Do not trust in princes, In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation, Ps. 146:3... mortals such as Mary; bones; relics; statues...

[§]

the evidence of salvation and the blessedness thereof, as Ps.146 indicates, lies in exactly who has
given us life eternal... it certainly wasn't mortal Mary nor the thousands and thousands of dead
people her worshipers kneel down to as well and their bones, relics and statues and pictures they
ask favor's of...

no, it is the Living God who has given His elect ones redemption.

the factors which evidence salvation is the new creation in Christ Jesus, 2 Cor.5:17, made possible
by His indwelling Holy Spirit, Ro.8:16. a life of learning God's Word through Him who does the
saving as Ps.119 points out, to the end result of being throughly furnished unto every good work,
2 Tim.3:16,17. keeping Commandments is not even remotely possible for the religious un-redeemed.
their total inability to use the Word of God to interpret the Word of God is seriously lacking, so
they come up bizarre doctrines which re-define the " one faith " of Eph.4:4-6.

the elect do not pretend to know God through denominational traditions nor by the praying to the
dead for favor's as the idol worshipers do daily. He is the God of the living, Mk12:27.

denominational traditions evidence a trust in princes... mortal man... who pretend to better
understand the Word of God than their fellow man. the trust lies in one believing their church
fathers have correctly taught them God's Word. take a look therefore at the people who post their
ideas of God to these Usenet forums...

some are on their knees praying to dead Mary in their church buildings filled with graven images of
what they want her to look like and be... notice these idols of their Mary are always Gentile faced
young woman with the symbol of the sun god around the images head ?

other's are preaching gospels of self-salvation for the smart, only. ideas such as these patented
' sinner's prayers ' all have the person doing something which must come about or that person can
not be redeemed. man must " tell Jesus " he receives Him but this leaves out the fetus, the still
born baby, the person born a mental vegetable and so on just to name a few.

" " I " made a decision for Christ; "" " " I " invited Jesus into my heart "" all evidence gospels
for the smart, only... there is just " one faith " as already mentioned. and because no one can
understand the gospel until after they are redeemed through it, Jn.3:3, it's obvious these are just
glory seekers needing to control salvation for other's.

the only completely trustworthy, and BTW, ' trust ' is a good work as far as God is concerned,
Ru.2:12; Ps.37:3; 73:28 and no one is elected because he first trusted in the Lord, Gal.2:16, is His
Word taught to us by Him alone as His Word clearly indicates in Mt.4:4 and Jn.6:45 and elsewhere.

denominational traditions end therefore, in perdition as do those who follow it.

[kolw...@astromail.com]

On Nov 5, 8:11 am, <www.salvation belongs to the Lord> wrote:
> the evidence of salvation and the blessedness thereof, as Ps.146 indicates, lies in exactly who has
> given us life eternal... it certainly wasn't mortal Mary nor the thousands and thousands of dead
> people her worshipers kneel down to as well and their bones, relics and statues and pictures they
> ask favor's of...

If you have NO respect for our lady, the one who bears
Jesus, the light of the world in her womb, then
you are a demon.
David says, trust no man and If you think
he was talking about the Messiah and his blessed mother
since David is also a man why should we care or trust
what he said

[Freedom Man]

See what RELIGION does to peoples' minds?

Adults no longer believe in the Tooth Fairy - but they still torture and
kill each other over ancient myths and superstitions.

"We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of love
and gentleness; how many bodies were burned alive with the genuinely kind
intention of saving souls from the eternal fire of hell." --- Karl Popper

"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many
people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
--- Robert M. Pirsig

Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want to.
If he wants to but cannot he is impotent. If he can but does not want to, he
is wicked. If he neither can nor wants to, then he is both powerless and
wicked.
--- Epicurus, Greek philosopher, circa 300 B.C.

"Act of God" disasters like the Japanese earthquake expose the myth. Either
God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like this, or he doesn't care to, or
he doesn't exist. He is thus either impotent, evil, or imaginary.
--- CNN Belief Blog, 3-20-11

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and
evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that
takes religion."
--- Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false,
and by rulers as useful."
--- Seneca the Younger (4? BC - 65 AD)

"Religion once ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages." --- Ruth
Green.

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." ---
Victor Stenger.

"I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." ---
Clarence Darrow

"As my ancestors are free from slavery, I am free from the slavery of
religion." --- Butterfly McQueen

"Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." - Mark
Twain

"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --- Mark Twain

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in
all fiction." --- Richard Dawkins

"Cult today, religion tomorrow."

The Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
The Secular Coalition for America: www.secular.org
Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org
www.infidels.org
www.humaniststudies.org
www.atheistalliance.org
www.americanhumanist.org

[•R.Measures]

In article <vp2t98ll8p04lvtmt...@4ax.com>, Za...@utopia.net wrote:

> This is illogical. Mary had a mother, she had a mother etc back to
> Eve. What you say makes no sense.

• The key to this delusion is that Mary's mom supposedly conceived Mary
without semen/original sin. (1845)

"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."
---- Walter Scott
>

[Dakota]

I prefer the updated version.

"Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to believe."
Laurence J. Peter

[•R.Measures]

*** that new to me,

[duke]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 12:15:06 -0500, Zadok <Za...@utopia.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:55:10 -0800 (PST), kolw...@astromail.com wrote:
>

>This is illogical. Mary had a mother, she had a mother etc back to
>Eve. What you say makes no sense.

Hmmm. A clear reflection that you are clueless to what he said.

>-- Zadok
>('¿')

The dukester, American - American
********************************************
You can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[duke]

Haahaahaa. He's still clueless after I've corrected him so many times before.

[duke]

Anything is better than rl's goofy professions after I've corrected him so many
times in the past.

[•R.Measures]

In article <kodv989641darknel...@4ax.com>, duke

• So tell us again whose conception was "Immaculate".

[duke]

Jesus, if you claim no semen.

[•R.Measures]

In article <aku1a8lmjdoig6nt9...@4ax.com>, duke

• whose conception was "Immaculate" duke?

[duke]

Mary, as scripture strongly suggests.

[•R.Measures]

In article <8eg4a81i15glsu34q...@4ax.com>, duke

• IOW, no semen.

[duke]

Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.

Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
about Jesus?

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[•R.Measures]

In article <k6b8a8p7jgl1819bv...@4ax.com>, duke

• ... but he won't say what does and he doesn't even know what transpired
at Lourdes with Saint Bernardette and the BVM. Is Duke really a Roman
Catholic?

[•R.Measures]

In article <NMmdnRNGcfPs2TnN...@giganews.com>, linuxgal

<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

> duke wrote:
> > Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>
> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
> about Jesus?

*** So it seems LG. . . Let us critics of the Church of Rome give
thanks for Duke/Earl.

[duke]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:25:04 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>
>Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
>confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
>about Jesus?

The only person born without semen is Jesus. Remember, the Immaculate
Conception of Mary is declared dogma for Catholics.

[duke]

I suspect our tao gal is still a few steps ahead of you in Christianity.

[Syd M.]

On Nov 15, 4:37 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:25:04 -0800, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >duke wrote:
> >> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>
> >Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father?  Or are you
> >confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
> >about Jesus?
>
> The only person born without semen is Jesus.

Empty assertion, liar.

PDW

[Syd M.]

On Nov 15, 4:38 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:01:03 -0800, r...@somis.org ( R.Measures) wrote:

> >In article <NMmdnRNGcfPs2TnNnZ2dnUVZ_uCdn...@giganews.com>, linuxgal

> ><linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> >> duke wrote:
> >> > Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>
> >> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father?  Or are you
> >> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
> >> about Jesus?
>
> >***  So it seems LG.  .  .  Let us critics of the Church of Rome give
> >thanks for Duke/Earl.
>
> I suspect our tao gal is still a few steps ahead of you in Christianity.
>

And you would be wrong, liar Dork.

PDW

[duke]

?? Somehow I don't think you have a clue anyway. We never even talked about
Lourdes before.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:25:04 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>>
>> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
>> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
>> about Jesus?
>
> The only person born without semen is Jesus. Remember, the Immaculate
> Conception of Mary is declared dogma for Catholics.

So if the only person born without semen is Jesus, and if the Immaculate
Conception is a Marian dogma, explain to me why semen has nothing to do
with the Immaculate Conception. Because if that is true, then Mary was
also born without semen. Do you understand the question?

[duke]

On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:25:04 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
>>> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
>>> about Jesus?
>>
>> The only person born without semen is Jesus. Remember, the Immaculate
>> Conception of Mary is declared dogma for Catholics.
>
>So if the only person born without semen is Jesus, and if the Immaculate
>Conception is a Marian dogma, explain to me why semen has nothing to do
>with the Immaculate Conception.

It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via Gabriel
declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free. As her to-be human son
existed as the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity before, the dogmatic statement in
support of "sin free" was that the 2nd person removed her sin nature at the
moment of her own conception as his SELECTED future Ark of the New Covenant.

> Because if that is true, then Mary was
>also born without semen. Do you understand the question?

You clearly never learned from your daddy. And tao doesn't care.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> So if the only person born without semen is Jesus, and if the Immaculate
>> Conception is a Marian dogma, explain to me why semen has nothing to do
>> with the Immaculate Conception.
>
> It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via Gabriel
> declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free. As her to-be human son
> existed as the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity before, the dogmatic statement in
> support of "sin free" was that the 2nd person removed her sin nature at the
> moment of her own conception as his SELECTED future Ark of the New Covenant.

Sin nature passes down by semen. That's why Jesus didn't have a sin
nature, because he was born of a virgin with no semen involved. Jesus
didn't need an Immaculate Conception. But Mary was conceived with
sinful semen, so she needed a special procedure, called Immaculate
Conception, to make her father St. Joachim's semen bright and shiny
clean. But all this is academic. I see that you cannot follow the
logical consequences of your own myths.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <t5oaa85b36iqnhcoq...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 06:01:03 -0800, r...@somis.org (•R.Measures) wrote:
>
> >In article <NMmdnRNGcfPs2TnN...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> ><linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> duke wrote:
> >> > Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
> >>
> >> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
> >> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
> >> about Jesus?
> >
> >*** So it seems LG. . . Let us critics of the Church of Rome give
> >thanks for Duke/Earl.
>
> I suspect our tao gal is still a few steps ahead of you in Christianity.
>

• ____

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <57oaa89a35u59rub4...@4ax.com>, duke

• Lourdes is where the BVM seemingly told Bernardette Soubirous "I am the
Immaculate Conception".

Wikipedia: "Soubirous is best known for her Marian apparitions of "a
small young lady" who asked for a chapel to be built at a cave-grotto in
Massabielle where the apparitions occurred between 11 February and 16 July
1858. She would later receive recognition when the lady who appeared to
her identified herself as the Immaculate Conception.

Since our "Duke" is unaware of the Lourdes/Immaculate Conception
connection,, one can only wonder if Duke is really a good Catholic?

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <dnbca8p8k7f9n9pgl...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> >duke wrote:
> >> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:25:04 -0800, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> duke wrote:
> >>>> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
> >>>
> >>> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
> >>> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
> >>> about Jesus?
> >>
> >> The only person born without semen is Jesus. Remember, the Immaculate
> >> Conception of Mary is declared dogma for Catholics.
> >
> >So if the only person born without semen is Jesus, and if the Immaculate
> >Conception is a Marian dogma, explain to me why semen has nothing to do
> >with the Immaculate Conception.
>
> It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via Gabriel
> declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free.

• If the BVM did not have post-puberty "impure thoughts" when she saw
cute boys, she was strange indeed.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <f7KdnXlLr5w50TvN...@giganews.com>, linuxgal

• agreed LG.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <8eg4a81i15glsu34q...@4ax.com>, duke

• Which Scripture?

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:25:04 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>>
>> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
>> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
>> about Jesus?
>
> The only person born without semen is Jesus. Remember, the Immaculate
> Conception of Mary is declared dogma for Catholics.

The only person born without sin, and without a special declaration, is
Jesus, because he was born without semen. Mary was born without sin,
but required a special declaration (Immaculate Conception) because she
was conceived with semen. Obviously, semen is the transmission vector
for Original Sin. And you are in error to say semen has nothing to do
with Immaculate Conception, for it is the presence of semen in Mary's
conception that required the special declaration.

[Fred^44]

Except that everyone is "sin free." Sin is an occult delusion.

[duke]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:24:35 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So if the only person born without semen is Jesus, and if the Immaculate
>>> Conception is a Marian dogma, explain to me why semen has nothing to do
>>> with the Immaculate Conception.
>>
>> It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via Gabriel
>> declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free. As her to-be human son
>> existed as the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity before, the dogmatic statement in
>> support of "sin free" was that the 2nd person removed her sin nature at the
>> moment of her own conception as his SELECTED future Ark of the New Covenant.

>Sin nature passes down by semen.

No, it does not. It is a characteristic of the human nature. A&E did not have
belly buttons and they introduced the sin nature into humankind.

> That's why Jesus didn't have a sin
>nature, because he was born of a virgin with no semen involved.

Bullshit, o'ignorant one. Jesus was tempted just like any man and said NO.

> Jesus didn't need an Immaculate Conception.

That's because Jesus is God become man. Not a "poof" of a fully grown man, but
the conceiving/incarnation of a human being in the womb of Mary to be nourished
by Mary for 9 months in a vaginal delivery.

> But Mary was conceived with
>sinful semen, so she needed a special procedure, called Immaculate
>Conception, to make her father St. Joachim's semen bright and shiny
>clean. But all this is academic. I see that you cannot follow the
>logical consequences of your own myths.

Haahaahaa. I can't believe you are so ignorant. Now I understand why you lick
the boots of tao.

[duke]

100% wrong. Haahaahaa.

[duke]

Not an issue. That's why it's called an immaculate conception. Heeheehee.

[duke]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 06:55:27 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:25:04 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> Nope, semen has nothing to do with immaculate conception.
>>>
>>> Are you saying that St. Joachim is not Mary's father? Or are you
>>> confused like 99% of Prodistents and think the immaculate conception is
>>> about Jesus?
>>
>> The only person born without semen is Jesus. Remember, the Immaculate
>> Conception of Mary is declared dogma for Catholics.
>
>The only person born without sin, and without a special declaration, is
>Jesus, because he was born without semen.

Still not the secret answer.

> Mary was born without sin,

Yes, but Mary was conceived also sin free. That first cell was absent of the
sin nature. I suspect you pop, if he is no longer alive, rolled over in his
grave on that one.

>but required a special declaration (Immaculate Conception) because she
>was conceived with semen. Obviously, semen is the transmission vector
>for Original Sin. And you are in error to say semen has nothing to do
>with Immaculate Conception, for it is the presence of semen in Mary's
>conception that required the special declaration.

Heeheehee. You can beat around the bush, but unless you accept the immaculate
"conception" of Mary, you're missing the boat.

[Syd M.]

On Nov 18, 5:06 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 09:38:50 -0800, r...@somis.org ( RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:

> >In article <f7KdnXlLr5w50TvNnZ2dnUVZ_qGdn...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> ><linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> >> duke wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com>

> >wrote:
>
> >> >> So if the only person born without semen is Jesus, and if the Immaculate
> >> >> Conception is a Marian dogma, explain to me why semen has nothing to do
> >> >> with the Immaculate Conception.
>
> >> > It never has had anything to do with semen.  It has to do with God via
> >Gabriel
> >> > declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free.  As her to-be human son
> >> > existed as the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity before, the dogmatic
> >statement in
> >> > support of "sin free" was that the 2nd person removed her sin nature at the
> >> > moment of her own conception as his SELECTED future Ark of the New Covenant.
>
> >> Sin nature passes down by semen.  That's why Jesus didn't have a sin
> >> nature, because he was born of a virgin with no semen involved.  Jesus
> >> didn't need an Immaculate Conception.  But Mary was conceived with
> >> sinful semen, so she needed a special procedure, called Immaculate
> >> Conception, to make her father St. Joachim's semen bright and shiny
> >> clean.  But all this is academic.  I see that you cannot follow the
> >> logical consequences of your own myths.
>
> >  agreed LG.
>
> 100% wrong.  Haahaahaa.
>
>

Yes, you totally are, ignorant one.

PDW

[duke]

A few points:
1. It was an apparition.
2. She already had been raised, body and soul, to the heavenly kingdom.
3. She did not declare such a status before she died.
4. That clears up the confusion.

>Wikipedia: "Soubirous is best known for her Marian apparitions of "a
>small young lady" who asked for a chapel to be built at a cave-grotto in
>Massabielle where the apparitions occurred between 11 February and 16 July
>1858. She would later receive recognition when the lady who appeared to
>her identified herself as the Immaculate Conception.
>
>Since our "Duke" is unaware of the Lourdes/Immaculate Conception
>connection,, one can only wonder if Duke is really a good Catholic?

[duke]

God's Holy Word.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <DoGdnazDpf58azXN...@giganews.com>, linuxgal

• Duke does not admit error even when he gets caught off-base.

[linuxgal]

He's too stupid to understand that he's wrong.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <LoCdncbcHYYGtzTN...@posted.sonicnet>,

• Indeed. Original Sin is part of RC inculcation.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <jumia8tohv4g20ebv...@4ax.com>, duke

• delusion

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <cvmia8dja25d61qpn...@4ax.com>, duke

• Reality is always an issue.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <o8nia8lnrjli4p4ni...@4ax.com>, duke

• No one knew that until 1950.

> 3. She did not declare such a status before she died.

• you are guessing, the RCC is guessing.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <efnia8pt2m501f3rh...@4ax.com>, duke

• wholly deluded.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <LPadnWDHKJ6T8TTN...@giganews.com>, linuxgal

*** It's at least 60% hubris.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <vbmia8tavtd2uj5d0...@4ax.com>,

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 06:24:35 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> >duke wrote:
> >> On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> So if the only person born without semen is Jesus, and if the Immaculate
> >>> Conception is a Marian dogma, explain to me why semen has nothing to do
> >>> with the Immaculate Conception.
> >>
> >> It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via
> >> Gabriel
> >> declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free. As her to-be human son
> >> existed as the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity before, the dogmatic
> >> statement in
> >> support of "sin free" was that the 2nd person removed her sin nature at
> >> the
> >> moment of her own conception as his SELECTED future Ark of the New
> >> Covenant.
>
> >Sin nature passes down by semen.
>
> No, it does not. It is a characteristic of the human nature. A&E did not
> have
> belly buttons and they introduced the sin nature into humankind.

Is there a scriptural basis for this silly belly button claim?

--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[duke]

Neither one of you understands.

[duke]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:09:42 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

<sigh> Do you have one, and why?

[duke]

See, you still don't get it.

[duke]

The really great thing is that I'm not the one in error. You're out of your
league, rl.

[duke]

I'm not, and that's why you wash the feet of tao.

[duke]

By definition, it implied by Holy Script.

>> 3. She did not declare such a status before she died.
>• you are guessing, the RCC is guessing.

Nope. But you are. And your own words were to "avoid guessing when you don't
have a basis for comment."

[duke]

Your funeral.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <9bcka8pjlokmb2nfu...@4ax.com>, duke

• If all babies are contaminated with Original Sin®, The Roman Catholic
Church, then baby Mary was for damn sure contaminated and she was not
without sin.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."
---- Walter Scott

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <5ecka8h56f7l228cl...@4ax.com>, duke

• so why have you not explained it Duke?

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <4fcka81ptjdqeh4l8...@4ax.com>, duke

• Declare victory and retreat.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <cicka85gfd4mhkrbe...@4ax.com>, duke

• There is no evidence in Scripture about baby Mary being baptised either
for Original Sin® or for her being baptised as a Christian.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <7mcka8hmtd8c57hd3...@4ax.com>, duke

• everyone gets one Duke.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <5ccka81kje9m2lsa3...@4ax.com>,

Deflection noted. deflection rejected. Answer the question.

Is there a scriptural basis for this silly belly button claim?

[duke]

Yes, she was. God said so. God decided that 13.7 billion years before he
became flesh in her womb to show other flesh that obedience to God is rewarded
with an eternity with God in heaven.

[duke]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 17:29:01 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

Why would they need one, dummy?

[duke]

You won't study it yourself.

[duke]

It's called the Immaculate Conception, rl.

[duke]

Dumb.

[duke]

Yep, and some have a future beyond that.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <84vma89hes8rk76g7...@4ax.com>, duke

• does RCC inculcation work miraculously or what?

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <q9vma8lf9547lsbpa...@4ax.com>, duke

• Did Saint Bernardette get it right?

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <mavma8dlhk37cqg36...@4ax.com>, duke

• what is it Duke?

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <rbvma8p0mmft4jhck...@4ax.com>, duke

• there's a tender nerve behind the bull's-eye. IME questioning
Mariology pisses off TBRCs.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <hcvma89ti6dms1rt4...@4ax.com>, duke

• According to you we all do. Some go to the hot spot while others do not.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <f8vma8hmb96s8lhv4...@4ax.com>,

So what you're saying is that somebody made up something that wasn't
actually in the bible and then promoted it as if it were.

Isn't that heresy? Good thing we don't burn heretics anymore.

[duke]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2012 15:27:04 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

SWOOOOSH - right over your head.

>Isn't that heresy? Good thing we don't burn heretics anymore.

[linuxgal]

When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists.

Next best is a leader who is loved.

Next, one who is feared.

The worst is one who is despised.

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[duke]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:06:53 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:15:29 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >•RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
>>>> >>• Duke does not admit error even when he gets caught off-base.
>>> >He's too stupid to understand that he's wrong.
>> I'm not, and that's why you wash the feet of tao.
>
>When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists.
>Next best is a leader who is loved.
>Next, one who is feared.
>The worst is one who is despised.

My God is the winner.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:06:53 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:15:29 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> •RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
>>>>>>> • Duke does not admit error even when he gets caught off-base.
>>>>> He's too stupid to understand that he's wrong.
>>> I'm not, and that's why you wash the feet of tao.
>>
>> When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists.
>> Next best is a leader who is loved.
>> Next, one who is feared.
>> The worst is one who is despised.
>
> My God is the winner.

You're right Duke, because the people are totally unaware that he exists.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <459va8litro24io2p...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:06:53 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> >duke wrote:
> >> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:15:29 -0800,
linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> >•RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
> >>>> >>• Duke does not admit error even when he gets caught off-base.
> >>> >He's too stupid to understand that he's wrong.
> >> I'm not, and that's why you wash the feet of tao.
> >
> >When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists.
> >Next best is a leader who is loved.
> >Next, one who is feared.
> >The worst is one who is despised.
>
> My God is the winner.
>

• YOUR (Roman Catholic) GOD WAS ASLEEP AT THE SWITCH WHILE PRIESTS WERE
USING ALTAR BOYS AS THEIR BITCH.

[duke]

On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:38:09 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:06:53 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:15:29 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> •RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> • Duke does not admit error even when he gets caught off-base.
>>>>>> He's too stupid to understand that he's wrong.
>>>> I'm not, and that's why you wash the feet of tao.
>>>
>>> When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists.
>>> Next best is a leader who is loved.
>>> Next, one who is feared.
>>> The worst is one who is despised.
>>
>> My God is the winner.
>
>You're right Duke, because the people are totally unaware that he exists.

Their loss and yours, but not mine.

[duke]

No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
after life. Choose wisely.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
> billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
> after life. Choose wisely.

Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".

[duke]

On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 07:19:44 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
>> billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
>> after life. Choose wisely.

>Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
>black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".

Wow, somebody calls blacks as sambo? I didn't know. And it's a real good thing
that I "like" jd.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <tej1b8dvhmdp4l729...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 03:51:11 -0800, r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:
>
> >In article <459va8litro24io2p...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:06:53 -0800, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >duke wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 18 Nov 2012 15:15:29 -0800,
> >linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> >•RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
> >> >>>> >>• Duke does not admit error even when he gets caught off-base.
> >> >>> >He's too stupid to understand that he's wrong.
> >> >> I'm not, and that's why you wash the feet of tao.
> >> >
> >> >When the Master governs, the people are hardly aware that he exists.
> >> >Next best is a leader who is loved.
> >> >Next, one who is feared.
> >> >The worst is one who is despised.
> >>
> >> My God is the winner.
> >>
> >• YOUR (Roman Catholic) GOD WAS ASLEEP AT THE SWITCH WHILE PRIESTS WERE
> >USING ALTAR BOYS AS THEIR BITCH.
>
> No, rl.

• No? . . . The hierarchy tried like hell to keep priests who it knew
were quite literally into altar-boy butts.

>God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
> billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
> after life. Choose wisely.

• It would have been wise to ASSign gay altar-boys to gay priests.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <842dnZx9ka4NeC3N...@giganews.com>, linuxgal

<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

> duke wrote:
> > No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
> > billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
> > after life. Choose wisely.
>
> Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
> black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".

• Good one LG but Duke seems to prefer the racial epithet "Buckwheat".
The amazing thing about our Duke is that he seems not to realize that his
"God/Jesus" created blacks, browns and whites. .

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <lf62b8tcovsjomnp6...@4ax.com>, duke

• proof can be found above.

[linuxgal]

•RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
> In article<842dnZx9ka4NeC3N...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> > >No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
>>> > >billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
>>> > >after life. Choose wisely.
>> >
>> >Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
>> >black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".
> • Good one LG but Duke seems to prefer the racial epithet "Buckwheat".

The syntax is different, the semantics unchanged.

[linuxgal]

Fred^44 wrote:
> r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:

>> >In article<dnbca8p8k7f9n9pgl...@4ax.com>, duke

>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> >>On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via Gabriel
>>> >>declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free.

>> >If the BVM did not have post-puberty "impure thoughts" when she saw
>> >cute boys, she was strange indeed.

> Except that everyone is "sin free." Sin is an occult delusion.
>
>

Sin is the violation of a religious rule. I have no religion.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <E6idnTsuXI6u-SzN...@giganews.com>, linuxgal

<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

> •RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
> > In article<842dnZx9ka4NeC3N...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> > <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >duke wrote:
> >>> > >No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would
happen 13.7
> >>> > >billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are
tested for life
> >>> > >after life. Choose wisely.
> >> >
> >> >Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
> >> >black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".
> > • Good one LG but Duke seems to prefer the racial epithet "Buckwheat".
>
> The syntax is different, the semantics unchanged.

• "Buckwheat". "Sambo"."Nigger", Darkie", "Coon", "Greaser". "Honkie", et
certera are racial epithets. What do they have to do with the rules
whereby words or other elements of sentence structure are combined to form
grammatical sentences?

[duke]

On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:47:54 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>Fred^44 wrote:
>> r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:
>>> >In article<dnbca8p8k7f9n9pgl...@4ax.com>, duke
>>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> >>On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>> >>It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via Gabriel
>>>> >>declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free.
>>> >If the BVM did not have post-puberty "impure thoughts" when she saw
>>> >cute boys, she was strange indeed.
>> Except that everyone is "sin free." Sin is an occult delusion.

>Sin is the violation of a religious rule. I have no religion.

No, sin is telling God you are his equal and will decide right v wrong, good v
bad, love v hate.

And you dumped God in favor of tao. So you now know where you stand in the long
term basis.

[duke]

Not even evidence can be found.

[duke]

On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 14:57:58 -0800, r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:

>In article <842dnZx9ka4NeC3N...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
><linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>> > No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
>> > billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
>> > after life. Choose wisely.
>>
>> Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
>> black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".
>
>• Good one LG but Duke seems to prefer the racial epithet "Buckwheat".

It's not racist. Truth is never racist.

>The amazing thing about our Duke is that he seems not to realize that his
>"God/Jesus" created blacks, browns and whites. .

And monkeys too.

[duke]

You made a mistake. According to the negro, only a "honkie" can be a racist,
never a negro. And "buckwheat" is a real person - a clown.

[duke]

No, rl.

>>God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
>> billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
>> after life. Choose wisely.

>• It would have been wise to ASSign gay altar-boys to gay priests.

Gay altar boys usually became gay priests.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 14:57:58 -0800,r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:
>
>> >In article<842dnZx9ka4NeC3N...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
>> ><linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>> >
>>> >>duke wrote:
>>>> >> >No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would happen 13.7
>>>> >> >billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested for life
>>>> >> >after life. Choose wisely.
>>> >>
>>> >>Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
>>> >>black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".
>> >
>> >• Good one LG but Duke seems to prefer the racial epithet "Buckwheat".
> It's not racist. Truth is never racist.
>

You wouldn't know truth if it bit you on the ass. Jeanne is not gay.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:47:54 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >Fred^44 wrote:
>>> >>r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:
>>>>> >>> >In article<dnbca8p8k7f9n9pgl...@4ax.com>, duke
>>>>> >>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:58:38 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>It never has had anything to do with semen. It has to do with God via Gabriel
>>>>>>> >>>> >>declaring that she is most blessed, ie, sin free.
>>>>> >>> >If the BVM did not have post-puberty "impure thoughts" when she saw
>>>>> >>> >cute boys, she was strange indeed.
>>> >>Except that everyone is "sin free." Sin is an occult delusion.
>> >Sin is the violation of a religious rule. I have no religion.
> No, sin is telling God you are his equal and will decide right v wrong, good v
> bad, love v hate.

God is nowhere near my equal. For one thing he doesn't exist. And if
exercising human judgement and rational choice is a sin to you, so be it.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <94e4b81o2miqkfimd...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 14:59:07 -0800, r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:
>
> >In article <lf62b8tcovsjomnp6...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 07:19:44 -0800, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >duke wrote:
> >> >> No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would
happen 13.7
> >> >> billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested
for life
> >> >> after life. Choose wisely.
> >>
> >> >Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
> >> >black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".
> >>
> >> Wow, somebody calls blacks as sambo? I didn't know. And it's a real
> >good thing
> >> that I "like" jd.
> >>
> >> The dukester, American - American
> >> ********************************************
> >> You can't fix stupid.
> >> ********************************************
> >
> >• proof can be found above.
>
> Not even evidence can be found.
>

• I found it.

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <85e4b8l49u6crlfqe...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 14:57:58 -0800, r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:
>
> >In article <842dnZx9ka4NeC3N...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> ><linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> duke wrote:
> >> > No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would
happen 13.7
> >> > billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are tested
for life
> >> > after life. Choose wisely.
> >>
> >> Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
> >> black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".
> >
> >• Good one LG but Duke seems to prefer the racial epithet "Buckwheat".
>
> It's not racist. Truth is never racist.
>
> >The amazing thing about our Duke is that he seems not to realize that his
> >"God/Jesus" created blacks, browns and whites. .
>
> And monkeys too.
>

• ____

[•RLMEAS@teranews.com]

In article <q6e4b8d6ht2b2imhf...@4ax.com>, duke

<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 04:24:09 -0800, r...@somis.org (•RLM...@teranews.com) wrote:
>
> >In article <E6idnTsuXI6u-SzN...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> ><linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> •RLM...@teranews.com wrote:
> >> > In article<842dnZx9ka4NeC3N...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> >> > <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> >duke wrote:
> >> >>> > >No, rl. God allows mankind to hang himself. He knew it would
> >happen 13.7
> >> >>> > >billion years ago. This life is not our end point. We are
> >tested for life
> >> >>> > >after life. Choose wisely.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Yeah, God is selecting for fat morons who will spend eternity calling
> >> >> >black people "Sambo" and women he doesn't like "dykes".
> >> > • Good one LG but Duke seems to prefer the racial epithet "Buckwheat".
> >>
> >> The syntax is different, the semantics unchanged.
> >
> >• "Buckwheat". "Sambo"."Nigger", Darkie", "Coon", "Greaser". "Honkie", et
> >certera are racial epithets. What do they have to do with the rules
> >whereby words or other elements of sentence structure are combined to form
> >grammatical sentences?
>
> You made a mistake. According to the negro, only a "honkie" can be a racist,
> never a negro. And "buckwheat" is a real person - a clown.
>

• Buckwheat / William Thomas, Jr. was a child actor on the "Our Gang" series.