Another sign of how deluded/bad the world is getting.

[Michael Christ]

A person admits that he does not submit to God, then starts telling me
what is right and what is wrong.

I bring attention to it, and the next thing I am told I am false.

I shake my head in disbelief, but it is actually happening!

If a man who lived 100 years ago could come and see what is happening
in the world today, he would still be a sinner, but even he would drop
to his knees in shock. The world today is...plunging...into the abyss/
to the nothingness without God.




Michael Christ

[duke]

Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.

The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[Mordecai]

Well, in this your words speak against you.
The bible has many accounts of exactly that.

It is not for you to say "I am not allowed to listen because the messenger
is unworthy."
Who are you to judge whom G_d might use to send a message?


--
Mordecai!

When words and actions disagree, believe actions.
When rhetoric and reality disagree, either rhetoric is wrong or reality is
wrong, and reality is Never wrong.

[Michael Christ]

On May 6, 6:11 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 5 May 2013 15:04:19 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
>

> <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >A person admits that he does not submit to God, then starts telling me
> >what is right and what is wrong.
>
> >I bring attention to it, and the next thing I am told I am false.
>
> >I shake my head in disbelief, but it is actually happening!
>
> >If a man who lived 100 years ago could come and see what is happening
> >in the world today, he would still be a sinner, but even he would drop
> >to his knees in shock.  The world today is...plunging...into the abyss/
> >to the nothingness without God.

Duke wrote:
> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.

Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.

When you understand these things, then you won't open your mouth in
man-made christian ignorance...

1Jn 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and
declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at
all.
1Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in
darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath
not seen him, neither known him.

In the meantime you just have to do your gang-nam style Catholic
'following' to the confessional because you haven't followed Him.

You could try praying to Mary for help, but then that is not real
Christianity, its humanism.



Michael Christ

[Michael Christ]

Michael Christ wrote:
> > A person admits that he does not submit to God, then starts telling me
> > what is right and what is wrong.
>
> > I bring attention to it, and the next thing I am told I am false.
>
> > I shake my head in disbelief, but it is actually happening!
>
> > If a man who lived 100 years ago could come and see what is happening
> > in the world today, he would still be a sinner, but even he would drop
> > to his knees in shock.  The world today is...plunging...into the abyss/
> > to the nothingness without God.

Mordecai wrote:
> Well, in this your words speak against you.
> The bible has many accounts of exactly that.
>
> It is not for you to say "I am not allowed to listen because the messenger
> is unworthy."
> Who are you to judge whom G_d might use to send a message?

Who are you to judge me an idiot? It is not for you to say! You
presume to speak for Him??

The message is either the truth or a lie, but to discern the
difference is only for those who know the Messenger/Jesus.

Mat_28:18 (KJV) And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All
power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.



Michael Christ

PS Lashon hara according to your own standards. You needed to ask me
for forgiveness but you didn't so your religion is seen for what it
is, a sham.

[Michael Christ]

I think you would make a good Catholic, Mordecai.

:-).





Michael Christ

[Mordecai]

Tony Abbott?
Yuck!

You always know a Christian by the way they treat their enemies.
And in the case of Abbott, his (ex) friends as well.

I am not interested in his politics, only his ethics.

[Barry OGrady]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 15:04:19 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ

I thought you were a believer.

>Michael Christ

[duke]

On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:13:35 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
<jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Duke wrote:
>> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
>> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.
>Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.

Catholic = universal Church.

>In the meantime you just have to do your gang-nam style Catholic
>'following' to the confessional because you haven't followed Him.

John 20:22-23 is very clear is you want to be saved.

>You could try praying to Mary for help, but then that is not real
>Christianity, its humanism.

All Mary can do is ask her son Jesus to help us. You don't believe she can do
that so you lack help there.

[Michael Christ]

Not interested, Dukester.

Its bullshit.




Michael Christ

[Michael Christ]

On May 6, 9:47 am, Mordecai <"mldavis(please dont

spam)"@internode.on.net> wrote:
> Michael Christ wrote:
>
> > I think you would make a good Catholic, Mordecai.
>
> > :-).
>
> > Michael Christ
>
> Tony Abbott?
> Yuck!
>
> You always know a Christian by the way they treat their enemies.
> And in the case of Abbott, his (ex) friends as well.
>
> I am not interested in his politics, only his ethics.

His politics are his ethics.

Would you think a quality of a true Christian would be to be merciful?




Michael Christ

[Ike]

On 5/5/2013 6:04 PM, Michael Christ wrote:
> A person admits that he does not submit to God, then starts telling me
> what is right and what is wrong.

You don't know "right" from "wrong," Antichristian, as you have nothing
in Jesus, and Jesus has nothing in you.

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/5/2013 8:13 PM, Michael Christ wrote:
> On May 6, 6:11 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 May 2013 15:04:19 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
>>
>> <jesusisthelordof...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> A person admits that he does not submit to God, then starts telling me
>>> what is right and what is wrong.
>>
>>> I bring attention to it, and the next thing I am told I am false.
>>
>>> I shake my head in disbelief, but it is actually happening!
>>
>>> If a man who lived 100 years ago could come and see what is happening
>>> in the world today, he would still be a sinner, but even he would drop
>>> to his knees in shock. The world today is...plunging...into the abyss/
>>> to the nothingness without God.
>
> Duke wrote:
>> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
>> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.
>
> Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.

How would you know? You don't know Him, and He doesn't know you.

And for the record, Jesus is Orthodox, but not Orthodox; and Catholic,
but not Catholic; and Lutheran, but not Lutheran; and Baptist, but not
Baptist, etc, etc, as Jesus is in ALL of His seven churches, but His
seven churches needed to be parsed to create the symbiotic whole, so not
all that are in His seven churches are OF His Seven churches (just as
"they are not all Israel that are of Israel."

But you, being an antichurch antichristian, wouldn't know any of this,
BECAUSE He is not in you, and you are not in Him.

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/5/2013 8:32 PM, Michael Christ wrote:

> Who are you to judge me an idiot?

My cats know you're an idiot.

<chuckle>

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/5/2013 8:33 PM, Michael Christ wrote:
> I think you would make a good Catholic, Mordecai.

Notice how the antichurch antichristian says that as if it's an insult.

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/6/2013 4:04 PM, Dupe wrote:
> On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:13:35 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
> <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Duke wrote:
>>> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
>>> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.
>> Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.
>
> Catholic = universal Church.

Yes, but "Roman Catholic" doesn't.

(Not that it matters, since Dupe isn't a Catholic to begin with.)

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/6/2013 4:51 PM, Michael Christ wrote:
> Not interested, Dukester.
>
> Its bullshit.

Yes, but yours stinks worse.

Ike

[duke]

On Mon, 6 May 2013 13:51:35 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
<jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Not interested, Dukester.
>Its bullshit.

You do't believe in God, the creator that willed the universe into existence, do
you? You think God is a black jackal that never moves.

[duke]

Roman was applied only when the Eastern Orthodox schismed. When you can show me
where the Roman Catholic Church was not the one founded by Jesus Christ, come
back to discuss.

[Ike]

On 5/7/2013 2:12 PM, duke wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 07:56:41 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/6/2013 4:04 PM, Dupe wrote:
>>> On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:13:35 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
>>> <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Duke wrote:
>>>>> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
>>>>> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.
>>>> Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.
>>>
>>> Catholic = universal Church.
>>
>> Yes, but "Roman Catholic" doesn't.
>>
>> (Not that it matters, since Dupe isn't a Catholic to begin with.)
>
> Roman was applied only when the Eastern Orthodox schismed.

Which is half the story right there, as Rome divided Christianity the
same way Ephraim divided the Israelites.

> When you can show me
> where the Roman Catholic Church was not the one founded by Jesus Christ, come
> back to discuss.

Once again, the moron demonstrates his illiteracy: I said Rome was never
THE FIRST, THE ONE, OR THE ONLY, moron.

But the RCC is only one of seven...and not a great one at that.

Ike

[duke]

On Tue, 07 May 2013 15:15:54 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 5/7/2013 2:12 PM, duke wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 May 2013 07:56:41 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/6/2013 4:04 PM, Dupe wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:13:35 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
>>>> <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Duke wrote:
>>>>>> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
>>>>>> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.
>>>>> Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.
>>>>
>>>> Catholic = universal Church.
>>>
>>> Yes, but "Roman Catholic" doesn't.
>>>
>>> (Not that it matters, since Dupe isn't a Catholic to begin with.)
>>
>> Roman was applied only when the Eastern Orthodox schismed.
>
>Which is half the story right there, as Rome divided Christianity the
>same way Ephraim divided the Israelites.

Rome didn't divide, Constantinople did. Every difference that they have with
Rome is a change in THEIR position after 1054 years of Christianity as given by
Jesus Christ. And if you don't believe me, try finding something that Rome
changed.

>> When you can show me
>> where the Roman Catholic Church was not the one founded by Jesus Christ, come
>> back to discuss.
>
>Once again, the moron demonstrates his illiteracy: I said Rome was never
>THE FIRST, THE ONE, OR THE ONLY, moron.
>
>But the RCC is only one of seven...and not a great one at that.
>
>Ike

[Ike]

On 5/10/2013 12:08 PM, duke wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 15:15:54 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/2013 2:12 PM, duke wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 May 2013 07:56:41 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/6/2013 4:04 PM, Dupe wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:13:35 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
>>>>> <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Duke wrote:
>>>>>>> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
>>>>>>> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.
>>>>>> Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.
>>>>>
>>>>> Catholic = universal Church.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but "Roman Catholic" doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> (Not that it matters, since Dupe isn't a Catholic to begin with.)
>>>
>>> Roman was applied only when the Eastern Orthodox schismed.
>>
>> Which is half the story right there, as Rome divided Christianity the
>> same way Ephraim divided the Israelites.
>
> Rome didn't divide, Constantinople did.

Just as Ephraim left behind Judah and Jerusalem.

> Every difference that they have with
> Rome is a change in THEIR position after 1054 years of Christianity as given by
> Jesus Christ.

Bullshit.

The disputations between the Greek and Latin writers was there from the
beginning; but the Orthodox Church tried to hold on to one church while
Rome up and left.

> And if you don't believe me, try finding something that Rome
> changed.

I already did, moron. THE DUETERCANONICAL BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT,
and that LONG after the schism.

>>> When you can show me
>>> where the Roman Catholic Church was not the one founded by Jesus Christ, come
>>> back to discuss.
>>
>> Once again, the moron demonstrates his illiteracy: I said Rome was never
>> THE FIRST, THE ONE, OR THE ONLY, moron.
>>
>> But the RCC is only one of seven...and not a great one at that.

Notice no rebuttal from the moron.

Ike

[duke]

On Fri, 10 May 2013 14:54:16 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 5/10/2013 12:08 PM, duke wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 May 2013 15:15:54 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/7/2013 2:12 PM, duke wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 07 May 2013 07:56:41 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/6/2013 4:04 PM, Dupe wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 5 May 2013 17:13:35 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
>>>>>> <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Duke wrote:
>>>>>>>> Maybe you still don't get it that Jesus alone never sinned, and that makes you
>>>>>>>> and everybody else a sinner 24/7/365.
>>>>>>> Jesus is not a Catholic, and neither are those who are His.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Catholic = universal Church.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but "Roman Catholic" doesn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> (Not that it matters, since Dupe isn't a Catholic to begin with.)
>>>>
>>>> Roman was applied only when the Eastern Orthodox schismed.
>>>
>>> Which is half the story right there, as Rome divided Christianity the
>>> same way Ephraim divided the Israelites.
>>
>> Rome didn't divide, Constantinople did.
>
>Just as Ephraim left behind Judah and Jerusalem.
>
>> Every difference that they have with
>> Rome is a change in THEIR position after 1054 years of Christianity as given by
>> Jesus Christ.
>
>Bullshit.

Gosh, your knowledge of Christian history is right at negative 1, ike.

>The disputations between the Greek and Latin writers was there from the
>beginning; but the Orthodox Church tried to hold on to one church while
>Rome up and left.

Haahaaahaaa. Hey, so explain this to me. The day before the split, both
reported to the Pope. The day after, the RCC did. Who left?

>> And if you don't believe me, try finding something that Rome
>> changed.

>I already did, moron. THE DUETERCANONICAL BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT,
>and that LONG after the schism.

Those books are OT, ike. The Jews are returning to acceptance. What, oh what,
will you protest_ers do now? BTW, you do know why the Jews originally rejected
them, don't you?

>
>>>> When you can show me
>>>> where the Roman Catholic Church was not the one founded by Jesus Christ, come
>>>> back to discuss.
>>>
>>> Once again, the moron demonstrates his illiteracy: I said Rome was never
>>> THE FIRST, THE ONE, OR THE ONLY, moron.
>>>
>>> But the RCC is only one of seven...and not a great one at that.
>
>Notice no rebuttal from the moron.
>
>Ike

[Ike]

...said the fool who doesn't even know the history of the Catholic
Church, let alone any others.

>> The disputations between the Greek and Latin writers was there from the
>> beginning; but the Orthodox Church tried to hold on to one church while
>> Rome up and left.
>
> Haahaaahaaa. Hey, so explain this to me. The day before the split, both
> reported to the Pope. The day after, the RCC did. Who left?

Again, you demonstrate your ignorance.

There were RIVAL Patriarchal Sees after the East-West Schism.

And there WAS NO POPE when the Schism occurred, as Pope Leo had just
died, and no pope had been elected to replace him.

(And then there's the fact that the papacy is an illegitimate office in
the first place.)

>>> And if you don't believe me, try finding something that Rome
>>> changed.
>
>> I already did, moron. THE DUETERCANONICAL BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT,
>> and that LONG after the schism.
>
> Those books are OT, ike.

Again, the moron ignores the facts, and those straight from the Catholic
Encyclopedia.

"Like the Old Testament, the NEW has its deuterocanonical books and
portions of books, their canonicity having formerly been a subject of
some controversy in the Church. These are for the entire books: the
Epistle to the Hebrews, that of James, the Second of St. Peter, the
Second and Third of John, Jude, and Apocalypse; giving seven in all as
the number of the New Testament contested books."

Up until the Council of Trent, when the Catholic Church had a hissy fit,
they recognized that the antilegomena were SPURIOUS.

> The Jews are returning to acceptance.

The hell they are.

DOCUMENT such a thing.

(Not to mention the fact that the "Jews" are clueless to begin with.)

>>>>> When you can show me
>>>>> where the Roman Catholic Church was not the one founded by Jesus Christ, come
>>>>> back to discuss.
>>>>
>>>> Once again, the moron demonstrates his illiteracy: I said Rome was never
>>>> THE FIRST, THE ONE, OR THE ONLY, moron.
>>>>
>>>> But the RCC is only one of seven...and not a great one at that.
>>
>> Notice no rebuttal from the moron.

And still none.

Ike