09:35:30 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross <tcro...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Yes, thanks, Terry.

>TCross

Just a note. I was trying to relate how one could repent of "another's" hard
heartedness, even though you well reject such in the earlier paragraph. I got
myself confused. Thanks.

[Linda Lee]

It's likely that Ike could straighten out Jesus as well as all "the
boys" (as he calls them), and that ability is probably why (as he
feels justified to claim here on the ngs) he was chosen as the only
person in the last 2,000+ years who can properly interpret all
prophesy. How ever did the church of God function before Ike came
along? I think he's even prophesied somewhere in the Book of Herman,
but of course only Ike can interpret those prophesies...

[Linda Lee]

On May 25, 8:31 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 09:35:30 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross <tcros...@hotmail.com>

It was me who said:
>> >I believe he meant repent of being hardhearted towards others and
>> >repent of being judgmental of others. It's certainly ironic that Ike
>> >would say that since he often appears rather hardhearted and
>> >judgmental, but I don't believe he meant it the way you understood it
>> >i.e. repent of other people's sins.

[duke]

On Fri, 25 May 2012 06:49:41 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindag...@juno.com>
wrote:

Thanks. But it doesn't matter who said it. I got confused over a suggestion
that anyone would repent of others wrongdoings.

[Linda Lee]

On May 25, 11:08 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 06:49:41 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com>

Terry said she thinks Ike meant to repent of others' sins because of
something he's said before. I think she misunderstood what he said
here, and I don't know what she's referring to him having said before.
Of course we can only repent and turn away from our own sins.

[Rod]

Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
used to it.

Rod

[Terry Cross]

Ike's "three dimensional" prophecy in practice is just triple
jointed. Like the Talmud sages who found ways to justify pederasty:

Tractate Sanhedrin 54b - 55a
Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed
as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a
child below three years is not treated as with a child above that. (2)
What is the basis of their dispute? — Rab maintains that only he who
is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject
of pederasty throw guilt [upon the active offender]; whilst he who is
unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of
pederasty [in that respect]. But Samuel maintains: Scripture writes,
[And thou shalt not lie with mankind] as with the lyings of a woman.

The Soncino translator's footnote explains:
(Rashi reads ... instead of the ... in our printed texts. A male, aged
nine years and a day who commits etc.) There are thus three distinct
clauses in this Baraitha. The first — a male aged nine years and a day
— refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being
incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning — because
firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male,
it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with
mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned;
and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt
being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty:
in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless
the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha
supports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum
age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable.

Like those sages, Ike finds ways to make the Scriptures say whatever
he wants them to say.

TCross

[duke]

On Fri, 25 May 2012 08:10:43 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindag...@juno.com>
wrote:

Exactly.

[duke]

On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod <nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
> used to it.
> Rod

Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
prophecy?

[Linda Lee]

On May 26, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >   Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
> >   about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
> >   gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
> >   used to it.
> >   Rod
>
> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
> prophecy?

For example, one aspect is that there is the Israel that was, the
Israel that is, and the Israel that is to come, just as God is He
"which is, and which was, and which is to come" (Rev. 1:4); then there
are the literal, figurative, and spiritual interpretations. Ike seems
to think he's been the first one who has discovered the theme. You
haven't paid much attention to what Ike posts, have you? Mixed in with
all the insults, this is the theme you'll find.

Ike - January 2011 - "Based on an examination of how (not just what)
Jesus and the prophets prophesied, "The Triune Hypothesis" is a guide
to reading the Bible
prophetically in all three dimensions of interpretation-the horizontal
axis
in time (what was, is, and/or is to come), the perpendicular axis in
application (literal, figurative, and/or spiritual), and the vertical
axis
in context (thesis, generality, and/or antithesis).

Topics of discussion include the resurrections, the triune "Last
Days," the
Pentecosts, the one-baptism-in-three-parts, the triple application of
the
Elijah prophecies, the Temples in Jerusalem, the Abominations of
Desolation,
the Triune Israel, the devolution of prophecy, and much more." - from
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.messianic/msg/11fd3702d70382c2

[Rod]

> What is the basis of their dispute? � Rab maintains that only he who

> is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject
> of pederasty throw guilt [upon the active offender]; whilst he who is
> unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of
> pederasty [in that respect]. But Samuel maintains: Scripture writes,
> [And thou shalt not lie with mankind] as with the lyings of a woman.
>
> The Soncino translator's footnote explains:
> (Rashi reads ... instead of the ... in our printed texts. A male, aged
> nine years and a day who commits etc.) There are thus three distinct

> clauses in this Baraitha. The first � a male aged nine years and a day
> � refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being
> incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning � because

> firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male,
> it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with
> mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned;
> and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt
> being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty:
> in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless
> the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha
> supports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum
> age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable.
>
> Like those sages, Ike finds ways to make the Scriptures say whatever
> he wants them to say.
>
> TCross

I wouldn't do those sages the honor of comparing them with Ike,
scumbags that do those things to children shouldn't be given a
trial if they are caught, they should be castrated, staked out
in the sun, their skin peeled off slowly, and salt poured all
across the nerve endings.

[Rod]

On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>> used to it.
>> Rod
>
> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
> prophecy?

Past, Present and the future.

[Terry Cross]

On May 26, 2:33 pm, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/25/2012 9:58 PM, Terry Cross wrote:
>
> > Ike's "three dimensional" prophecy in practice is just triple
> > jointed. Like the Talmud sages who found ways to justify pederasty:
>
> > Tractate Sanhedrin 54b - 55a
> > Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed
> > as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a
> > child below three years is not treated as with a child above that. (2)

> > What is the basis of their dispute? — Rab maintains that only he who

> > is able to engage in sexual intercourse, may, as the passive subject
> > of pederasty throw guilt [upon the active offender]; whilst he who is
> > unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of
> > pederasty [in that respect]. But Samuel maintains: Scripture writes,
> > [And thou shalt not lie with mankind] as with the lyings of a woman.
>
> > The Soncino translator's footnote explains:
> > (Rashi reads ... instead of the ... in our printed texts. A male, aged
> > nine years and a day who commits etc.) There are thus three distinct

> > clauses in this Baraitha. The first — a male aged nine years and a day
> > — refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being
> > incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning — because

> > firstly, the active offender is never explicitly designated as a male,
> > it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with
> > mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned;
> > and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt
> > being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty:
> > in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless
> > the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha
> > supports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the minimum
> > age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable.
>
> > Like those sages, Ike finds ways to make the Scriptures say whatever
> > he wants them to say.
>
> > TCross
>
> I wouldn't do those sages the honor of comparing them with Ike,
> scumbags that do those things to children shouldn't be given a
> trial

You misunderstand the purpose of a trial.

> if they are caught, they should be castrated, staked out
> in the sun, their skin peeled off slowly, and salt poured all
> across the nerve endings.

And woe to you if you discover a day later that you have the wrong
person. The purpose of a trial is to avoid litle mistakes like that.

TCross

[duke]

On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:06:15 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindag...@juno.com>
wrote:

>On May 26, 12:13�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > � Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>> > � about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>> > � gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>> > � used to it.
>> > � Rod
>>
>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
>> prophecy?
>
>
>For example, one aspect is that there is the Israel that was, the
>Israel that is, and the Israel that is to come, just as God is He
>"which is, and which was, and which is to come" (Rev. 1:4); then there
>are the literal, figurative, and spiritual interpretations. Ike seems
>to think he's been the first one who has discovered the theme. You
>haven't paid much attention to what Ike posts, have you? Mixed in with
>all the insults, this is the theme you'll find.

I followed him for a while, but soon bored. Insults played a big part. And the
more he did, the more I saw him as a man against the Christian Church.
More specifically, I saw him as an expert on the bible events, but one who had
absolutely no idea of what the bible taught.

[duke]

On Sat, 26 May 2012 16:34:16 -0500, Rod <nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>> used to it.
>>> Rod
>>
>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
>> prophecy?
>
> Past, Present and the future.

Ok, but that only the single dimension of time.

But a question. How is a statement of today or tomorrow a question of prophecy.
Prophecy must come without firm knowledge of tomorrow.

[duke]

On Sat, 26 May 2012 22:24:18 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross <tcro...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

And so much more:
1. No witnesses.
2. Young boy accusing adult.
3. Rape or attempted rape at 27% of cases.

When I was a young boy, my uncle used to put his hand on my butt and push me out
of the pool. Today, that would likely be seen as sexual abuse.

[Rod]

Unless you catch them in the act..

[Rod]

On 5/27/2012 10:11 AM, duke wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2012 16:34:16 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>>> used to it.
>>>> Rod
>>>
>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
>>> prophecy?
>>
>> Past, Present and the future.
>
> Ok, but that only the single dimension of time.
>
> But a question. How is a statement of today or tomorrow a question of prophecy.
> Prophecy must come without firm knowledge of tomorrow.

Ask Ike. There are some facets to it that I still cannot understand.

[Linda Lee]

> > > he wants them to say.a

He just says they're wrong if they get in the way of his theories.
It's not believable.

>
> > > TCross
>
> >    I wouldn't do those sages the honor of comparing them with Ike,
> >    scumbags that do those things to children shouldn't be given a
> >    trial
>
> You misunderstand the purpose of a trial.
>
> > if they are caught, they should be castrated, staked out
> >    in the sun, their skin peeled off slowly, and salt poured all
> >    across the nerve endings.
>
> And woe to you if you discover a day later that you have the wrong

> person.  The purpose of a trial is to avoid little mistakes like that.
>
> TCross

Such a godly man... not.

James 2:13 "For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath
shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment."

[Terry Cross]

And how does anyone know that YOU are not lying? Do you think the
word of one witness and no evidence should be enough to condemn
someone to the tortures you advocate?

A trial is not a "benefit" to the guilty, but a protection for the
innocent.

TCross

[Linda Lee]

On May 27, 11:09 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:06:15 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com>

> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 26, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >   Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
> >> >   about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
> >> >   gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
> >> >   used to it.
> >> >   Rod
>
> >> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
> >> prophecy?
>
> >For example, one aspect is that there is the Israel that was, the
> >Israel that is, and the Israel that is to come, just as God is He
> >"which is, and which was, and which is to come" (Rev. 1:4); then there
> >are the literal, figurative, and spiritual interpretations. Ike seems
> >to think he's been the first one who has discovered the theme.  You
> >haven't paid much attention to what Ike posts, have you? Mixed in with
> >all the insults, this is the theme you'll find.
>
> I followed him for a while, but soon bored.  Insults played a big part.  And the
> more he did, the more I saw him as a man against the Christian Church.

Ike is an enemy of Christianity and doesn't call himself a Christian,
thinks all branches of Christianity are incorrect, and calls all
Christians here morons. He calls himself a "Triunist" in his cult of
one member.

> More specifically, I saw him as an expert on the bible events, but

An "expert"? He BS's and intimidates his way into leading you to
think that. He's often just plain wrong (see
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764108737830b482)
He gets a lot of his info from bible commentaries such as Gill's,
Barnes, Henry's, etc., just like many of us, but he passes it off as
his own.

> one who had
> absolutely no idea of what the bible taught.

I agree with that part; he thinks Christ and "the boys" (his pet term
for the apostles) were as mean as he is, and often says he's just like
Christ.

He's another internet crazy who deludes himself that he's just like
Christ and has been specially appointed by God. See this post from
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible.prophecy/msg/56fff197b2934313

On Feb 26, 3:36 am, Linda Lee <lindagirl...@juno.com> wrote:
> On Feb 25, 1:57 pm, Pete <*@*> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 08:45:28 -0500, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
>
> > <xeicklebo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 2/24/2012 12:30 PM, Pete wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:26:46 -0500, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> > >> <xeicklebo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> It was never about who would listen to whom, bullshit artist.
>
> > >>>Ike
>
> > >> Send me a photo, I'll sketch one of you too. So you won't have to feel left
> > >> out.
>
> > > Notice how the asshole cut the statement of facts to dwell on the pointless.
>
> > > In the End of the Age, when Moses and Elijah come for the
> > > reconciliation, it WON'T MATTER who listens to whom, as God will be
> > > putting BOTH Covenants together, starting with the Remnant that will
> > > "keep the commandments of God AND have the testimony of Jesus Christ,
> > > etc, etc.
>
> > > But, of course, the point went completely over the fool's head, as he
> > > doesn't know anything about prophecy to begin with, let alone any of its
> > > advanced details.
>
> > >Ike
>
> > May your love be returned to you unabated, and your knowledge be doubled.
>
> He needs his knowledge more than doubled; he compares himself to
> Christ! Can you imagine a Christ as hateful of all believers asIke
> is? And what love do you see evidenced byIke? He's another
> delusional Internet self-appointed false prophet.
>
> FROMhttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.messianic/msg/d8c7ebe2f0aecf44
>
> LindaLeewrote:
> > > That must be whyIkesays God appointedIke
> > > as the first person in over 2,000 years who can
> > > properly interpret prophesy; God worshipsIke.
> Dave wrote:
> > You're kidding me! Seriously? Do you have him
> > quoted as saying that? I'm not saying I don't
> > believe you. I'd just like to read that message
> > and see exactly what prompted that comment.LindaLeewrote:
>
> No, I'm not kidding, and he quit posting his usual venom to me after
> revealing his delusion. Suddenly, he doesn't want to talk to me. What
> he said in response to my saying he thought that about himself was
> along these lines, 'What IF God chose one man? That's how it always
> works', confirming it rather than denying it. Here you go, this is
> how it started; the quote of him is at the link following his quote,
> and I think he was talking to Mark T: who was posting as "THE LORD":
>
> I had added this:
> "[WHOM IKE CLAIMS IS IKE]".
>
> When I responded to this quote of him he had further things to say, in
> his reply to me (also quoted below with a link).
>
> Linda Lee wrote:
>
> "According toIke, the Messiah (God incarnate) had to choose 12 men to
> preach his gospel (the apostles), but the Messiah/God only chose ONE
> MAN (IKE) in the last 2,000 years to interpret ALL prophesy for him."
>
> <BEGIN QUOTE>IKESAYS:
> "Now, here's the thing. God can't talk to the "experts," and has never
> been able to--they all think they know what they're talking about when
> they don't, and God can't get a word in edgewise.
>
> So what does God do?
>
> He goes out and find 12 sheep ranchers, fishermen, and a tax collector
> who DON'T have preconceived theological notions, and trains them [THE
> APOSTLES] up to teach what HE wants taught, DESPITE the "experts" (who
> are really no experts at all).
>
> So what does God do when He wants prophecy explained the RIGHT way?
>
> He can't go to the Seminarians, or Bible College teachers, or Divinity
> School professors--THEY aren't LISTENING because they already THINK
> they know what they're talking about.
>
> So he goes and finds some relatively smart (but common) fellow
> [WHOM IKE CLAIMS IS IKE] who is from several disciplines (military,
> agricultural, academic, etc.) and says "Let Me show you some things
> that no one has noticed."
> So what YOU think is "an embarrassment" is MY GREATEST STRENGTH.
> <chuckle> "
> <END QUOTE>- SEEhttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.messianic/msg/5fbb427f22277903
> - January 12, 2011
>
> And here is his post to me two days later where he defends his claim,
> saying, "And what IF "God only chose ONE MAN (Ike) in the last 2,000
> years to interpret ALL prophecy for Him?" GOD HAS ALWAYS STARTED WITH
> "ONE MAN." "
>
> Ikequotes me posting the following paragraph; his reply follows it:
> "> According to Ike, the Messiah (God incarnate) had to choose 12 men
> as
>
> > apostles to preach his gospel, but God only chose ONE MAN (IKE) in
> > the last 2,000 years to interpret ALL prophesy for him, and that man was
> >Ike.
>
> [IKESAYS]
> Notice how Jezebel here has to divert from the facts to the ad
> hominem
> attack.
>
> And what IF "God only chose ONE MAN (Ike) in the last 2,000 years to
> interpret ALL prophecy for Him?"
>
> GOD HAS ALWAYS STARTED WITH "ONE MAN."
> (And the Disciples didn't start first, JESUS started first."
>
> See, the REAL issue here is YOUR JEALOUSY--you keep making stupid
> statements; Ike keeps destroying them. "
> - Jan 14 2011 - fromhttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.bible/msg/b60fdb3b3a678ba9
<END QUOTE>

[duke]

On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:28:52 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindag...@juno.com>
wrote:

Oh, I didn't realize that. I experienced his as one that could quote every
comma and period in scripture, yet had no idea what God said.

>> More specifically, I saw him as an expert on the bible events, but

>An "expert"? He BS's and intimidates his way into leading you to
>think that. He's often just plain wrong (see

Like on a history test where he memorized every event and time of day but
doesn't have a clue as to what God said.

>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764108737830b482)

[duke]

On Sun, 27 May 2012 18:41:38 -0500, Rod <nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 5/27/2012 10:11 AM, duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 May 2012 16:34:16 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>>>> used to it.
>>>>> Rod
>>>>
>>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
>>>> prophecy?
>>>
>>> Past, Present and the future.
>>
>> Ok, but that only the single dimension of time.
>>
>> But a question. How is a statement of today or tomorrow a question of prophecy.
>> Prophecy must come without firm knowledge of tomorrow.
>
> Ask Ike. There are some facets to it that I still cannot understand.

I guess we need to put ike back in his bottle.

[Terry Cross]

On May 29, 11:52 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 May 2012 18:41:38 -0500, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 5/27/2012 10:11 AM, duke wrote:

> >> On Sat, 26 May 2012 16:34:16 -0500, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> >>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:

> >>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>   wrote:
>
> >>>>>     Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
> >>>>>     about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
> >>>>>     gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
> >>>>>     used to it.
> >>>>>     Rod
>
> >>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
> >>>> prophecy?
>
> >>>    Past, Present and the future.
>
> >> Ok, but that only the single dimension of time.
>
> >> But a question.  How is a statement of today or tomorrow a question of prophecy.
> >> Prophecy must come without firm knowledge of tomorrow.
>
> >   Ask Ike. There are some facets to it that I still cannot understand.
>

> I guess we need to put Ike back in his bottle.


Just put him in a paper bag and wrap the end closed with a wet
noodle. He'll never get out!

TCross

[Rod]

#1. I just happened to come upon the body, officer...

> Do you think the
> word of one witness and no evidence should be enough to condemn
> someone to the tortures you advocate?

See #1..

[Rod]

You are so easy to manipulate...I just push the right button
and you go over the edge!

Now if I can just find the right button that makes you squat
and quack like a duck!!

[Rod]

Seriously...I'm not taking this last statement lightly, but when I
said "catch them in the act", that is what i meant.


But of course..we can take the same route that you and Linda the
Loser have chosen; we can put then on trial and take the chance that
(their attorney isn't smart or just lucky) they get off. Sure, we can
let them loose to molest and sodomize hundreds of children, and just
like you and Linda, we can accept the fact that the poor little
Pedo cretin might be mistreated and his rights violated, but we can
also ignore as you and Linda have the rights of his victims. We may
also ignore the lack of mercy and concern that this Pedo homo back door
rapist has for his victims who DON'T "want it". You're right of course,
those who have mercy will receive mercy...perhaps that's why these
creeps don't often receive any, ya think ?

Yeah, we can also ignore the fact that many pedo creeps and homos
will, and HAVE murdered their victims without mercy, mostly from fear
of being caught and prosecuted, and some that do get off or get away
entirely.

Yeah, we can ignore the fact that you concern is one dimensional and
for the perverts only....but we won't....



>
> TCross

[Rod]

Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..

[H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.]

On 5/26/2012 5:34 PM, Rod wrote:
> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>> used to it.
>>> Rod
>>
>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3
>> dimensional"
>> prophecy?
>
> Past, Present and the future.

That's one axis, with the other two being application (literal,
figurative, and/or spiritual) and context (thesis, generality, and/or
antithesis).

And any given prophecy can be applied along those shifting contexts, as
in Jesus' discussion of the Elijah prophecy.

Elijah literally "was."

Elijah spiritually "is" in the person of John the Baptist.

Elijah literally and figuratively "will be" when he comes in the End of
the Age, but comes in subdued form so that only the wise (i.e. the
Remnant) will recognize who he is and what he is doing when he (with
Moses) returns to Jerusalem.

Ike

--
http://thetriunist.weebly.com/index.html
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/The-Triune-Hypothesis/102657386473773

[H.E. Eickleberry, Jr.]

On 5/27/2012 7:41 PM, Rod wrote:
> On 5/27/2012 10:11 AM, duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 May 2012 16:34:16 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>>>> used to it.
>>>>> Rod
>>>>
>>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3
>>>> dimensional"
>>>> prophecy?
>>>
>>> Past, Present and the future.
>>
>> Ok, but that only the single dimension of time.
>>
>> But a question. How is a statement of today or tomorrow a question of
>> prophecy.
>> Prophecy must come without firm knowledge of tomorrow.
>
> Ask Ike. There are some facets to it that I still cannot understand.

How would one know the "tomorrow" if precedences were not set in the
"yesterday?"

Linearly speaking, Jesus wasn't the first one to use the term
"abomination of desolation;" it occurred throughout Jewish apocalyptic
literature, and applied to events in the history of Israel.

The First A of D was committed by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in c. 166 BC. (was)

The Second A of D was committed by the Romans, in particular when
Emperor Hadrian set up ANOTHER statue of Zeus as himself on the Temple
Mount. "(is)

The third will occur in the End of the Age. (yet to come)

Unfortunate, "experts" try to dismiss the triune nature of prophecy one
way or the other, either to dismiss any future implications of it, or to
cobble together false interpretations that skip parts they don't like or
can't sell (like the Beginning of Sorrows), etc, etc.

[duke]

> Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
> has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
> in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..

By hates men, you mean Linda?

[duke]

On Tue, 29 May 2012 12:58:58 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross <tcro...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

I concur.

[duke]

On Wed, 30 May 2012 05:43:33 -0400, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
<xeickl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 5/26/2012 5:34 PM, Rod wrote:
>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>>> used to it.
>>>> Rod
>>>
>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3
>>> dimensional"
>>> prophecy?
>>
>> Past, Present and the future.
>
>That's one axis, with the other two being application (literal,
>figurative, and/or spiritual) and context (thesis, generality, and/or
>antithesis).
>
>And any given prophecy can be applied along those shifting contexts, as
>in Jesus' discussion of the Elijah prophecy.
>
>Elijah literally "was."
>
>Elijah spiritually "is" in the person of John the Baptist.

Wow, what a wacko.

>Elijah literally and figuratively "will be" when he comes in the End of
>the Age, but comes in subdued form so that only the wise (i.e. the
>Remnant) will recognize who he is and what he is doing when he (with
>Moses) returns to Jerusalem.

>Ike

Into the bottle for preservation.

[Rod]

Yes. Linda the Loon

[Rod]

On 5/30/2012 11:14 AM, duke wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 05:43:33 -0400, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> <xeickl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/26/2012 5:34 PM, Rod wrote:
>>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>>>> used to it.
>>>>> Rod
>>>>
>>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3
>>>> dimensional"
>>>> prophecy?
>>>
>>> Past, Present and the future.
>>
>> That's one axis, with the other two being application (literal,
>> figurative, and/or spiritual) and context (thesis, generality, and/or
>> antithesis).
>>
>> And any given prophecy can be applied along those shifting contexts, as
>> in Jesus' discussion of the Elijah prophecy.
>>
>> Elijah literally "was."
>>
>> Elijah spiritually "is" in the person of John the Baptist.
>
> Wow, what a wacko.

Not even a little bit. If you would bother yourself to learn
more about it and how to apply it you could interpret scripture
correctly yourself instead of relying on others to do so for you.

>
>> Elijah literally and figuratively "will be" when he comes in the End of
>> the Age, but comes in subdued form so that only the wise (i.e. the
>> Remnant) will recognize who he is and what he is doing when he (with
>> Moses) returns to Jerusalem.
>
>> Ike
>
> Into the bottle for preservation.

And !!!POP!!! back out of the bottle!! and helping others to learn,
but this is key to ((((((WANTING to LEARN))))))).

[Terry Cross]

On May 30, 10:32 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/30/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 29 May 2012 19:53:29 -0500, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> >> On 5/29/2012 1:51 PM, duke wrote:

> >>> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:28:52 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee<lindagirl...@juno.com>

> >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764...)

>
> >>    Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
> >>    has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
> >>    in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>
> > By hates men, you mean Linda?
>
>    Yes. Linda the Loon

Perhaps you and Ike will one day read the Gospels.

Matthew 5:22
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a
cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to
his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

TCross

[Barry OGrady]

God is in danger of hell fire!

Luke 12:20
But God said unto him, [Thou] fool, this night thy soul shall be
required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast
provided?

>TCross

=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
God is a spirit. 0% proof!

[Terry Cross]

On May 30, 3:08 pm, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 14:43:40 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross
>

> <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On May 30, 10:32 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>    Yes. Linda the Loon
>
> >Perhaps you and Ike will one day read the Gospels.
>
> >Matthew 5:22
> >But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a
> >cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to
> >his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
> >shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
>
> God is in danger of hell fire!

You already asked about that. God has no fear of hell-fire. God is
everywhere, even between the ears people who use the name, "Barry
OGrady.

TCross

[Barry OGrady]

On Wed, 30 May 2012 15:26:14 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross
<tcro...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On May 30, 3:08 pm, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 May 2012 14:43:40 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross
>>
>> <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >On May 30, 10:32 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>    Yes. Linda the Loon
>>
>> >Perhaps you and Ike will one day read the Gospels.
>>
>> >Matthew 5:22
>> >But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a
>> >cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to
>> >his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
>> >shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
>>
>> God is in danger of hell fire!
>
>You already asked about that.

This time I'm not asking.

>God has no fear of hell-fire.

Yet Luke 12:20 tells us

But God said unto him, [Thou] fool, this night thy soul shall be
required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast
provided?

>God is everywhere, even between the ears people who use the
>name, "Barry OGrady.

How do we make use of this magical God before he ends up
in hell fire?

[Terry Cross]

On May 30, 3:54 pm, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 15:26:14 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On May 30, 3:08 pm, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 30 May 2012 14:43:40 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross
>
> >> <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On May 30, 10:32 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>    Yes. Linda the Loon
>
> >> >Perhaps you and Ike will one day read the Gospels.
>
> >> >Matthew 5:22
> >> >But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a
> >> >cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to
> >> >his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
> >> >shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
>
> >> God is in danger of hell fire!
>
> >You already asked about that.
>
> This time I'm not asking.
>
> >God has no fear of hell-fire.
>
> Yet Luke 12:20 tells us
> But God said unto him, [Thou] fool, this night thy soul shall be
> required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast
> provided?

What is your point?

> >God is everywhere, even between the ears people who use the
> >name, "Barry OGrady.
>
> How do we make use of this magical God before he ends up
> in hell fire?

How do you "make use" of your mother? How do you "make use" of
existence?

You might be asking a meaningless question.

TCross

[Rod]

I'm not worried about it. A fool and a lunatic are NOT
the same thing, but feel free to misapply more verses..

[Rod]

On 5/30/2012 5:26 PM, Terry Cross wrote:
> On May 30, 3:08 pm, Barry OGrady<athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 May 2012 14:43:40 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross
>>
>> <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On May 30, 10:32 am, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Yes. Linda the Loon
>>
>>> Perhaps you and Ike will one day read the Gospels.
>>
>>> Matthew 5:22
>>> But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a
>>> cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to
>>> his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever
>>> shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
>>
>> God is in danger of hell fire!
>
> You already asked about that. God has no fear of hell-fire.

No....but He has a dislike for iron.

[Barry OGrady]

God said unto him, Thou fool

>> >God is everywhere, even between the ears people who use the
>> >name, "Barry OGrady.
>>
>> How do we make use of this magical God before he ends up
>> in hell fire?
>
>
>How do you "make use" of your mother? How do you "make use" of
>existence?
>
>You might be asking a meaningless question.

Perhaps, but I won't know unless you tell me.
There is no point having a magical God with no function.

[Linda Lee]

On May 30, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 May 2012 19:53:29 -0500, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 5/29/2012 1:51 PM, duke wrote:

> >> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:28:52 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee<lindagirl...@juno.com>

> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764...)

> >   Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
> >   has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
> >   in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>
> By hates men, you mean Linda?

I don't hate men who show some respect for women, Duke. I do have a
revulsion for ungodly, hatefully chauvinist wackos like Rod and Ike.
I must say, to your credit, even when you become angry, you do not
exhibit any hatred of women.

[Linda Lee]

Neither of them are my brothers, but they do have a 'cause' for their
condition; either they both were rejected by their girlfriends/wives,
or else both had abusive unloving mothers who caused them to hate
women (thus the appropriate term S.O.B.).

[Terry Cross]

On May 30, 5:19 pm, Barry OGrady <athe...@hotmail.com.au> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 May 2012 16:11:14 -0700 (PDT), Terry Cross
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Perhaps I have misunderstood you. How do you "make use of" the
universe? How do you "make use of" the primordial mass?

> There is no point having a magical God with no function.

I guess you mean to say that anything YOU cannot employ to serve your
petty purposes -- well, it certainly has no excuse for existence, does
it?

TCross

[Linda Lee]

There's a reason for Barry's sense of a lack of purpose for his life,
but he isn't too happy about it.

2Pe 2:10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of
uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they,
selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
...
2Pe 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and
destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and
shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
2Pe 2:13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they
that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and
blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they
feast with you;
2Pe 2:14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from
sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with
covetous practices; cursed children:

[Rod]

Translation: I can get along with men that won't stand up
to my psychotic urges.

I do have a
> revulsion for ungodly, hatefully chauvinist wackos like Rod and Ike.

You have a revulsion for anyone that stands up to you
and wont take your crap.

> I must say, to your credit, even when you become angry, you do not
> exhibit any hatred of women.
>

No one kisses ass like you do Linda...

[Terry Cross]

Good grief! "Despise government"??? What awful people those must be.
Now we know that everybody here just LOVES government. We love the
government of Syria, the government of China, the government of N.
Korea, the government of Israel, the government of Uganda, the
government of Saudi Arabia, ...

How could anybody in her right mind "despise government"? Such people
are crawling with uncleanliness!

TCross

[Terry Cross]

You don't make any effort to be consistent, do you, Rod -- except
consistently nasty.

TCross

[Linda Lee]

He's inconsistent because he's a liar and fraud, and the truth offends
him. And he disrespects men who don't hate women like he does too.

> -- except
> consistently nasty.

No explanation needed other than his core nature is evil.

>
> TCross

[Barry OGrady]

On Thu, 31 May 2012 03:14:56 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee
<lindag...@juno.com> wrote:

>On May 31, 2:32 am, Terry Cross <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 30, 7:44 pm, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>

>> > On 30/5/2012 8:45 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>
>> > >>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764...)
>> > >>>    Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
>> > >>>    has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
>> > >>>    in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>>
>> > >> By hates men, you mean Linda?
>>
>> > > I don't hate men who show some respect for women, Duke.
>>
>> >    Translation: I can get along with men that won't stand up
>> >    to my psychotic urges.
>>
>> >    I do have a
>>
>> > > revulsion for ungodly, hatefully chauvinist wackos like Rod and Ike.
>>
>> >    You have a revulsion for anyone that stands up to you
>> >    and wont take your crap.
>>
>> > > I must say, to your credit, even when you become angry, you do not
>> > > exhibit any hatred of women.
>>
>> >    No one kisses ass like you do Linda...
>>
>> You don't make any effort to be consistent, do you, Rod
>
>He's inconsistent because he's a liar and fraud, and the truth offends
>him. And he disrespects men who don't hate women like he does too.
>
>> -- except
>> consistently nasty.
>
>No explanation needed other than his core nature is evil.

I normally respect women but you are a nasty piece of work.

[Linda Lee]

It's not a political statement; it's about those who disrespect God;
notice the previous verses cite the destruction of Sodom and
Gomorrha. I think II Pet. 2:10 was talking about those who despise
God's governing (such as those people who hate God because the
Scriptures say God will judge and punish the wicked), since the word
is from Kurios (often translated God or Lord). Such people are often
the same people who won't be held to any kind of law governing wicked
behavior. You know, wicked people who hurt others.

And the "dignities" I took to be supernatural also, because of the way
it is translated, and not necessarily natural dignities such as kings,
etc.

Dignities - Gk. 1391
doxa
From the base of G1380; glory (as very apparent), in a wide
application (literally or figuratively, objectively or subjectively):
- dignity, glory (-ious), honour, praise, worship.


2Pe 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes
condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those
that after should live ungodly;
2Pe 2:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of
the wicked:
2Pe 2:8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and
hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful
deeds;)
2Pe 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations,
and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:

[Linda Lee]

Poor bitter Barry; you're a liar who does routinely disrespect women,
God, and believers. You and the ungodly "Rod" have much in common. Too
bad your rejection of God's judgment won't save you from it.

[Barry OGrady]

rOn Thu, 31 May 2012 03:25:19 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee

<lindag...@juno.com> wrote:

>It's not a political statement; it's about those who disrespect God;

Why would anyone disrespect God?
We all feel the warmth of God's love.
How else could it be that everything is good and there are
no problems of any kind? We don't even have words for
problems or bad.
I'd like atheists to tell me how everything could be so good
without a loving God.

[Rod]

Just telling it like it is..

[Rod]

Psycho..

[Rod]

On 5/31/2012 5:27 AM, Linda Lee wrote:

You see, here is another of those damnable lies that you paste around
like it were true. Barry has shown no disrespect to your womanhood
nor have I ever questioned it. What I question is your ethics. You
seem to have none, and there is no point you have ever reached where
you are unwilling to lie about those you consider to be enemies.

Barry is correct, you are a nasty piece of work.

[Rod]

On 5/31/2012 1:32 AM, Terry Cross wrote:

And you don't think her kissing ass is nasty...

Consistency has it drawbacks, for example: Linda claiming that I
disrespect her womanhood. I've never questioned her womanhood, more
her ethics than anything, but now I have to question yours as well,
for a picture is being painted by both you and Linda of two people;
you Terry for me being consistently nasty, and you're right to do this,
but your lack of criticism of Linda for her habit of telling lies about
others with no remorse. And then there is Linda, a true spiritual
Jezebel if ever their were one. A contempt for manhood, belittling and
lying about them constantly; a woman who has demonstrated a contempt for
males on anywhere, and yet ironically she is the one doing most of what
she has complained about!


Linda, a woman who has no idea that she is lying when she does it.

In truth, Linda is a pathological liar that cannot tolerate the fact
being pointed out to other people.


Poor little Lying Linda Lee, ever wondering and never learning...







>
> TCross

[Linda Lee]

On May 31, 9:12 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/31/2012 1:32 AM, Terry Cross wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 30, 7:44 pm, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >> On 5/30/2012 8:45 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764...)
> >>>>>     Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
> >>>>>     has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
> >>>>>     in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>
> >>>> By hates men, you mean Linda?
>
> >>> I don't hate men who show some respect for women, Duke.
>
> >>     Translation: I can get along with men that won't stand up
> >>     to my psychotic urges.
>
> >>     I do have a
>
> >>> revulsion for ungodly, hatefully chauvinist wackos like Rod and Ike.
>
> >>     You have a revulsion for anyone that stands up to you
> >>     and wont take your crap.
>
> >>> I must say, to your credit, even when you become angry, you do not
> >>> exhibit any hatred of women.
>
> >>     No one kisses ass like you do Linda...
>
> > You don't make any effort to be consistent, do you, Rod -- except
> > consistently nasty.
>
>    And you don't think her kissing ass is nasty...

What I said about Duke was true, and it is you who are the liar, you
jackass, and my post to him was a response to your lying about me to
him. There are men who aren't jackasses like yourself, or haven't you
ever noticed? Oh yeah, you've noticed them; they're the ones you claim
don't have a backbone because they aren't hateful asses like yourself.

Only extremely evil people like yourself have a problem with God's
determination he will one day punish and destroy the wicked. So don't
bother trying to blame me because the Messiah's Gospel says it will
happen and that there is a hell. If you didn't fear it was actually
true, and didn't suspect damnation in hell refers to you and people
like the atheist Barry, you would have no problem with those who do
believe it.


Psa 2:11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
Psa 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way,
when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put
their trust in him.

And the Messiah's parable here confirms the destruction of the wicked;
God's enemies who reject the Messiah and his Gospel:

Luke 19:27 "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should
reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."


Now, it's back in the persona non grata file for your worthless self.

[Linda Lee]

On May 31, 9:12 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5/31/2012 1:32 AM, Terry Cross wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 30, 7:44 pm, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >> On 5/30/2012 8:45 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764...)
> >>>>>     Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
> >>>>>     has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
> >>>>>     in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>
> >>>> By hates men, you mean Linda?
>
> >>> I don't hate men who show some respect for women, Duke.
>
> >>     Translation: I can get along with men that won't stand up
> >>     to my psychotic urges.
>
> >>     I do have a
>
> >>> revulsion for ungodly, hatefully chauvinist wackos like Rod and Ike.
>
> >>     You have a revulsion for anyone that stands up to you
> >>     and wont take your crap.
>
> >>> I must say, to your credit, even when you become angry, you do not
> >>> exhibit any hatred of women.
>
> >>     No one kisses ass like you do Linda...
>
> > You don't make any effort to be consistent, do you, Rod -- except
> > consistently nasty.
>
>    And you don't think her kissing ass is nasty...

What's nasty is you trying to spread your hatred. You're a sick excuse
for a human being whose only interest in the Scriptures is for the
"authority" you imagine it has granted you over women when it says
nothing about it except in a marriage, and then it teaches the husband
should respect and take care of his wife. What a pathetic laugh you
are!

[duke]

On Wed, 30 May 2012 12:32:54 -0500, Rod <nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 5/30/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:

>> On Tue, 29 May 2012 19:53:29 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/29/2012 1:51 PM, duke wrote:

>>>> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:28:52 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee<lindag...@juno.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On May 27, 11:09 am, duke<duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764108737830b482)

>>
>>> Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
>>> has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
>>> in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>>
>> By hates men, you mean Linda?
>

> Yes. Linda the Loon

Oh.

[duke]

On Wed, 30 May 2012 18:45:10 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee <lindag...@juno.com>
wrote:

That's because I have no hatred for that which I love.

[duke]

On Wed, 30 May 2012 12:56:19 -0500, Rod <nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 5/30/2012 11:14 AM, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 May 2012 05:43:33 -0400, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
>> <xeickl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/26/2012 5:34 PM, Rod wrote:
>>>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:

>>>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
>>>>>> about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
>>>>>> gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
>>>>>> used to it.
>>>>>> Rod
>>>>>
>>>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3
>>>>> dimensional"
>>>>> prophecy?
>>>>

>>>> Past, Present and the future.
>>>
>>> That's one axis, with the other two being application (literal,
>>> figurative, and/or spiritual) and context (thesis, generality, and/or
>>> antithesis).
>>>
>>> And any given prophecy can be applied along those shifting contexts, as
>>> in Jesus' discussion of the Elijah prophecy.
>>>
>>> Elijah literally "was."
>>>
>>> Elijah spiritually "is" in the person of John the Baptist.
>>
>> Wow, what a wacko.
>
> Not even a little bit. If you would bother yourself to learn
> more about it and how to apply it you could interpret scripture
> correctly yourself instead of relying on others to do so for you.

It's totally nuts as black magic. Moses and Elijah and Jesus and Simon Peter
and Paul and all the apostles were men, real men - living one life and then
dying.

>>> Elijah literally and figuratively "will be" when he comes in the End of
>>> the Age, but comes in subdued form so that only the wise (i.e. the
>>> Remnant) will recognize who he is and what he is doing when he (with
>>> Moses) returns to Jerusalem.
>>
>>> Ike
>>
>> Into the bottle for preservation.
>
> And !!!POP!!! back out of the bottle!! and helping others to learn,
> but this is key to ((((((WANTING to LEARN))))))).

There is no place in Christianity for black magic and fire breathing dragons.
Jesus the man showed us in example the way to eternal salvation with the Father
in Heaven.

Anyone taking such a position is in total delusion to the truth.

[Rod]

Sadly, you even lie to yourself. Any man that stands up to your
bullying is an automatic target for your hate, jezebel.

There are men who aren't jackasses like yourself, or haven't you
> ever noticed?

And their are women who aren't jezebels and liars like yourself,
or *haven't you noticed ?*

> Oh yeah, you've noticed them; they're the ones you claim
> don't have a backbone because they aren't hateful asses like yourself.

I hate the things that you do Linda, but I don't hate you yourself
and never have. I would have to actually know you in person to hate
you.

>
> Only extremely evil people like yourself have a problem with God's
> determination he will one day punish and destroy the wicked.

Look in the mirror lately ? You evidently don't have a conscience
when it comes to your own behavior, but you're blantantly loud on
everyone else's misdeeds.

> So don't
> bother trying to blame me because the Messiah's Gospel says it will
> happen and that there is a hell.

Why is it that you believe I am "blaming you" for it ? In all truth,
it doesn't make sense to raise someone back from the dead just to
punish them. If that is the case then they should have received
punishment while they were living for their misdeeds, and then
leave them dead.

No, the verses do not make any kind sense, *UNLESS* the author(s)
are trying to play on someones fear of the unknown, to manipulate
the readers.

> If you didn't fear it was actually
> true, and didn't suspect damnation in hell refers to you and people
> like the atheist Barry, you would have no problem with those who do
> believe it.

The problem is that you are TRYING to make ME believe it. You attempt
to manipulate me using fear of the unknown, and it won't work.

This is my belief Linda: many things incorporated into the scriptures
have no truth in them. God did not create an unreasoning creature
when He created men and women, and His ability to create us proves
that he has a capacity for thinking things thru. We, on the other
hand, do not often use our capacity to reason as you have
demonstrated by believing the verses. Those verses were not the
product of the mind of God, they are the products of men bent on
manipulating your fear of death and the unknown to their advantage.

>
>
> Psa 2:11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

Does this sound like the life you want to have after dying ?

Do you really want to live forever under someone who *wants you
to fear them constantly ?* Yes, I am interpreting these words
literally because these words paint a very unpleasant picture,
a picture of someone or something desiring to have you terrified
of him at all times.

> Psa 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way,
> when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put
> their trust in him.

These verses don't demonstrate a loving God, and it certainly isn't
someone who is capable of anything more than self love.

>
> And the Messiah's parable here confirms the destruction of the wicked;
> God's enemies who reject the Messiah and his Gospel:

If this is the case then we should have endorsed and supported Stalin,
he would have been just as kind.

>
> Luke 19:27 "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should
> reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."

Another attempt at fear mongering and manipulation. if these are the
words of God, then they again paint a picture of a future not unlike
many peoples lives at this moment, a horrible life of constant fear
and abuse.

No one wants a future like this unless they are already horribly
frightened of death and the unknown, and they shouldn't be. Death
really isn't always a horrible end, but you'll have to face it
wanting to or not. Death in the end is often what you make of it,
but it's natural and the next step.

>
>
> Now, it's back in the persona non grata file for your worthless self.

And now you are going to have another tantrum. I have a suggestion
for you; if you don't like what I post then don't read it. It has a
name Linda; it goes by "self control".

Try using it sometime.

[Rod]

On 5/31/2012 10:44 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
> On May 31, 9:12 am, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/31/2012 1:32 AM, Terry Cross wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 30, 7:44 pm, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/30/2012 8:45 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764...)
>>>>>>> Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
>>>>>>> has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
>>>>>>> in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>>
>>>>>> By hates men, you mean Linda?
>>
>>>>> I don't hate men who show some respect for women, Duke.
>>
>>>> Translation: I can get along with men that won't stand up
>>>> to my psychotic urges.
>>
>>>> I do have a
>>
>>>>> revulsion for ungodly, hatefully chauvinist wackos like Rod and Ike.
>>
>>>> You have a revulsion for anyone that stands up to you
>>>> and wont take your crap.
>>
>>>>> I must say, to your credit, even when you become angry, you do not
>>>>> exhibit any hatred of women.
>>
>>>> No one kisses ass like you do Linda...
>>
>>> You don't make any effort to be consistent, do you, Rod -- except
>>> consistently nasty.
>>
>> And you don't think her kissing ass is nasty...
>
>
> What's nasty is you trying to spread your hatred.

Pot...Kettle...Black...

> You're a sick excuse
> for a human being whose only interest in the Scriptures is for the
> "authority" you imagine it has granted you over women when it says
> nothing about it except in a marriage,

And yet knowing this you not once demonstrated respect for it. No
wonder you are divorced!

> and then it teaches the husband
> should respect and take care of his wife. What a pathetic laugh you
> are!

If you were as defiant in marriage as you are now in divorce
then I can well understand why you are divorced.


Your ex is a lucky man!

[Rod]

No one said there was but you...

Many happy delusions!

[Terry Cross]

Possibly. But the English Standard renders this verse thus:

... then (S)the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials,[d] and
to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, 10
and especially (T)those who indulge[e] in the lust of defiling passion
and (U)despise authority.

(U) takes us to Jude 1:8 and Exodus 22:28
8 Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams,
defile the flesh, reject authority, and (A)blaspheme the glorious
ones.

Exodus 22:28
28 (A)“You shall not revile God, nor (B)curse a ruler of your people.

This leads to more references in Acts 23:5; [2 Sam. 19:21; Eccles.
10:20; Jude 8]

Acts 23:5
5 And Paul said, (A)“I did not know, brothers, that he was the high
priest, for it is written, (B)‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of
your people.’”

2 Samuel 19:21
21 Abishai the son of Zeruiah answered, “Shall not Shimei be put to
death for this, because (A)he cursed the Lord's anointed?”

These seem to be political statements. Paul, again, in Acts, of
course. Paul expands on that theme without ambiguity in Romans 13.

These folks are all tangled up between holiness and political power.
Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world. I side with Jesus on
this one. I do not hold with worshiping the feet the thrones, or the
flesh of political puppets.

TCross

[Barry OGrady]

On Thu, 31 May 2012 11:51:24 -0500, Rod <nhra...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 31/5/2012 10:32 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>> On May 31, 9:12 am, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> On 31/5/2012 1:32 AM, Terry Cross wrote:
>>>
>>>> On May 30, 7:44 pm, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:

People are asking, if we evolved why are there still people
like Linda?

[Rod]

It seems to me that human evolution happens a little bit at a time
in jumps. Some of us move up the ladder a few at a time and a few
don't, and if that is the case then the likely answer will be genetics
and how well one adapts to the environment..or perhaps Linda was at
one time a mutant sperm.

[Linda Lee]

On May 30, 5:43 pm, Terry Cross <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 30, 10:32 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 5/30/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, 29 May 2012 19:53:29 -0500, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> > >> On 5/29/2012 1:51 PM, duke wrote:

> > >>> On Mon, 28 May 2012 10:28:52 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee<lindagirl...@juno.com>
> > >>> wrote:
>
> > >>>> On May 27, 11:09 am, duke<duckgumb...@cox.net>   wrote:

> > >>>>> On Sat, 26 May 2012 12:06:15 -0700 (PDT), Linda Lee<lindagirl...@juno.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> On May 26, 12:13 pm, duke<duckgumb...@cox.net>   wrote:

> > >>>>>>> On Fri, 25 May 2012 12:18:59 -0500, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>   wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>     Whether you like it or whether you don't, *Ike has ALWAYS been right
> > >>>>>>>>     about prophecy being 3 dimensional*. I know that this fact just
> > >>>>>>>>     gripes your butt, but I'm afraid that you're going to have to get
> > >>>>>>>>     used to it.
> > >>>>>>>>     Rod
>
> > >>>>>>> Pardon me for just now seeing this and asking, but what is "3 dimensional"
> > >>>>>>> prophecy?
>

> > >>>>>> For example, one aspect is that there is the Israel that was, the
> > >>>>>> Israel that is, and the Israel that is to come, just as God is He
> > >>>>>> "which is, and which was, and which is to come" (Rev. 1:4); then there
> > >>>>>> are the literal, figurative, and spiritual interpretations. Ike seems
> > >>>>>> to think he's been the first one who has discovered the theme.  You
> > >>>>>> haven't paid much attention to what Ike posts, have you? Mixed in with
> > >>>>>> all the insults, this is the theme you'll find.
>
> > >>>>> I followed him for a while, but soon bored.  Insults played a big part.  And the
> > >>>>> more he did, the more I saw him as a man against the Christian Church.
>
> > >>>> Ike is an enemy of Christianity and doesn't call himself a Christian,
> > >>>> thinks all branches of Christianity are incorrect, and calls all
> > >>>> Christians here morons. He calls himself a "Triunist" in his cult of
> > >>>> one member.
>
> > >>> Oh, I didn't realize that.  I experienced his as one that could quote every
> > >>> comma and period in scripture, yet had no idea what God said.
>
> > >>>>> More specifically, I saw him as an expert on the bible events, but
>
> > >>>> An "expert"?  He BS's and intimidates his way into leading you to
> > >>>> think that. He's often just plain wrong (see
>
> > >>> Like on a history test where he memorized every event and time of day but
> > >>> doesn't have a clue as to what God said.
>

> > >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.christian.baptist/msg/764...)
>
> > >>    Talk to Ike...you don't want to believe anything that the jezebel
> > >>    has to say. She hates men and refuses the male authority granted
> > >>    in the scriptures. She is the last word in heresy..
>
> > > By hates men, you mean Linda?
>

> >    Yes. Linda the Loon
>
> Perhaps you and Ike will one day read the Gospels.

Whereas some chauvinistic men find women 'less than' and think they
should have "authority" over all women; all four gospel accounts
report that the risen Christ first appeared to women and commissioned
women to announce the good news of his resurrection to the apostles.

[Rod]

Whoopdee freakin' do.....golly mom...

[duke]

Are you sure that you espouse black magic and fire breathing dragons in
Christianity the way your comment reads? Then again, maybe I'm the one that
wasn't clear.

[Terry Cross]

Linda: Rod is so obviously an intellectual light-weight, I am
embarrassed to answer his posts. He takes from the scripture only the
parts useful to him in his private war against the adults of the
world.

TCross

[Terry Cross]

On May 31, 10:13 am, Rod <nhraf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/31/2012 11:25 AM, duke wrote:
>

> > On Wed, 30 May 2012 12:56:19 -0500, Rod<nhraf...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> >> On 5/30/2012 11:14 AM, duke wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 30 May 2012 05:43:33 -0400, "H.E. Eickleberry, Jr."
> >>> <xeicklebo...@gmail.com>   wrote:
>
> >>>> On 5/26/2012 5:34 PM, Rod wrote:
> >>>>> On 5/26/2012 11:13 AM, duke wrote:

Another entry to the Rod-is-right-and-the-world-is-wrong list.

TCross

[Linda Lee]

You know I agree. I just think it boils down to - he is evil and
manifests it in many ways. He's so consistently evil, he's actually
boring.

[Rod]

But you do it anyway. You must be into self abuse. Here's a hint,
oh mighty intellectuals: stop reading my posts....

but you're mighty intellectuals and I shouldn't have to tell you
that....

> He takes from the scripture only the
> parts useful to him in his private war against the adults of the
> world.
>
> TCross

<smiling.....> I'm not at war with you. Why would you believe
yourself worth the trouble ?