#ALERT! SUPER-TERRORIST POSTS ON THE NGs!!
Ted McMillan
I was unfortunate enough to bump into a Dark Ages Catholic person. I
mean a person whose mind is at least just the same as in the Dark
Ages. There are private groups and people now referred to as
"conspiracy kooks" who are revealing that Rome has not changed, and
that she has infiltrated all of society and especially attacked
entities of control, influence and power.with people from her various
not so well known orders. Many of them are reported to have
infiltrated all the Christian Churches pretending to be members just
as Protestant documentation has forewarned. We have found these
reports to be startlingly true!
Typically anyone bringing such things to light would be referred to as
kooks, paranoid, Anti-Catholics, or hatemongers. Well let's take a
look at someone who gave such an accusation so that we can see what we
are up against. I am talking about a man by the name of Ted Seeber.
You are about to see the man confirm everything that has been said.
He is going to argue against most every principle of liberty and the
Constitution. He shows total loyalty to the Pope. Here is a synopsis
of his views against human liberty and the American Constitution:
It is true that some have said that his ideas are not a reliable
indicator of how the Vatican feels. It is interesting to note
however, that though he condemned Protestants to persecution and
death, all such people were not in the least upset at him, but instead
attacked me because I reproved him for his terrible disregard of human
life.
We start the conversation over the current September 11th terrorist
incident I was discussing:
When told how long this terrorist incident took to plan and implement
compared to others that were planned quicker and yet caught, Seeber
said: "There have been plenty of successfull terrorist attacks
against US interests where the terrorists stayed legal until the
attack."
We find this difficult to believe since we know that America had been
considered a haven against terrorism and how this was surely mentioned
by all our news media as they were describing the impact of this
unprecedented act of terrorism.
Seeber tells us that:
The current Constitutional principles of liberty are incredibly
outdated and stupid. He said the principle is as old as the 1500s
with Martin Luther. When did his principles for no liberty or privacy
originate? When Christians reveal the Vatican hatred of religious
liberty of conscience and expose her continual conspiracy through
infiltration of our nation and the nations of the world, despot
Vatican Catholics like Seeber tell the world that we hate the Catholic
people. How long was this practice used? Since he told us that our
principles of liberty are outdated, how outdated is the constant
reflex habit that exposing people who slowly tortured Christians to
death makes one hateful of Catholics and more a criminal than the
people who committed the atrocities themselves? How outdated it is?
Seeber said that the terrorist incident provided a benefit to us in
that, "we found out that privacy is not a luxury we can afford just
yet." Notice that he said "we" volunteering all opinions for us and
not allowing us to disagree. He includes himself among us as if he is
one of us even though he hates liberty for everything else except him
and his church. He doesn't think like us nor agree with us, but he
includes himself in our communion. He gets upset when we say he is a
despot.
AFTER he already told us a year before on the newsgroups that "liberty
is useless and only causes schism." We therefore asked again and
again the question we have for our new American government:
"If the Citizens of America agree to give up their liberties in order
to take out terrorism, what will happen after terrorism is conquered?
Will we get our liberties back? Seeber has indeed answered that
question for us.
Soon Seeber began to lie to us telling us that what he said about
liberty being useless is just and only his opinion and that I should
not get upset about it or believe it. The problem is that there is
documentation showing that his church does believe that liberty is
useless and only causes schism.
Seeber accuses us of aiding and supporting the terrorists because we
believe that liberty and privacy is more important than stopping Bin
Laden. He despots us to believe that Bin Laden will only be caught if
privacy is eliminated.
Seeber tells all that Osama Bin Laden is my Idol because I determined
that the American citizens must retain their liberties.
In Seeber telling us that Privacy is outdated. He tells us that we
should provide all our private information to the government. Our
emails should not be private. Even our apartments that we rent, since
we did not build them, we should allow our landlords the rights to go
in and out as they please and to do what they want. Privacy and
liberty are not inseparable. Those who contend for privacy are
criminals.
Seeber claims that I support the terrorists because I oppose the
citizens giving up their privacy and liberties. He says that I
support those who would destroy liberty. When I replied that I don't
support Seeber (who would destroy liberty), he asked if I support the
American citizens living their lives as if nothing had happened. Well
no I don't. I want the citizens to remember this terrorist attack as
I want them to remember the worst terrorist attacks during the Dark
Ages. But as Seeber told everyone that I support terrorism because I
support the citizens living as if nothing has happened, you can see
that he also condemned President Bush for saying that America should
continue living on their lives and that we will not allow terrorists
to limit the freedoms of Americans.
Others have falsely claimed that Ted Seeber doesn't represent Catholic
thought, but this is not the fact. Although Ted Seeber already has
argued against liberty for all non-Catholics, he has shown just as
Rome has that he believes in a different type of liberty. Check for
example this Catholic statement of her position on this matter:
"The church does not, and cannot accept, or in any degree favor,
liberty IN THE PROTESTANT SENSE OF LIBERTY." -- (Catholic World,
April, 1870.
Ted Seeber, in another occasion talks about "fake liberty" after
telling us that liberty itself is useless and "only causes schism." He
is therefore showing that he supports a different kind of liberty even
though he has before condemned the concept entirely.
Ted Seeber charges Ted McMillan with aiding terrorists through his
support of the rights of the citizens of America to keep their
liberties. He says that by Ted McMillan's determination along this
line, he provides, "Aid and comfort to the enemy, is what you said and
did." But he gets upset if people say he's a despot.
Ted McMillan asked if we are entering a government now when those who
tell us that "liberty is useless and only causes schism" are freedom
lovers and those who are apalled by such words are terrorists? Seeber
replies, "Yep. Been that way for 40-odd years now." Why then is he
calling for change to that setting if he now tells us it is and has
already been like that?
After Ted McMillan said that those who believe "liberty is useless and
only causes schism" are the ones who believe in depopulation, Seeber
said, "Really? You don't believe in depopulation? Then what are all
those guns for?" He is against the rights to bear arms which was
instituted as a last resort to the Citizens of America in case they
find themselves suddenly confronting a tyrannical United States
government through infiltration, having people who think like Seeber
all throughout it as it is today. But Seeber well knows that the US
military and the UN has lots of guns and far more devices of
destruction INCLUDING STICKY STRIPS. These are spread along highways
and arteries where people can enter or leave populated areas. They
get stuck there and can't move. The criteria Seeber gave was that if
you own guns or support the ownership of it, you believe in
depopulation. But Seeber gets upset when we say he is a despot. Why
is the government planning a depopulation of the citizenry?
Seeber says:
I know you have a Jihad against America because you support an
outdated and incredibly stupid interpretation of the Constitution,
[the "interpretation that always was] and because you support the
taking up of arms against your own government even in times of war.
Ted McMillan:
Ted Seeber knows the following very well, but he is working to
deliberately deceive the readers here. The framers of the
Constitution allowed for the citizens of America to be armed in case,
through infiltration, the American Government turns into a tyrannical
government. I assure all of you that the framers of the Constitution
do not have a Jihad against America. The guns are for the citizens to
protect themselves against despots like Seeber who would at times
claim themselves that they would infiltrate the government and work to
change it till it hates and outlaws liberty. Seeber even admitted
this very thing concerning himself.
Ted McMillan:
> Yes, I am on the side of those who love liberty. Where have I said
> whose side I was or was not on?
Ted Seeber:
In fighting for privacy rights (which aren't in the
constitution-ANYWHERE) against neccessary rules needed to fight
against the Terrorists, you've chosen the wrong side.
Ted McMillan's comment:
Take note folks that he told us we shouldn't have rights to privacy
"just yet" when he was in deceive mode. He now again shows us we were
to NEVER have it, for he claims it is nowhere in the Constitution.
He tells us privacy rights aren't in the constitution, yet he is just
one of a vast army working to change the Constitution so that it can
take away the privacy rights. Where else have we seen thinking like
Seeber's? Have any of you studied the Communists? Have any of you
studied the Nazis? If Seeber's principles are so great, please show
us how these regimes were great throughout history. Where is the
benefit of them compared to America? Let us see if Vatican
Inquisitors, Communists, Facists, Nazis or Seeber can learn anything
even in lessons over the span of thousands of years! How come you
can't see that the sources which told us there is an indelible
connection between Communism, Fascism, Nazism and every other horrible
regime to the Vatican is fact?? "Well Seeber doesn't speak for the
Catholic Church" the "Ends Justifies the Means" people would say.
Well then why not then get upset at Seeber? Instead all emotion is
only on Ted McMillan. That is VERY revealing!
Seeber says that he destroys communities and builds them:
He says that he works against the government in order to reform it
from the inside in "acceptable confines", but though Ted McMillan is
in agreement with the present makeup of government, he is in a Jihad
against it. Anyone who repeats this fact about Seeber as Jack Chick
and others tell us, will be charged with being "Anti-Catholic" and
with hating Catholics. How come Seeber is not being charged here?
All this shows that ROME HAS NOT CHANGED! Despot Catholics like
Seeber would never think of providing such unlimited power to the free
American government throughout its history. Why are they so eager and
determined that that be done now? That is because most of those in
government are secretly loyal to the Pope and would break any American
or Constitutional principle in a heartbeat at his command irregardless
of any oath that they have made. They could not do this so readily
historically because there were many true Americans who also held
posts side them and who would either stop them or report what they
were doing. As prophecy is about to be fulfilled, NOW THAT POPULATION
OF TRUE AMERICANS IS ALMOST NON-EXISTENT. They have retired, have
been dismissed, have been killed, or otherwise just are not there
anymore. Some have resigned in protest of the new outlaw movements.
I reprove despot Seeber for gloating over the dead bodies of the
Protestants! The following is the actual statement and reply:
Ted McMillan:
> > But you did understand how to hang people in chains. And your
> > founding Fathers also can't tell the difference between shedding the
> > blood of millions of bible-believers in the most unbelievable ways for
> > their descendants to now presume upon the world to teach them what is
> > the definition of love, hate and plagiarism.
>
Ted Seeber:
> Can you really be said to be believing in the Bible if you don't live it?
> NONE of the groups persecuted by the Catholics were living the Bible. They were living their personal interpretations of God, not the Bible.
-------------------
CHECK THESE WORDS CAREFULLY! THEY WERE THE EXACT THOUGHTS OF THE
BRUTAL USTASHI KILLER SOLDIERS OF WWII! THEY WERE THE EXACT THOUGHTS
THAT CAUSED THE PERSECUTION AND DEATH OF MILLIONS THROUGHOUT THE
REFORMATION MANY CATHOLICS ARE TELLING US ISN'T TRUE AND IS WAY IN THE
PAST!!
Amazingly even Nicholas, now viewing that much of his claims were
proven true through Seebers words, moved out to attack me telling me I
have an obsession with a super-terrorist like the US government has
with regular terrorists, and has failed to even address what Seeber
has done. Seeber has condemned all non-Catholics to persecution and
death. Nicholas II claims to be a non-Catholic as most of the other
posters here including Caillean, who claims to be a witch. Witches
are known for being persecuted by everyone. She also sees nothing
wrong with what Seeber has said, but expended all her irritation on
the fact that I have reproved and do expose the super-terrorist!
Claiming to be non-Catholic is not good enough if you follow a Vatican
agenda.
-------------------
Ted McMillan:
NO WONDER YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT ME BRINGING BACK YOUR RECORD OF
HORRIBLE ATROCITIES! They were not even living the bible! Why even
worry about them! Were the 5 to 6 thousands who were killed by the
terrorist attacks living by the bible? You don't have any consistent
principles, if you even know the meaning of the word! Your principles
change only for you to even look like you are winning an argument.
Your statement is incredibly insensitive and you constantly reveal
that what is written by your uncomparably bloody religion is true.
All I know is that you people murdered millions in the most horrible
ways. I DON'T CARE IF YOU MURDERED ATHEISTS!! I am not that
inhumanly insensitive for an animal like you to be worried about me
having guns!
Again, despot: WHY IS THE POPE APOLOGIZING!! You have just sent us
your bigoted despot opinions without providing any MAYBEES! Why not
try to prove what you are saying against me using the scriptures then?
How often have you even answered my questions?
Thousands of people lost their lives in the World Trade Center
disaster. How many of them lived by the bible? They were not even in
rural settings nor under persecution. All those in the WTC were
products of the modern revolution. I would even say that most of them
believe that homosexual activity is acceptable behavior. They all
lived in the modern age and are products of it. I can bet you that
homosexuality was not a problem for those who were slain by Rome!
I don't care whether or not they lived by the bible according to a
murderous despot!
--------------------
For making these statements, I have been constantly attacked by
Vatican Cindy Ford, Angelo Braz and Paul Tooley Jr. who all falsely
claim to be Adventists. Their discussion specifically and
intentionally leaves out their fellow soldier of the Pope, Ted Seeber,
and they have even demanded that I not refer to Ted Seeber in any
discussion despite his very revealing comment involving the blood of
the Saints. These all claim to be Adventists. I have asked Vatican
Cindy a simple question. She moves heaven and earth to evade it but
later claims that she has answered it. Below is the question and
check the threads in order to see how she has answered it. She has
moved heaven and earth to evade and avoid it and then finally lied by
telling us that she has answered it. The statement of Ted Seeber not
only condemned the religion Cindy Ford falsely claims to be a part of,
but because of her claims, his statements also condemns her life. The
same is true for Vatican Angelo Braz. They have played the Jesuit and
done everything possible to avoid the very plain and clear question
while claiming that they have answered it.
For the Work Finished!
Ted McMillan
Tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
THE LAST WORD ON ADVENTIST TRUTH!
http://www.seventh-dayadventism.com
Robert A. Walker
tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com (Ted McMillan) wrote in message news:<c9dac66d.02043...@posting.google.com>...
Joseph Meehan
You always give Ted the best parts. Do you like him just because you
have the same first name?
--
Joseph E. Meehan
26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
Paul
who has taken the things Mr. Seeber posted way out of context, failed to
recognize satire and has done nothing to even come close to the truth. I am
sad that Ted Seeber doesn't post here anymore.
Paul
"Robert A. Walker" <rwa...@nycc.edu> wrote in message
news:8d9ab0cb.02050...@posting.google.com...
Caillean McMahon
> > Amazingly even Nicholas, now viewing that much of his claims were
> > proven true through Seebers words, moved out to attack me telling me I
> > have an obsession with a super-terrorist like the US government has
> > with regular terrorists, and has failed to even address what Seeber
> > has done. Seeber has condemned all non-Catholics to persecution and
> > death. Nicholas II claims to be a non-Catholic as most of the other
> > posters here including Caillean, who claims to be a witch. Witches
> > are known for being persecuted by everyone. She also sees nothing
> > wrong with what Seeber has said, but expended all her irritation on
> > the fact that I have reproved and do expose the super-terrorist!
> >
> > Claiming to be non-Catholic is not good enough if you follow a Vatican
> > agenda.
> >
>
I have no love for anyone persecuting anyone.
I disapprove of Mr. Seeber's statements if he approved of the abuse of
others.
Stop , please, saying that I see nothing wrong or approve of any
persecution.
Blessings;
Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Ted McMillan
I do not give out hatred as the witch has wrongfully accused me of.
She now complains that I have falsely accused her. A Super-terrorist
has condemned all non-Catholics. Caillean has not expended any
irritation about that even though she claims to be non-Catholic and a
witch at that. All her posts are telling me that by exposing a
super-terrorist I am promoting hatred. That must mean that the United
States is the most hateful nation in the world since they go after
regular terrorists. Antichrist Caillean keeps evading these points as
Antichrist Nicholas, Cindy, Lamarr, Angelo and the others.
Caillean is also another super-terrorist and indeed another
infiltrator from the Vatican. She doesn't feel bad being condemned to
persecution and death because she is NOT a non-Catholic.
If Antichrist Caillean saw something wrong with persecution, she would
have put forth some energy in at least showing outrage about the
actions of super-terrorist Ted Seeber. She has expended NO such
energy. All her energies, like the other workers of the Antichrist,
have been against me for exposing the super-terrorist. They have
portrayed me as being mean, evil and "INCOMPREHENSIBLE" for doing
that. These are the reincarnates from the Inquisition: the children
of the Antichrist.
Ted McMillan
tmac1238seventh-dayadventism.com
Ted McMillan
> No fair. I want to be a super-terrorist also.
Don't be modest, worker for the Antichrist! You are a super-terrorist
and will ultimately receive a super-terrorist's reward from above. I
have been waiting for years for you to lay a single egg having
evidence for anything you say.
> You always give Ted the best parts. Do you like him just because you
> have the same first name?
Here is the evidence again that super-terrorist Ted Seeber condemned
all non-Catholics. Joe Meehan and most of these posters are the same
and were trained by the same cult:
A man by the name of Ted Seeber, has condemned all non-Catholics to
persecution and death on Decembr 5, 2001 on the newsgroups after he
argued against every vestige of the Constitution, liberty and privacy.
Since that time, strange people even claiming to be non-Catholics
have been attacking me because I exposed what the man has done. They
have portrayed me as mean, "incomprehensible," "evil," and even "not
human" for doing so. We have found that these people are infiltrants
from the Vatican to other non-Catholic religions. Here now again is
the actual conversation and where you can find it posted on the
newsgroups. Here is the evidence every worker for the Antichrist, be
they sabbathkeepers or even witches, have ignored in favor over their
paranoia that uncivil posts are being submitted to the newsgroups.
Being workers for the Antichrist, their solution to this problem was
to submit more uncivil postings:
I reprove despot Seeber for gloating over the dead bodies of the
Protestants! The following is the actual statement and reply:
Ted McMillan:
> > But you did understand how to hang people in chains. And your
> > founding Fathers also can't tell the difference between shedding the
> > blood of millions of bible-believers in the most unbelievable ways for
> > their descendants to now presume upon the world to teach them what is
> > the definition of love, hate and plagiarism.
>
Ted Seeber:
> Can you really be said to be believing in the Bible if you don't live it?
> NONE of the groups persecuted by the Catholics were living the Bible. They were living their personal interpretations of God, not the Bible.
------------------
FREEZE!
In this simple statement, Ted Seeber acknowledges not only that
Catholics have persecuted and killed Protestants, but he states why.
He speaks clearly with approval as if he is expressing an eternal
principle. He is talking as if he is proud of what he is saying. And
why were the 5 to 6 thousand people killed in the WTC terrorist
disaster of September 11 again? You can see that Osama can speak
similar words!
I, being infuriated, respond:
------------------
Ted McMillan:
NO WONDER YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT ME BRINGING BACK YOUR RECORD OF
HORRIBLE ATROCITIES! They were not even living the bible! Why even
worry about them! Were the 5 to 6 thousands who were killed by the
terrorist attacks living by the bible? You don't have any consistent
principles, if you even know the meaning of the word! Your principles
change only for you to even look like you are winning an argument.
------------------
Ted Seeber was clearly telling the world that people deserve to die or
should even be persecuted and killed if they don't live the bible
according to his standards. My reply to him continues:
------------------
Your statement is incredibly insensitive and you constantly reveal
that what is written by your uncomparably bloody religion is true.
All I know is that you people murdered millions in the most horrible
ways. I DON'T CARE IF YOU MURDERED ATHEISTS!! I am not that
inhumanly insensitive for an animal like you to be worried about me
having guns!
Again, despot: WHY IS THE POPE APOLOGIZING!! You have just sent us
your bigoted despot opinions without providing any MAYBEES! Why not
try to prove what you are saying against me using the scriptures then?
How often have you even answered my questions?
Thousands of people lost their lives in the World Trade Center
disaster. How many of them lived by the bible? They were not even in
rural settings nor under persecution. All those in the WTC were
products of the modern revolution. I would even say that most of them
believe that homosexual activity is acceptable behavior. They all
lived in the modern age and are products of it. I can bet you that
homosexuality was not a problem for those who were slain by Rome!
I don't care whether or not they lived by the bible according to a
murderous despot!
------------------
What I was saying here was that the Protestants viewed homosexual
behavior as intolerable and abominable. Likely most of the victims of
911 did not view matters that way. Since they likely did not live the
bible according to Seeber's standards, what should be their fate?
So here we see the issues and prove that Rome has not changed. These
statements of Seeber did not just come like a bolt of lightning. This
was the last leg of a series of emotional ramblings between us both as
I was defending human liberty, privacy and the American Constitution
while Seeber was condemning all of these and demanding change under
the false pretext that the terror attacks require a police state for
security. Seeber told us boldly that he works against the
Constitution to change it to be interpreted opposite from what it
currently is under "acceptable confines" from the INSIDE! This is
just what people like Jack Chick WERE SAYING FOLKS!!
Interestingly, although he was even telling us that privacy was
NOWHERE to be found in the American Constitution, go to his website
and you will find something strange. Would you like to have an email
account given to you by Ted Seeber? Well go to his website and you
can get one. What's more is, according to him, IT'S FREE! Want to
get a free email account from a man arguing against basic human
privacy? You go right ahead!
For a long time he was spitting upon the principles of human liberty
as had ALL those brutal regimes that easily took the lives of people
and committed atrocities. He even told me that the current American
system respecting privacy was "increibly stupid" and "outdated." He
told me the current principles were as old as Martin Luther during the
Reformation. When I asked him the date his contrary principles were
created, he behaved just like Antichrist MSiciliana, Cindy, Nicholas
and so many others.
After I demonstrated his terrible responsibility for saying words like
that on the newsgroups directly in the climate of September 11th
fulfilling the stated definition of a terrorist, Ted Seeber ducked out
from dialoguing with me even though he had been trailing my postings
and wrangling with me tit-for-tat.
I then kept raving and raving about what Ted Seeber had said. NONE OF
THE OTHER WORKERS FOR THE ANTICHRIST DARED TO TAKE NOTICE OVER WHAT
TED SEEBER HAD SAID OR DONE. They came to attack me telling me that I
insulted the man, and I therefore was an "incomprehensible" and "evil"
man sending in uncivil postings. Antichrist Lamarr told us that I was
not human as I dared to respect the lives of millions of men, women
and little children who were not just ordinary people, but were the
very saints of God! All of them attacked me taking turns and telling
the world I am the only problem on the newsgroups. Through this we
discover that Rome has not changed. It shows they are not to use the
claim that Ted Seeber was not representing Rome here. His words did
not offend them.
That is why you notice all claims that Seeber did not do what I said
he did, are just a squeak and from among the most unscrupulous of them
all, Antichrist MSiciliana. I have told Antichrist MSiciliana to LET
THE MAN SPEAK FOR HIMSELF many times over. The advice sounds logical,
does it NOT? From day one, TED SEEBER COULD NOT DENY WHAT I HAD SAID
ABOUT WHAT HE HAD DONE. FROM DAY ONE HE HAD NOTHING TO SAY ABOUT MY
CLAIMS AGAINST WHAT HE HAD DONE. He had been posting on the
newsgroups for almost three months afterward and then ducked out at
the end of January.
-
Just like Antichrist MSiciliana was the only one trying to show the
world I taught that Ellen White was the Antichrist, so she is the only
one now trying to babble to us that Ted Seeber did not boldly condemn
the lives of all non-Catholics on the basis of Vatican principle!
Although Antichrist MSiciliana claims that Ted Seeber did not condemn
all non-Catholics, with all my ravings about what was done, she is the
only one unscrupulous enough to claim Seeber did not do it. All the
rest of them acknowledge that he did. The Pope should give Antichrist
MSiciliana an award or elect her the next pope!
For the Work Finished!
Ted McMillan
tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
Ted McMillan
> Get help soon, and stop crossposting.
Not likely. I don't want to regress to you workers for the antichrist
who cannot afford to add evidence with what you post. You all are
seasoned in attack and in preaching that we should not attack.
Bring evidence for what you say next time if it is possible to convert
a child of the antichrist and the Inquisitions to a child of God.
God help unscrupuluos DOCTOR Walker from the Antichrist!
Ted McMillan
tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
Ted McMillan
> For the record Ted Seeber, is being libeled, and slandered by Ted McMillan
> who has taken the things Mr. Seeber posted way out of context, failed to
> recognize satire and has done nothing to even come close to the truth. I am
> sad that Ted Seeber doesn't post here anymore.
>
> Paul
You unscrupulous super-terrorist son of the Antichrist!
You workers of the Antichrist have been attacking me for a long time,
slandering me without realizing all my satire about you all being the
reincarnate scoundrel childrem from the Inquisitions.
Now here again is the supposed libel slander as I expose the
super-terrorist right before these other super-terrorists trained and
infiltrated from the Vatican:
A man by the name of Ted Seeber, has condemned all non-Catholics to
persecution and death on Decembr 5, 2001 on the newsgroups after he
argued against every vestige of the Constitution, liberty and privacy.
Since that time, strange people even claiming to be non-Catholics
have been attacking me because I exposed what the man has done. They
have portrayed me as mean, "incomprehensible," "evil," and even "not
human" for doing so. We have found that these people are infiltrants
from the Vatican to other non-Catholic religions. Here now again is
the actual conversation and where you can find it posted on the
newsgroups. Here is the evidence every worker for the Antichrist, be
they sabbathkeepers or even witches, have ignored in favor over their
paranoia that uncivil posts are being submitted to the newsgroups.
Being workers for the Antichrist, their solution to this problem was
to submit more uncivil postings:
I reprove despot Seeber for gloating over the dead bodies of the
Protestants! The following is the actual statement and reply:
Ted McMillan:
> > But you did understand how to hang people in chains. And your
> > founding Fathers also can't tell the difference between shedding the
> > blood of millions of bible-believers in the most unbelievable ways for
> > their descendants to now presume upon the world to teach them what is
> > the definition of love, hate and plagiarism.
>
Ted Seeber:
> Can you really be said to be believing in the Bible if you don't live it?
> NONE of the groups persecuted by the Catholics were living the Bible. They were living their personal interpretations of God, not the Bible.
------------------
FREEZE!
In this simple statement, Ted Seeber acknowledges not only that
Catholics have persecuted and killed Protestants, but he states why.
He speaks clearly with approval as if he is expressing an eternal
principle. He is talking as if he is proud of what he is saying. And
why were the 5 to 6 thousand people killed in the WTC terrorist
disaster of September 11 again? You can see that Osama can speak
similar words!
I, being infuriated, respond:
------------------
Ted McMillan:
NO WONDER YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT ME BRINGING BACK YOUR RECORD OF
HORRIBLE ATROCITIES! They were not even living the bible! Why even
worry about them! Were the 5 to 6 thousands who were killed by the
terrorist attacks living by the bible? You don't have any consistent
principles, if you even know the meaning of the word! Your principles
change only for you to even look like you are winning an argument.
------------------
Ted Seeber was clearly telling the world that people deserve to die or
should even be persecuted and killed if they don't live the bible
according to his standards. My reply to him continues:
------------------
Your statement is incredibly insensitive and you constantly reveal
that what is written by your uncomparably bloody religion is true.
All I know is that you people murdered millions in the most horrible
ways. I DON'T CARE IF YOU MURDERED ATHEISTS!! I am not that
inhumanly insensitive for an animal like you to be worried about me
having guns!
Again, despot: WHY IS THE POPE APOLOGIZING!! You have just sent us
your bigoted despot opinions without providing any MAYBEES! Why not
try to prove what you are saying against me using the scriptures then?
How often have you even answered my questions?
Thousands of people lost their lives in the World Trade Center
disaster. How many of them lived by the bible? They were not even in
rural settings nor under persecution. All those in the WTC were
products of the modern revolution. I would even say that most of them
believe that homosexual activity is acceptable behavior. They all
lived in the modern age and are products of it. I can bet you that
homosexuality was not a problem for those who were slain by Rome!
I don't care whether or not they lived by the bible according to a
murderous despot!
------------------
For the Work Finished!
Ted McMillan
tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
Tom A.
Joseph Meehan wrote:
>
> No fair. I want to be a super-terrorist also.
First you need a "How I got my super powers story" - unfortunately, most
of those (when filmed) are not very good (although if you can get Jack
Nickolson to play your super-enemy, it might be OK. (OK, Gene Hackman
was good too, but much better in the sequel than the original).
Then, you need a costume ....
>
> You always give Ted the best parts. Do you like him just because you
> have the same first name?
>
Blatant favoritism, I think.
> --
> Joseph E. Meehan
>
> 26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
--
Tom A.
There's nothing like cooking and eating outside, unless you like
comfort. - Henny Youngman
Deja mail is gone. Look for me at raugost at yahoo . com
Will Nordmeyer
"Ted McMillan" <tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com> wrote in message
news:c9dac66d.0205...@posting.google.com...
She accused you of nothing.
> She now complains that I have falsely accused her.
You have. She never said she sees nothing wrong with what Ted Seeber
has said.
You are once again being hateful and non-Christian.
> A Super-terrorist has condemned all non-Catholics.
And Ted continues to call people names.
But if someone calls him a name he rants and raves about it.
> Caillean has not expended any irritation about that even though she
claims to be non-Catholic and a
> witch at that.
Ted lies again... she has
> All her posts are telling me that by exposing a super-terrorist I am
promoting hatred.
All her posts are telling you that you are consumed with hatred. As
evidenced by your posts, your namecalling, your obsession with Ted
Seeber, your crossposting, your conspiracy theories...
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Ted McMillan
told us that someone would have to be stupid to post to me while he
was posting to me. How is it that Frank is so accurate in regard to
himself, Antichrist Nordy and the other workers of the Antichrist?
Here is what Antichrist Nordy writes:
"Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.daytondigital.net> wrote in message news:<3cd14...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
> > She [Caillean the witch] now complains that I have falsely accused her.
>
> You have. She never said she sees nothing wrong with what Ted Seeber
> has said.
If I don't care what people say, all the more for the super-terrorists
of the Papacy. I never said I needed mental help since I regard human
life either.
Antichrist Caillean cannot see that something is wrong with a person
who condemns all non-Catholics to persecution and death in comparison
to me who irritates her. I do because I exposed and reproved the
super-terrorist monster from the Inquisition. She has consistently
talked only about that and ordered me not to bring up super-terrorist
Seeber. Even Nicholas II has done that. I therefore don't go by what
they claim to be. Human beings are not like that.
More from Antichrist Nordy:
> You are once again being hateful and non-Christian.
If I had said we should persecute and kill all non-Catholics then you
would see these workers of the Antichrist having some form of humanity
in appearance. Me exposing the fact that Antichrist Nordy is another
super-terrorist of the Papacy is a sign of love. Leave things alone
and they will work matters out to the deaths of thousands and
millions.
> > A Super-terrorist has condemned all non-Catholics.
>
> And Ted continues to call people names.
Compare which is worse. Is it, according to Antichrist Nordy and the
rest of the abandoned children of the Papacy to persecute and murder
people? Or to call them names. Because I expose that they are the
grotesque reincarnate Children of the Inquisition they have
established an immense crime called name-calling. read their posts
and you will see that to add to their centuries of atrocities, deceit
and murder is the crime of NAME-CALLING! Let me make Antichrist Nordy
more paranoid in his obsession!
> But if someone calls him a name he rants and raves about it.
>
> > Caillean has not expended any irritation about that even though she
> claims to be non-Catholic and a
> > witch at that.
>
>
> Ted lies again... she has
Funny, why did I think that Antichrist Nordy would provide some
evidence and proof. How is it that Antichrist Caillean has expended
much more irritation about me exposing a super-terrorist and has done
literally no expenditure of effort to point out the crime Seeber has
done in this climate of justifying the deeds of Rome as being
exclusively in the past?
> > All her posts are telling me that by exposing a super-terrorist I am
> promoting hatred.
>
> All her posts are telling you that you are consumed with hatred.
That's what I said. She also is a lying child of the Antichrist as is
unscrupulous despot Will Nordy.
> As
> evidenced by your posts, your namecalling, your obsession with Ted
> Seeber, your crossposting, your conspiracy theories...
Conspiracy theories because I disagree with another super-terrorist
despot of the Antichrist called Will Nordy who is obsessed with Ted
McMillan?
Where in the bible does it say that even your communion with the
Antichrist Will Nordy should be jeopardized by your obsession with Ted
McMillan? Where in that book does it tell you you should be paranoid
about the crime of crossposting?
Here again is some documentation on your fellow super-terrorist by the
name of Ted Seeber, Antichrist Nordy:
A man by the name of Ted Seeber, has condemned all non-Catholics to
persecution and death on Decembr 5, 2001 on the newsgroups after he
argued against every vestige of the Constitution, liberty and privacy.
Since that time, strange people even claiming to be non-Catholics
have been attacking me because I exposed what the man has done. They
have portrayed me as mean, "incomprehensible," "evil," and even "not
human" for doing so. We have found that these people are infiltrants
from the Vatican to other non-Catholic religions. Here now again is
the actual conversation and where you can find it posted on the
newsgroups. Here is the evidence every worker for the Antichrist, be
they sabbathkeepers or even witches, have ignored in favor over their
paranoia that uncivil posts are being submitted to the newsgroups.
Being workers for the Antichrist, their solution to this problem was
to submit more uncivil postings:
I reprove despot Seeber for gloating over the dead bodies of the
Protestants! The following is the actual statement and reply:
Ted McMillan:
> > But you did understand how to hang people in chains. And your
> > founding Fathers also can't tell the difference between shedding the
> > blood of millions of bible-believers in the most unbelievable ways for
> > their descendants to now presume upon the world to teach them what is
> > the definition of love, hate and plagiarism.
>
Ted Seeber:
> Can you really be said to be believing in the Bible if you don't live it?
> NONE of the groups persecuted by the Catholics were living the Bible. They were living their personal interpretations of God, not the Bible.
------------------
FREEZE!
In this simple statement, Ted Seeber acknowledges not only that
Catholics have persecuted and killed Protestants, but he states why.
He speaks clearly with approval as if he is expressing an eternal
principle. He is talking as if he is proud of what he is saying. And
why were the 5 to 6 thousand people killed in the WTC terrorist
disaster of September 11 again? You can see that Osama can speak
similar words!
I, being infuriated, respond:
------------------
Ted McMillan:
NO WONDER YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT ME BRINGING BACK YOUR RECORD OF
HORRIBLE ATROCITIES! They were not even living the bible! Why even
worry about them! Were the 5 to 6 thousands who were killed by the
terrorist attacks living by the bible? You don't have any consistent
principles, if you even know the meaning of the word! Your principles
change only for you to even look like you are winning an argument.
------------------
Ted Seeber was clearly telling the world that people deserve to die or
should even be persecuted and killed if they don't live the bible
according to his standards. My reply to him continues:
------------------
Your statement is incredibly insensitive and you constantly reveal
that what is written by your uncomparably bloody religion is true.
All I know is that you people murdered millions in the most horrible
ways. I DON'T CARE IF YOU MURDERED ATHEISTS!! I am not that
inhumanly insensitive for an animal like you to be worried about me
having guns!
Again, despot: WHY IS THE POPE APOLOGIZING!! You have just sent us
your bigoted despot opinions without providing any MAYBEES! Why not
try to prove what you are saying against me using the scriptures then?
How often have you even answered my questions?
Thousands of people lost their lives in the World Trade Center
disaster. How many of them lived by the bible? They were not even in
rural settings nor under persecution. All those in the WTC were
products of the modern revolution. I would even say that most of them
believe that homosexual activity is acceptable behavior. They all
lived in the modern age and are products of it. I can bet you that
homosexuality was not a problem for those who were slain by Rome!
I don't care whether or not they lived by the bible according to a
murderous despot!
------------------
For the Work Finished!
Ted McMillan
tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
THE LAST WORD ON ADVENTIST TRUTH!
http://www.seventh-dayadventism.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Ted McMillan
> news:c9dac66d.0205...@posting.google.com...
> > A Super-terrorist has condemned all non-Catholics.
>
"Will Nordmeyer" <wi...@nospam.daytondigital.net> wrote in message news:<3cd14...@news5.uncensored-news.com>...
> And Ted continues to call people names.
>
> But if someone calls him a name he rants and raves about it.
As we can see here, I talk about a man who has condemned all
non-Catholics to persecution and death. To show a greater crime in
the minds of these horrible people of the Vatican telling me I'm not
sane, Antichrist Nordy gives me the touche and tells the world, "but
Ted McMillan calls people names." You be the judge so that you can
tell where the children of the Antichrist are. But Antichrist Nordy
then tells me that I rave about being called names back. Who then are
calling Ted McMillan names and performing, according to Antichrist
Nordy here the worst crime that can be committed?
During the Inquisitions when their ancestors gleefully wasted the
lives of millions of Christians, is it to be imagined that they didn't
call the Protestants names? Not even the name: heretic?
These are the children of the Anichrist. That's why they would even
say that I am consumed with hatred because I revealed that a
super-terrorist killer like themselves has been posting on the
newsgroups in order to save the lives of many more and even Antichrist
Nicholas II cannot explain the hatred of President George Bush going
after Osama Bin Laden.
Osama is a terrorist. He killed many out of anger due to what he
claims are crimes against the Arabs. Ted Seeber and all his Vatican
friends here are SUPER-terrorists. They kill only because you are not
Catholic! As we can see, none of them still can afford to ignore the
posts of Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
Caillean McMahon
Theodore;
I have the blessing of belonging to a religion that both believes in
and practices peace. Is that so very difficult to understand? Healing is
better than warring. Why do I believe this? Because I am a Witch.
Yes, we have been persecuted, and yes the lot of Christianity would burn
us without the civil protections that we possess. I understand this, as
does every Witch. Nevertheless, we wish only peace upon all persons and
indeed all of creation.
Brightest Blessings to you, the Goddess give you her love nd peace, Ted;
Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Caillean McMahon
I have tried to be the soul of patience with you. I have expressed
desires and hopes only for peace. I do not approve of the persecution of
any living being.
Your exchange with Mr Seeber ended months ago. I suggested that you
simply let this go.
You called me an infiltrator from the Vatican, and an Antichrist.
I asked again for peace.
You called me a Child of the Inquisition......
How dare you, Sir. 250,000 womyn at least perished during the Witch
hunts, though over half at the hands of Protestants.
Notwithstanding, the term Inquisition has become synonomous with those
trials, and, dear Sir, I take umbrage at being thrown into such a
category. The Inquisitors are long dead, their bodies dust, but to say
that I am one of them hurts in a way that a Christian could not
understand. Those of my faith were very nearly exterminated, not by
Rome, not by Geneva, or Wurttemberg, Canterbury or Edinburgh, but by
ignorance and fear. Our learning, our healing arts became a very
fragmentary body of information that it is taking well over half a
century to rebuild.
To a Witch, the Inquisition is very real, we see the Christian sites
calling for our faith to be outlawed, we saw the Vatican condemn us yet
again, we know that radical Calvinists want us burned anew from their
own posted writings. We know that Islam routinely executes us. The
President of the United States says that we are not a faith though the
Supreme Court says we are.
Theodore, you have cut me to the quick in a very personal way. Do not
throw back at me that Mr. Seeber did the same. He has been gone a long
time. Your point was made ages ago. You simply need to persecute because
it makes you feel empowered and less threatened by your own paranoia.
What you are doing is called rumination and perseveration. They are
symptoms of something that you ought to seek help for.
I have been patient and kind to you, but no more. I have no Biblical
obligation to keep offering another cheek anew to be slapped, but I
have. You do and you have not.
Beware, Theodore, what evil is cast out to others will return to you
threefold.
So will forgiveness and kindness, if you finally embrace these. There is
always hope.
Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Dolf Boek
news:3cd25...@news.iprimus.com.au...
Gee is Willy an Anti-Christ.....and I thought the pinhead was just one of
those boring new breed of extremist right winged Christian neo- Nazis one
sees frequent these kinds of news groups with repetitive zeal.
DOLF BOEK RESPONDS:
As a rabid fundamentalist loving muslim, you would be well qualified to
speak of neo-Nazi extremists--But you know nothing about Seventh-day
Adventist belief as an American originating community of faith.
--
- dolf
Why should our souls be so daily vexed, depart and leave us our lot?
'Telos' 122J3W1D = 'arch' 0J0W0D + c² {
1. - Adam in 22/7=3W1D {22 Hebrew letters/7th day}
Genealogy: 22 Generations Adam to Isaac: "This the order of the sons of Noah
to Abraham until he bore Isaac, ten generations {as an ontological esoteric
representation of the 10 Commandments} ..." [4Q180 - The Ages of the World,
Frag 1:1-5 + 4Q181 Frag. 2:1]
2. - Noah in {26J5W}
3. - Abraham in {40J4W}
4. - Law@Sinai = {50J}
5. - Xerxes in 457 BCE {72J2W1D}
6. - Jesus {10J=490 years - cryptic prophecy}
7. - Telos {Y6K = 122J3W1D & Y2K/Jubilee2000 myth}
6,000 / 666 = 9.009 ... [Eclipse 25/12/2000 + 6 remaining]
}
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/dolfboek/meta/time.html#BEGIN
This message doesn't constitute authorisation or acceptance by its author,
of the use of their email address for the purposes of unsolicited email
known as 'SPAM'.
Ted McMillan
Antichrist Caillean, after assaulting me from nowhere now comes to
show how her tender, unscrupulous soul is hurt and grieving because
she claims she was attacked by Ted McMillan:
<caill...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3CD1DA50...@yahoo.com>...
> Theodore;
> I have tried to be the soul of patience with you.
Just match the patience you have with Super-terrorist Seeber and you'd
be alright Antichrist Caillean!
> I have expressed
> desires and hopes only for peace.
So? You are a child of the Antichrist, so naturally you will babble
all kinds of falsehoods. Why did you even start to post against me
for the high crime of pointing out a super-terrorist while leaving the
super-terrorist and those others who go to mighty heights to defend
him Antichrist Caillean?
> I do not approve of the persecution of
> any living being.
I am not a hateful person as you have slandered, lied, babbled,
judged, accused and then preached to me against all these things you
freely did. Yes YOU DO approve of persecution of certain people by
your actions and not by your babblings.
> Your exchange with Mr Seeber ended months ago. I suggested that you
> simply let this go.
The Inquisitions ended centuries ago. Should we let it go? Japanese
atrocities ended decades ago. Should we let it go?
http://www.seventh-dayadventism.com/Contention.htm
September 11th ended months ago, should you get a new feminine napkin
because certain people have not let it go?
Ted Seeber, after Catholics were all the time telling us the
Inquisitions were so long ago, proved that his mind is startlingly
just the same. Cindy, Lamarr, Angelo, even Nicky now show by their
defense of the super-terrorist in ignorance of the Bush Administration
that their minds are the same. You use your witchy paranoia because
someone who points out a super-terrorist and is attacked no end by you
and the other workers of the Antichrist, causes you fits. You claim I
am spueing hatred also because I issue uncivil posts. Like Antichrist
Cindy, you haven't noticed that other uncivil postings are all around
outnumbering and attacking Ted McMillan! You are indeed another
unscrupulous infiltrator from the Antichrist.
> You called me an infiltrator from the Vatican, and an Antichrist.
That is true! You called me hateful, mean and other things. You
claim I post uncivil posts, yet you know I only stand against all the
preacher of righteousness against attacks attacking me. YOU ONLY SEE
MY POSTS. Yes, you are a worker for the Antichrist.
> I asked again for peace.
The Japanese government asked again for peace, but proves itself to be
just as dishonest as Witch Caillean. A Korean lady, who was forced to
provide sex for Japanese soldiers during WWII realized that the call
for peace from the Japanese government seeking to gut the record of
her atrocities is proof that she is dealing with the same horrible
people. She protests vehemently against Japan, along with most all
the other Asian countries:
http://www.seventh-dayadventism.com
> You called me a Child of the Inquisition......
You acted like one and proved it. You are paranoid against someone
who pointed out a super-terrorist who condemned all non-Catholics.
You considered that crime light compared to mine in pointing out the
monster EVEN THOUGH YOU FALSELY CLAIM TO BE NON-CATHOLIC! You don't
fault the Bush Administration for their paranoia over someone far more
innocent (Osama Bin laden) than super-terrorist Ted Seeber.
> How dare you, Sir.
How dare you lie on me telling me I was trained at your Vatican and is
therefore hateful!
> 250,000 womyn at least perished during the Witch
> hunts, though over half at the hands of Protestants.
How dare you POINT OUT the crimes? I thought it is worse to point it
out than to commit it? Isn't that what all you sons and daughters of
the Antichrist have been working to do? HOW DARE YOU SPUE SUCH HATRED
AROUND!!
> Notwithstanding, the term Inquisition has become synonomous with those
> trials, and, dear Sir, I take umbrage at being thrown into such a
> category. The Inquisitors are long dead, their bodies dust, but to say
> that I am one of them hurts in a way that a Christian could not
> understand.
AAWWWWW!! Poor worker for the Antichrist again showing how tender is
their poor murderous hearts!! Now how can you tell us that the
Inquisitors are all dead WHEN YOU JUST HEARD TED SEEBER TELL US THAT
ALL NON-CATHOLICS SHOULD BE PERSECUTED AND PUT TO DEATH??? Not every
"heretic" is stupid, Antichrist Caillean!!
> Those of my faith were very nearly exterminated, not by
> Rome, not by Geneva, or Wurttemberg, Canterbury or Edinburgh, but by
> ignorance and fear.
HOW DARE YOU POINT THAT OUT!! Why don't you let it go! I call for
peace! I don't want to hear that violin vermin!
> Our learning, our healing arts became a very
> fragmentary body of information that it is taking well over half a
> century to rebuild.
I do plead with you to stop spueing the hatred by bringing up these
things from so far in the past!!
> To a Witch, the Inquisition is very real,
Then you would have been reminded of this when Super-terrorist Seeber
told us that people should be persecuted and killed merely for not
being Catholic. You didn't notice that! It is like Antichrist Cindy
warring with me and wasting my time with her lies because she claimed
she saw uncivil postings on the newsgroups and this irritated her
spirit. After that, all kinds of the worst attack posts were coming
against me and Antichrist Cindy didn't notice it even after I screamed
about it? Why did she lie? Why are you lying?
> we see the Christian sites
> calling for our faith to be outlawed, we saw the Vatican condemn us yet
> again, we know that radical Calvinists want us burned anew from their
> own posted writings.
You noticed all that and didn't notice that Ted Seeber condemned all
non-Catholics to persecution and death? You pounced upon me bringing
it up in light of all the other super-terrorists doing all they can to
silence what I am trying to reveal? HOW DARE YOU COMMIT THE
UNPARDONABLE SIN OF POINTING OUT ATROCITIES OF HISTORY! You all now
keep forgetting that, according to you sons and daughters of the
Antichrist, it is worse to point out terrorism than to be one!
> We know that Islam routinely executes us.
Stop spueing out the hatred my Dear Witch Caillean!
> The
> President of the United States says that we are not a faith though the
> Supreme Court says we are.
Do you know that President Bush has an obsession against a more
innocent terrorist by the name of Osama Bin Laden?
> Theodore, you have cut me to the quick in a very personal way.
OH! Poor, no-conscience thing!! Her tender feelings are hurt as she
approached to attack me knowing that I am always one against everyone
else. They send attack posts against me all the time and preach
against sending such posts. Sweet tender witch Caillean comes and
attacks me also and now tells us how her tender unscrupulous soul is
hurt! Let the Pope kiss where it hurts, dear!
> Do not
> throw back at me that Mr. Seeber did the same.
Now here comes the despot bablbing orders. Witch Caillean seeks the
advantage so she tries to crutch me to tell me what defenses I cannot
use against her attacks.
> He has been gone a long
> time.
Like the Inquisition, right? The murders of witches were gone a long
time? Has September 11th been gone a long time?
> Your point was made ages ago.
I wasn't even alive during the Inquisitions! Now despot Seeber shows
that his mind is the same. All of a sudden all the people whose lives
Super-terrorist Seeber condemned, comes out of the woodwork to protect
him and to even tell the world I have lied and slandered against him.
Antichrist Witch Caillean now demonstrates all the arts of her
training back at the Vatican to tell me that all these
super-terrorists posting here died a long time ago!
> You simply need to persecute because
> it makes you feel empowered and less threatened by your own paranoia.
Now comes the attacks accusations, the lack of peace, the refusal to
let go as Antichrist Witch Caillean adds to all the attacks against
the lone Ted McMillan! And she complained that her poor unscrupulous
tender Antichrist soul has been hurt. Now she tells me that I am
paranoid with the newsgroups all weighed down because of the paranoia
of all these workers for the Antichrist converging against Ted
McMillan out of the belief that some A-Bomb has exploded. Even
Antichrist Nick goes into temper tantrums that I am revealing Seeber's
crime on the newsgroups!
> What you are doing is called rumination and perseveration. They are
> symptoms of something that you ought to seek help for.
Then stop ruminating and persevering against Ted McMillan or go see
the celestial psychiatrist by severing all connection with your pope.
That way you will not be preaching against making attacks while making
attacks. You will not be preaching against judging others while
judging one in paranoia.
> I have been patient and kind to you, but no more.
OF COURSE! You saw me being attacked by all these preachers of
righteousness against attacks, and you were patient with me by adding
to the attacks, coming against me and accusing me of spueing hatred.
> I have no Biblical
> obligation to keep offering another cheek anew to be slapped, but I
> have. You do and you have not.
So Antichrist Caillean saw me being singularly attacked, but she has
to pretend now that I am the worker for the Antichrist attacking her
tender unscrupulous soul.
> Beware, Theodore, what evil is cast out to others will return to you
> threefold.
She seems to know something about the future crisis in conspiracy
theories. And what about all those people long condemned during the
Inquisitions whose blood cries from afresh by another authentic
inquisitor who just told us that all non-Catholics need to die? Where
is the warning against super-terrorist Seeber that evil is going to
come from the Master of those people whose blood he is also guilty of?
> So will forgiveness and kindness, if you finally embrace these.
Antichrist Caillean, forgive me! Now, back to exposing
super-terrorist Seeber, Cindy, Lamarr, Angelo, Nicky, Nordy, AND YOU!
Just forgive me and give up your paranoia. It has been centuries in
need of forgiveness of the Inquisition. Someone just demonstrated
that he is the same as the Inquisitors!
> There is
> always hope.
> Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
For you workers of the Antichrist???? Seek help NOW! Sever all
connections WITH YOUR POPE!!
Ted McMillan
tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
Robert A. Walker
Actually, the DOCTOR was from Kent State University, thank you.
Please get help.
Judge not lest ye be also judged.
Robert A. Walker, Ph.D.
Not to be confused with Ronald Walker, M.D.
Ted McMillan
> tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com (Ted McMillan) wrote in message news:<c9dac66d.02050...@posting.google.com>...
> > rwa...@nycc.edu (Robert A. Walker) wrote in message news:<8d9ab0cb.02050...@posting.google.com>...
> > > Get help soon, and stop crossposting.
> >
> >
> > Not likely. I don't want to regress to you workers for the antichrist
> > who cannot afford to add evidence with what you post. You all are
> > seasoned in attack and in preaching that we should not attack.
> >
> > Bring evidence for what you say next time if it is possible to convert
> > a child of the antichrist and the Inquisitions to a child of God.
> >
> > God help unscrupuluos DOCTOR Walker from the Antichrist!
> >
> >
> > Ted McMillan
> > tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
>
> Actually, the DOCTOR was from Kent State University, thank you.
>
> Please get help.
Actually that was not the question. Make the statement now that Kent
State University doesn't use evidence to prove anything just like you.
Is that true? If that is true, that would mean that their
psychiatric department, if they have one, is as Vatican and deranged
as you are also.
> Judge not lest ye be also judged.
I do believe the "sane" Vatican one has told me that he didn't judge
me!
> Robert A. Walker, Ph.D.
> Not to be confused with Ronald Walker, M.D.
From Goebbels university. Not from any bonafide place that even
respects human life!
Ted McMillan
Caillean McMahon
Theodore;
Does this mean that to Super Terrorist seekers of the destruction of
Catholicism that Harvard and the Sorbonne are not bona fide?
billu
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,tnn.r
eligion.catholic
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: #ARE YOU STUPID??
> No I am not lacking in love and filled with malice just because I
> exposed a very dangerous person who doesn't respect human,
> non-Catholic, life. You therefore have charged me with malice
> obviously because you are not human, non-Catholic, life.
RIGHT here ABOVE TED McMillan admits that he is not
a Christian, he is a super antichrist terrorist supreme. He
ADMITS that he is FULL of MALICE and LACKING
in LOVE. ALL THAT HE SAYS ***MUST*** be a
lie because he is is a super antichrist terrorist supreme.
You heard it folks right from his own message.
"Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:dfc66dfc.02061...@posting.google.com...
Ted McMillan
Caillean McMahon <caill...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3D0FB1F7...@yahoo.com>...
> Does this mean that to Super ist seekers of the destruction of
> Catholicism that Harvard and the Sorbonne are not bona fide?
> Blessings;
> Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Well seek wisdom from Witchdom to first answer the many questions you
also find it necessary to evade before asking me any question. You
accused me of despising Ted Seeber just because he has a terrible
disregard of human life. I have claimed that you are a Vatican liar
for doing that. Now, even though you cannot recognize the lack of
love in Seeber by his condemnation of all non-Catholics (which would
include you if you were not an infiltrator from Rome) you attack me
only and then babble your claims that you do not condone the
of people. You yet have not classified Seeber's behavior, but was
quick to classify mine.
I respectfully claim again Caillilly, that I am not an unloving person
as you have accused so freely.
Kindly get a degree in any kindergarten so that you can understand
what I have asked and have been asking for such a long time. You are
making a mockery of the mother goddess.
Ted McMillan
Caillean McMahon
Theodore;
You cut a word from my post
>
> Well seek wisdom from Witchdom to first answer the many questions you
> also find it necessary to evade before asking me any question. You
> accused me of despising Ted Seeber just because he has a terrible
> disregard of human life.
Seeber apparently commented on a tragedy of the Middle Ages.
I have claimed that you are a Vatican liar
> for doing that.
This is a BIG LIE designed to generate hatred and fear of me, Witches,
and the Vatican. Stalin, Mao, and Hitler did that. They are
Super-Terrorists. This must mean that:
TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST!
Now, even though you cannot recognize the lack of
> love in Seeber by his condemnation of all non-Catholics (which would
> include you if you were not an infiltrator from Rome)
I was not on the newsgroup at the time of your original conversation
with Mr. Seeber
you attack me
> only and then babble your claims that you do not condone the
> of people.
I do not condone such behaviours and listed some specifics of my
condemnation. You now lie about me to get people to hate me, like the
Manson Family did of some people . They were Super-Terrorists. This must
mean that :
TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST
You yet have not classified Seeber's behavior, but was
> quick to classify mine.
>
> I respectfully claim again Caillilly,
You make fun of my name, I always address you by your formal, given
name. Hitler used to call his enemies by unpleasant names to make
himself look more impressive. He was a SUPER-TERRORIST> This must mean
that:
TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST
that I am not an unloving person
> as you have accused so freely.
>
> Kindly get a degree in any kindergarten so that you can understand
> what I have asked and have been asking for such a long time. You are
> making a mockery of the mother goddess.
I have my doctorate, a residency, and two post-doc fellowships.
My Goddess(Her name is capitalized) is loving but wants Her children
protected from attack and you are formenting hatred to both the
Catholics and Witches.
Be careful Ted of the lies that you tell. Each one points out the true
agitator, hate-mongerer and bloodthirsty demagogue.
Be more careful of the antagonism of the Catholics, I do not know
whether or not they have realized that you do not speak for Adventism
and may believe that All Adventists mean them harm and lie about them.
Blessings;
Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
All that you have to do its to stop mentioning my name or referencing me
in any way, Theodore, then this stops.
>
> Ted McMillan
Caillean McMahon
in the United States
Social Ministries
While all Jesuit ministries seek to respond to
important human
needs, social ministries work with and for those people
whose needs
arise from their social marginalization. As community
organizers,
prison chaplains and lawyers, Jesuits confront the
social problems of
the day. Those directly engaged in these apostolates
collaborate with
other Jesuits, lay collegues and Jesuit institutions to
advance social
concerns such as the rights of immigrants, Native
Americans, African
Americans, Hispanics and women as well as housing,
hunger and
health care.
The National Office of Social Ministries in
Washington, D.C.
monitors national legislation, advocates on behalf of
the
constituencies of the Jesuit ministries throughout the
U.S., and assists
them in their ongoing development.
International Ministries
Jesuits are commissioned worldwide to proclaim the
good news of
salvation, in many instances to people who have never
heard of Jesus
Christ. Some 500 U.S. Jesuit missionaries work abroad
with local
Jesuits and lay colleagues in Latin America, Africa,
Asia, the Near
East, India and Micronesia, and at home among Native
Americans.
This is a continuation of the original vision of Saint
Ignatius, who
founded the Society to be available to travel to the
ends of the earth,
wherever the need was greatest. They follow in the
tradition of such
early Jesuits as Saint Francis Xavier, Robert de Nobili
and Matteo
Ricci who opened new doors for Christianity in Japan,
India and
China.
U.S. Jesuits are presently serving in the following
areas of the
world: Alaska, Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Belize,
Brazil,
Caroline Islands, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Egypt,
Eritrea, Ethiopia,
Ghana, Guatemala, Hawaii, Honduras, India, Indonesia,
Israel,
Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Korea, Lebanon, Malawi,
Mariana
Islands, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Mozambique, Nepal,
Nicaragua,
Nigeria, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Sri
Lanka, Sudan,
Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
The Jesuit Conference Secretariat for International
and Refugee
Ministries is a national office working in areas
relating to international
Jesuit concerns, justice and peace, and refugees. Its
board is
comprised of representatives of the ten U.S. and two
Canadian
provinces. The Secretary for International and Refugee
Ministries is
ex officio Director of the Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS)
in the U.S.
JRS is an international network of Jesuits, religious
and lay volunteers
who serve refugees in more than 40 countries around the
world.
Pastoral Ministries
Throughout the United States Jesuit priests and
brothers work with
deacons, religious women and laity in more than 100
parishes. These
parishes are located in inner city neighborhoods,
business districts,
academic centers, suburbs, rural areas and Native
American
reservations. There are more than 20 Jesuit parishes in
Alaska alone.
Other Jesuit priests currently serve full time in
diocesan parishes and
as hospital chaplains. Jesuits also serve U.S. service
members as
military chaplains.
Ministry of the Spiritual Exercises
Ignatian spirituality, the vision of the relationship
between God and
the human person grounded in the mystical experiences of
Saint
Ignatius, has its primary expression in his book of
Spiritual Exercises.
Twenty-six retreat houses and spirituality centers
throughout the
United States provide a variety of services based on the
Spiritual
Exercises for clergy, men and women religious, and lay
people.
Some 200 Jesuits are engaged full-time in directing
people through
the Spiritual Exercises. Jesuits who are primarily
committed to other
apostolates often share their spiritual patrimony with
colleagues and
students through retreats and spiritual direction.
Communications
Since St. Ignatius bought a printing press in 1556, the
Jesuits have
always been involved in communications through popular
media.
American Jesuits, under the leadership of the Jesuit
Conference,
produce several national projects of wide interest:
America, a
national weekly journal of opinion; Company, a quarterly
magazine
about Jesuit service; Theological Studies, a prestigious
theological
quarterly; the National Jesuit News, a monthly
newspaper, reports
activities and opinions of American Jesuits throughout
the world; and
“Contact,” a weekly radio program profiling individuals
and
organizations who have developed grass roots projects to
combat
poverty.
The Institute of Jesuit Sources publishes important
works on Jesuit
history and spirituality. Many Jesuits teach
communications at the
university level, and others are involved in independent
production
works.
Jesuits also have a strong presence on the World Wide
Web with
academic and personal sites. The assistancy sponsors a
general
information site (www.jesuit.org) as well as
experiential sites on
spirituality and social and international ministries.
Individual Ministries
In the United States there are a number of Jesuit
lawyers and
physicians, many of whom provide legal and medical
services for the
poor. Other Jesuits teach in non-Jesuit colleges and
universities
throughout the country. Many have distinguished
themselves in such
widely diverse fields as astronomy, geophysics, the fine
arts and
theology. Several serve as heads of various diocesan
administrative
offices. Around the world, mostly in Third World
countries, Jesuits
serve the Church as cardinals, archbishops and bishops.
In recent
years American Jesuits have exercised episcopal ministry
in areas
such as Alaska; the Caroline and Marshall Islands;
Iceland;
Brownsville, TX; Chicago, Il; Fort Wayne-South Bend, IN;
Yakima,
WA; and Washington, D.C.
from www.jesuit.org
Ted McMillan
> Jesuits work in a wide variety of ministries
> in the United States
And they work well infiltrating other religions and governments. I
can see that they work well infiltrating Witchdom also.
Does your degree not allow you to understand that there are questions
you are refusing to deal with, Vatican Caillean? Why are you just and
exactly like Cindy in habits and unChristian mannerisms? OH! If I
told Christ He was avoiding my questions, He would behave just like
you Antichristians!
You have accused me using a very specific word that Cindy and the
other workers of the Papacy have used. I keep asking specific
questions and you skillfully evade in the same way. Was there
something I have asked you, Vatican Caillean, when I demonstrated that
because I reproved someone who has a terrible disrespect of
non-Catholic life (including your unscrupulous Witch soul) I was the
only one you had a problem with just like everyone else? You accused
me of that four letter word which is the opposite of love. I was even
appealing for the lives of all non-Catholics, and you claimed that you
were concerned because I was encouraging a despising of all Catholics.
Me protecting even Witches went unnoticed by you. Remember me
bringing these issues up and asking you to answer?
Did you remember me asking you why you spoke for Ted Seeber, telling
us that he made a mistake when I pointed out that Ted Seeber never
claimed to have made one? Remember I pointed out that you just keep
ignoring my points and statements and then make excuses for the
monster that prove to be absurd? When I ask you about them you just
patiently keep making absurd statements and accuse me of your
training, Vatican Caillean pretending to be a Witch?
Now, back to your degree:
What did you learn at college that made you so illiterate and
possessing so worthless an IQ with all I have been asking you?
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
> Ted McMillan wrote:
> > Well seek wisdom from Witchdom to first answer the many questions you
> > also find it necessary to evade before asking me any question. You
> > accused me of despising Ted Seeber just because he has a terrible
> > disregard of human life.
>
> Seeber apparently commented on a tragedy of the Middle Ages.
Well then Ted McMillan apparently was uncovering a dangerous person
capable of mass-extermination to even aid the US government and save
lives. Ted Seeber can speak for himself then and prove Ted McMillan
wrong. He doesn't have to have Witches (Non-Catholics, they say)
coming in to defend him and babbling that they themselves are not also
from orders of the Papacy.
Actually, again, Vatican Caillean statement of what she thought here
is false due to the fact that Ted Seeber spoke against every facet of
liberty, freedom and the Constitution of the United States without a
single complaint from all these professing Protestants and
non-Catholics who are actually Catholics. Vatican Caillean is just
lying again as is customary for anyone coming from her Papal order.
> I have claimed that you are a Vatican liar
> > for doing that.
> This is a BIG LIE designed to generate hatred and fear of me, Witches,
> and the Vatican.
If someone condemns a whole generation of people, and someone steps up
to reprove that person, it is only a liar and exterminator who would
step up to condemn the one who reproved that person as Vatican Cindy,
Angelo, Nicholas II, Nordy, Caillean and others have done. That is
why Vatican Caillean has all this amnesia away from the questions and
points I have been giving her. Why did you claim, in protecting the
Monster Ted Seeber, that he made a mistake when he did not say that
again Vatican Caillean Witch?
> Stalin, Mao, and did that. They are
> Super-Terrorists. This must mean that:
>
> TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST!
Because these men are monsters, that means that I am also a monster
when I condemn their actions? Why did you protect Ted Seeber who
condemned all non-Catholics which would normally include your
unscrupulous soul, infiltrated Witch from the Vatican Caillean? Can
you tell me why you have ageed to become a worse criminal than an
exterminator by accusing me? What has made you to forget that it is a
worse crime to point out an exterminator criminal than to actually be
one as you papists have been demonstrating here for a long time?
> Now, even though you cannot recognize the lack of
> > love in Seeber by his condemnation of all non-Catholics (which would
> > include you if you were not an infiltrator from Rome)
>
> I was not on the newsgroup at the time of your original conversation
> with Mr. Seeber
>
> you attack me
Again you repeat the same old lie and don't make an explanation. If
you were not there at the time, you could neither support nor condemn
Ted Seeber. Does it make sense for a person who was not there and
doesn't know what happened to support the man? Does it make sense for
someone like you lying to tell us that you were not there when in
almost all my messages I pasted what was written and directed the link
to the conversation? What college did you come from again Caillean,
that knows everyone else is insane but yourselves?
Why did you lie, Vatican Caillean? Who taught you to do that? Where
were you actually trained?
> > only and then babble your claims that you do not condone the
> > of people.
> I do not condone such behaviours and listed some specifics of my
> condemnation. You now lie about me to get people to me, like the
> Family did of some people . They were Super-Terrorists. This must
> mean that :
>
> TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST
I don't go by your lying Vatican claims. If a person capable of
committing atrocities condemns whole races or races of people, I am
going to reprove that person. You didn't. You joined the rest of the
Papal people, such as Caillean, and accused me of being unloving for
doing that.
You condone the extermination of non-Catholics even though you claim
to be a witch.
I WILL ASK YOU NOW TO STOP SPREADING MALICE BY POINTING ME OUT WITH
THE ACCUSATION YOU HAVE LAID AGAINST ME. REMEMBER THAT YOU
INFILTRANTS FROM THE VATICAN CONSIDER POINTING OUT SUPER-CRIMINALS
LIKE YOURSELVES AS WORSE THAN BEING SUPER-CRIMINALS. You constantly
keep forgetting yourself and won't even think to get a refund on your
degree and IQ.
> You yet have not classified Seeber's behavior, but was
> > quick to classify mine.
> >
> > I respectfully claim again Caillilly,
> You make fun of my name, I always address you by your formal, given
> name.
You address me as "respectfully Theodore..." You then accuse me with
the accusation above. You are unscrupulous also and therefore free to
do anything and everything that you condemn.
> used to call his enemies by unpleasant names to make
> himself look more impressive. He was a SUPER-TERRORIST> This must mean
> that:
>
> TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST
Again, Vatican Caillean is super-guilty being guilty of not only being
capable of the extermination of people, but also guilty of attempting
to point them out.
Hitler was not outwardly a mean person. When I exposed the monster,
Ted Seeber, even Antichrist Andrew pointed out that the man was "kind
and courteous." Antichrist Andrew completely dismissed the fact that
Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics to extermination, and that
would include also his unscrupulous soul. What is all this seeming
self-sacrifice for Rome?
> that I am not an unloving person
> > as you have accused so freely.
> >
> > Kindly get a degree in any kindergarten so that you can understand
> > what I have asked and have been asking for such a long time. You are
> > making a mockery of the mother goddess.
>
> I have my doctorate, a residency, and two post-doc fellowships.
But you can't even address or remember that you are being asked
questions. Did your degree teach you how to evade questions? You
also love people who condemn all non-Catholics and condemn those who
would reprove such people as you have done with me.
> My Goddess(Her name is capitalized) is loving but wants Her children
> protected from attack and you are formenting hatred to both the
> Catholics and Witches.
Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics, including Witches to
extermination. Did your degree teach you that when someone does this,
you are to step up and claim that he made a slip-up in the climate of
911 when he did not claim to do so, and condemn those who would expose
him? Did your degree teach you to attack only Ted McMillan because of
what?
I am not formenting what you claim of Catholics and Witches. Only
through you can you claim that there is any form of an alliance
between Catholics and Witches. I invite both Catholics and Witches to
examine you and these discussions. I don't post on the Catholics
newsgroups or even post here because I understand that I am only
posting to dangerous and unscrupulous people and infiltrants such as
yourself. I post because I have some idea that there are some
Catholics who would listen and would even be interested in protecting
their own lives.
> Be careful Ted of the lies that you tell. Each one points out the true
> agitator, -mongerer and thirsty demagogue.
That is why all my posts are revealing you. Ted Seeber DID condemn
all non-Catholics to extermination as would naturally come after all
his posts against liberty and freedom. Even those posts didn't bother
you because you believe the same way, was trained at the same place
Ted Seeber was, and you are just as dangerous, deceitful and
unscrupulous.
> Be more careful of the antagonism of the Catholics,
I don't care if you are antagonized. That is not my concern. If I
see dangerous people here who would take lives, I am going to comment
about them. Ted Seeber joyfully commented on how Rome persecuted and
put to all non-Catholics. That naturally cannot bother you
because you are really not a Witch. You merely infiltrated the order.
> I do not know
> whether or not they have realized that you do not speak for Adventism
> and may believe that All Adventists mean them harm and lie about them.
You switch modes. Tell me about what you know and what you do not
know. You do not know what? You know definitely about me? You do
not know about Ted Seeber? You told us definitely that the monster
made a slip-up and a mistake. Now show evidence to all Catholics and
Witches that you are not deceitful and unscrupulous by finally at
least addressing this point. How can you claim that Ted Seeber
slipped in his treasonous and dangerous remarks against the lives of
all races of people when I have pointed out over ando ver again that
Ted Seeber didn't make any such a claim? What excuse beyond Rome is
there for you again?
> Blessings;
> Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
>
> All that you have to do its to stop mentioning my name or referencing me
> in any way, Theodore, then this stops.
I will continue to define and expose all enemies to life, liberty and
property. I will also continue to point out someone like you, whom I
have never known before, who jumped into my discussion about a really
dangerous person, to then tell everyone that I am filled with malice.
This that you tell us will stop will really only take place when
Christ comes an destroy your order both root and branch.
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com>
> Newsgroups:
> alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,tnn.r
> eligion.catholic
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 11:27 AM
> Subject: Re: #ARE YOU STUPID??
>
> > No I am not lacking in love and filled with malice just because I
> > exposed a very dangerous person who doesn't respect human,
> > non-Catholic, life. You therefore have charged me with malice
> > obviously because you are not human, non-Catholic, life.
>
> RIGHT here ABOVE TED McMillan admits that he is not
> ADMITS that he is FULL of MALICE and LACKING
> in LOVE. ALL THAT HE SAYS ***MUST*** be a
>
> You heard it folks right from his own message.
Dear Vatican Billu,
God has shown me that you have a problem with love. I therefore have
to lend my services for the benefit of your poor unscrupulous soul.
Christ said to love our brothers as ourselves. Do you love me?
I love you, Antichrist Billu!
You are spreading malice by accusing me before the world. You have
committed a supreme crime and you are asked to repent.
Repent before God and He will forgive you for your terrible forms of
malice. The sweet life of Christ will permeate your unscrupulous soul
and give you some form of human qualities first before the further
step of making you a Saint before him. Remember how it is the worst
crime to accuse dangerous people on these newsgroups.
I will over look your horrendous malice and I hope that my love for
your unscrupulous soul will convince you to seek Christ before
ultimate you are pointed out for treason.
In Love,
Ted McMillan
JTEM
"Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote
> You are spreading malice by accusing me before the world.
> You have committed a supreme crime and you are asked to repent.
You're joking, right? If not, you really have to get over yourself...
billu
Ted,
I don't lack in love for you. I am merely using the same tactics
that you use on others back on you. If they are vatican tactics
then you should be called vatican Ted. You above said that
you were lacking in love and full of malice. Those are not attributes
of a Christian. I am spreading nothing but your own words. Is that
not what you do to Ted Seeber?
Also direcly above you say "Remember how it is the worst
crime to accuse dangerous people on these newsgroups. " SO now you
say you are dangerous. Was Christ dangerous? Lacking in love? Full of
Malice? I think not. Repent yourself before you call on others to do so.
It is your own words that convict you not I. I did call you a super
terrorist
antichrist supreme because those are the names you like to call others
so I thought they would be comforting and familiar to you.
BillU
Robert A. Walker
Ah yes, when all else fails, play the Nazi card.
Ted, Ted, Ted....
Ted McMillan
I was unfortunate enough to bump into a Dark Ages Catholic person. I
mean a person whose mind is at least just the same as in the Dark
Ages. There are private groups and people now referred to as
"conspiracy kooks" who are revealing that Rome has not changed, and
that she has infiltrated all of society and especially attacked
entities of control, influence and power.with people from her various
not so well known orders. Many of them are reported to have
infiltrated all the Christian Churches pretending to be members just
as Protestant documentation has forewarned. We have found these
reports to be startlingly true!
Typically anyone bringing such things to light would be referred to as
kooks, paranoid, Anti-Catholics, or mongers. Well let's take a
look at someone who gave such an accusation so that we can see what we
are up against. I am talking about a man by the name of Ted Seeber.
You are about to see the man confirm everything that has been said.
He is going to argue against most every principle of liberty and the
Constitution. He shows total loyalty to the Pope. Here is a synopsis
of his views against human liberty and the American Constitution:
It is true that some have said that his ideas are not a reliable
indicator of how the Vatican feels. It is interesting to note
however, that though he condemned Protestants to persecution and
death, all such people were not in the least upset at him, but instead
attacked me because I reproved him for his terrible disregard of human
life.
We start the conversation over the current September 11th ist
incident I was discussing:
When told how long this ist incident took to plan and implement
compared to others that were planned quicker and yet caught, Seeber
said: "There have been plenty of successfull ist attacks
against US interests where the ists stayed legal until the
attack."
We find this difficult to believe since we know that America had been
considered a haven against ism and how this was surely mentioned
by all our news media as they were describing the impact of this
unprecedented act of ism.
Seeber tells us that:
The current Constitutional principles of liberty are incredibly
outdated and stupid. He said the principle is as old as the 1500s
with Martin Luther. When did his principles for no liberty or privacy
originate? When Christians reveal the Vatican hatred of religious
liberty of conscience and expose her continual conspiracy through
infiltration of our nation and the nations of the world, despot
Vatican Catholics like Seeber tell the world that we the Catholic
people. How long was this practice used? Since he told us that our
principles of liberty are outdated, how outdated is the constant
reflex habit that exposing people who slowly d Christians to
death makes one ful of Catholics and more a criminal than the
people who committed the atrocities themselves? How outdated it is?
Seeber said that the ist incident provided a benefit to us in
that, "we found out that privacy is not a luxury we can afford just
yet." Notice that he said "we" volunteering all opinions for us and
not allowing us to disagree. He includes himself among us as if he is
one of us even though he s liberty for everything else except him
and his church. He doesn't think like us nor agree with us, but he
includes himself in our communion. He gets upset when we say he is a
despot.
AFTER he already told us a year before on the newsgroups that "liberty
is useless and only causes schism." We therefore asked again and
again the question we have for our new American government:
"If the Citizens of America agree to give up their liberties in order
to take out ism, what will happen after ism is conquered?
Will we get our liberties back? Seeber has indeed answered that
question for us.
Soon Seeber began to lie to us telling us that what he said about
liberty being useless is just and only his opinion and that I should
not get upset about it or believe it. The problem is that there is
documentation showing that his church does believe that liberty is
useless and only causes schism.
Seeber accuses us of aiding and supporting the ists because we
believe that liberty and privacy is more important than stopping Bin
Laden. He despots us to believe that Bin Laden will only be caught if
privacy is eliminated.
Seeber tells all that Osama Bin Laden is my Idol because I determined
that the American citizens must retain their liberties.
In Seeber telling us that Privacy is outdated. He tells us that we
should provide all our private information to the government. Our
emails should not be private. Even our apartments that we rent, since
we did not build them, we should allow our landlords the rights to go
in and out as they please and to do what they want. Privacy and
liberty are not inseparable. Those who contend for privacy are
criminals.
Seeber claims that I support the ists because I oppose the
citizens giving up their privacy and liberties. He says that I
support those who would destroy liberty. When I replied that I don't
support Seeber (who would destroy liberty), he asked if I support the
American citizens living their lives as if nothing had happened. Well
no I don't. I want the citizens to remember this ist attack as
I want them to remember the worst ist attacks during the Dark
Ages. But as Seeber told everyone that I support ism because I
support the citizens living as if nothing has happened, you can see
that he also condemned President Bush for saying that America should
continue living on their lives and that we will not allow ists
to limit the freedoms of Americans.
Others have falsely claimed that Ted Seeber doesn't represent Catholic
thought, but this is not the fact. Although Ted Seeber already has
argued against liberty for all non-Catholics, he has shown just as
Rome has that he believes in a different type of liberty. Check for
example this Catholic statement of her position on this matter:
"The church does not, and cannot accept, or in any degree favor,
liberty IN THE PROTESTANT SENSE OF LIBERTY." -- (Catholic World,
April, 1870.
Ted Seeber, in another occasion talks about "fake liberty" after
telling us that liberty itself is useless and "only causes schism." He
is therefore showing that he supports a different kind of liberty even
though he has before condemned the concept entirely.
Ted Seeber charges Ted McMillan with aiding ists through his
support of the rights of the citizens of America to keep their
liberties. He says that by Ted McMillan's determination along this
line, he provides, "Aid and comfort to the enemy, is what you said and
did." But he gets upset if people say he's a despot.
Ted McMillan asked if we are entering a government now when those who
tell us that "liberty is useless and only causes schism" are freedom
lovers and those who are apalled by such words are ists? Seeber
replies, "Yep. Been that way for 40-odd years now." Why then is he
calling for change to that setting if he now tells us it is and has
already been like that?
After Ted McMillan said that those who believe "liberty is useless and
only causes schism" are the ones who believe in depopulation, Seeber
said, "Really? You don't believe in depopulation? Then what are all
those guns for?" He is against the rights to bear arms which was
instituted as a last resort to the Citizens of America in case they
find themselves suddenly confronting a tyrannical United States
government through infiltration, having people who think like Seeber
all throughout it as it is today. But Seeber well knows that the US
military and the UN has lots of guns and far more devices of
destruction INCLUDING STICKY STRIPS. These are spread along highways
and arteries where people can enter or leave populated areas. They
get stuck there and can't move. The criteria Seeber gave was that if
you own guns or support the ownership of it, you believe in
depopulation. But Seeber gets upset when we say he is a despot. Why
is the government planning a depopulation of the citizenry?
Seeber says:
I know you have a Jihad against America because you support an
outdated and incredibly stupid interpretation of the Constitution,
[the "interpretation that always was] and because you support the
taking up of arms against your own government even in times of war.
Ted McMillan:
Ted Seeber knows the following very well, but he is working to
deliberately deceive the readers here. The framers of the
Constitution allowed for the citizens of America to be armed in case,
through infiltration, the American Government turns into a tyrannical
government. I ure all of you that the framers of the Constitution
do not have a Jihad against America. The guns are for the citizens to
protect themselves against despots like Seeber who would at times
claim themselves that they would infiltrate the government and work to
change it till it s and outlaws liberty. Seeber even admitted
this very thing concerning himself.
Ted McMillan:
> Yes, I am on the side of those who love liberty. Where have I said
> whose side I was or was not on?
Ted Seeber:
In fighting for privacy rights (which aren't in the
constitution-ANYWHERE) against neccessary rules needed to fight
against the ists, you've chosen the wrong side.
Ted McMillan's comment:
Take note folks that he told us we shouldn't have rights to privacy
"just yet" when he was in deceive mode. He now again shows us we were
to NEVER have it, for he claims it is nowhere in the Constitution.
He tells us privacy rights aren't in the constitution, yet he is just
one of a vast army working to change the Constitution so that it can
take away the privacy rights. Where else have we seen thinking like
Seeber's? Have any of you studied the Communists? Have any of you
studied the s? If Seeber's principles are so great, please show
us how these regimes were great throughout history. Where is the
benefit of them compared to America? Let us see if Vatican
Inquisitors, Communists, Facists, s or Seeber can learn anything
even in lessons over the span of thousands of years! How come you
can't see that the sources which told us there is an indelible
connection between Communism, m, sm and every other horrible
regime to the Vatican is fact?? "Well Seeber doesn't speak for the
Catholic Church" the "Ends Justifies the Means" people would say.
Well then why not then get upset at Seeber? Instead all emotion is
only on Ted McMillan. That is VERY revealing!
Seeber says that he destroys communities and builds them:
He says that he works against the government in order to reform it
from the inside in "acceptable confines", but though Ted McMillan is
in agreement with the present makeup of government, he is in a Jihad
against it. Anyone who repeats this fact about Seeber as Jack
and others tell us, will be charged with being "Anti-Catholic" and
with hating Catholics. How come Seeber is not being charged here?
All this shows that ROME HAS NOT CHANGED! Despot Catholics like
Seeber would never think of providing such unlimited power to the free
American government throughout its history. Why are they so eager and
determined that that be done now? That is because most of those in
government are secretly loyal to the Pope and would break any American
or Constitutional principle in a heartbeat at his command irregardless
of any oath that they have made. They could not do this so readily
historically because there were many true Americans who also held
posts side them and who would either stop them or report what they
were doing. As prophecy is about to be fulfilled, NOW THAT POPULATION
OF TRUE AMERICANS IS ALMOST NON-EXISTENT. They have retired, have
been dismissed, have been ed, or otherwise just are not there
anymore. Some have resigned in protest of the new outlaw movements.
I reprove despot Seeber for gloating over the bodies of the
Protestants! The following is the actual statement and reply:
Ted McMillan:
> > But you did understand how to hang people in chains. And your
> > founding Fathers also can't tell the difference between shedding the
> > of millions of bible-believers in the most unbelievable ways for
> > their descendants to now presume upon the world to teach them what is
> > the definition of love, and plagiarism.
>
Ted Seeber:
> Can you really be said to be believing in the Bible if you don't live it?
> NONE of the groups persecuted by the Catholics were living the Bible. They were living their personal interpretations of God, not the Bible.
-------------------
CHECK THESE WORDS CAREFULLY! THEY WERE THE EXACT THOUGHTS OF THE
BRUTAL USTASHI ER SOLDIERS OF WWII! THEY WERE THE EXACT THOUGHTS
THAT CAUSED THE PERSECUTION AND OF MILLIONS THROUGHOUT THE
REFORMATION MANY CATHOLICS ARE TELLING US ISN'T TRUE AND IS WAY IN THE
PAST!!
Amazingly even Nicholas, now viewing that much of his claims were
proven true through Seebers words, moved out to attack me telling me I
have an obsession with a super-terrorist like the US government has
with regular ists, and has failed to even address what Seeber
has done. Seeber has condemned all non-Catholics to persecution and
death. Nicholas II claims to be a non-Catholic as most of the other
posters here including Caillean, who claims to be a witch. Witches
are known for being persecuted by everyone. She also sees nothing
wrong with what Seeber has said, but expended all her irritation on
the fact that I have reproved and do expose the super-terrorist!
Claiming to be non-Catholic is not good enough if you follow a Vatican
agenda.
-------------------
Ted McMillan:
NO WONDER YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT ME BRINGING BACK YOUR RECORD OF
HORRIBLE ATROCITIES! They were not even living the bible! Why even
worry about them! Were the 5 to 6 thousands who were ed by the
terrorist attacks living by the bible? You don't have any consistent
principles, if you even know the meaning of the word! Your principles
change only for you to even look like you are winning an argument.
Your statement is incredibly insensitive and you constantly reveal
that what is written by your uncomparably y religion is true.
All I know is that you people ed millions in the most horrible
ways. I DON'T CARE IF YOU ED ATHEISTS!! I am not that
inhumanly insensitive for an animal like you to be worried about me
having guns!
Again, despot: WHY IS THE POPE APOLOGIZING!! You have just sent us
your bigoted despot opinions without providing any MAYBEES! Why not
try to prove what you are saying against me using the scriptures then?
How often have you even answered my questions?
Thousands of people lost their lives in the World Trade Center
disaster. How many of them lived by the bible? They were not even in
rural settings nor under persecution. All those in the WTC were
products of the modern revolution. I would even say that most of them
believe that homosexual activity is acceptable behavior. They all
lived in the modern age and are products of it. I can bet you that
homosexuality was not a problem for those who were slain by Rome!
I don't care whether or not they lived by the bible according to a
murderous despot!
--------------------
For making these statements, I have been constantly attacked by
Vatican Cindy Ford, Angelo Braz and Paul Tooley Jr. who all falsely
claim to be Adventists. Their discussion specifically and
intentionally leaves out their fellow soldier of the Pope, Ted Seeber,
and they have even demanded that I not refer to Ted Seeber in any
discussion despite his very revealing comment involving the of
the Saints. These all claim to be Adventists. I have asked Vatican
Cindy a simple question. She moves heaven and earth to evade it but
later claims that she has answered it. Below is the question and
check the threads in order to see how she has answered it. She has
moved heaven and earth to evade and avoid it and then finally lied by
telling us that she has answered it. The statement of Ted Seeber not
only condemned the religion Cindy Ford falsely claims to be a part of,
but because of her claims, his statements also condemns her life. The
same is true for Vatican Angelo Braz. They have played the Jesuit and
done everything possible to avoid the very plain and clear question
while claiming that they have answered it.
For the Work Finished!
Ted McMillan
Tmac...@seventh-dayadventism.com
Ted McMillan
I never admitted that I was not a Christian despite your Vatican style
evidence.
Babble, babble, Vatican babble. That is all you just gave. Did you
see a man by the name of Ted Seeber who argued against every principle
of liberty? Witch Caillean claimed that, despite that, Seeber is more
tolerant than me! After that, Seeber condemned all non-Catholics. I
was horrified by that and then exposed him. Naturally you also would
have a problem with that, so you join the people that preach against
making accusations by making accusations.
> I am merely using the same tactics
> that you use on others back on you. If they are vatican tactics
> then you should be called vatican Ted. You above said that
> you were lacking in love and full of malice. Those are not attributes
> of a Christian. I am spreading nothing but your own words. Is that
> not what you do to Ted Seeber?
Oh, you mean you spread my words about how Ted Seeber argued against
liberty and freedom? You spread my words about how he condemned all
non-Catholics? What would impress you to ignore everything about me
except something to demonstrate your malice?
> Also direcly above you say "Remember how it is the worst
> crime to accuse dangerous people on these newsgroups. " SO now you
> say you are dangerous. Was Christ dangerous? Lacking in love? Full of
> Malice? I think not. Repent yourself before you call on others to do so.
> It is your own words that convict you not I. I did call you a super
> ist
> antichrist supreme because those are the names you like to call others
> so I thought they would be comforting and familiar to you.
>
> BillU
I don't like to call others that. I am enraged that you scoundrels
are Antichristians. It was your choices and you all refuse to repent.
Now answer my questions. I predict you will have to ignore them.
Ted McMillan
billu
> > I don't lack in love for you.
>
> I never admitted that I was not a Christian despite your Vatican style
> evidence.
>
You said you were lacking in love and filled with malice. A Christian
would *NOT* be like that.
> Babble, babble, Vatican babble. That is all you just gave. Did you
> see a man by the name of Ted Seeber who argued against every principle
> of liberty? Witch Caillean claimed that, despite that, Seeber is more
> tolerant than me! After that, Seeber condemned all non-Catholics. I
> was horrified by that and then exposed him. Naturally you also would
> have a problem with that, so you join the people that preach against
> making accusations by making accusations.
>
Where did I ever comment on what you said to Seeber or what Seeber
said? I didn't. A Christian wouldn't lie like that. More evidence.
> > I am merely using the same tactics
> > that you use on others back on you. If they are vatican tactics
> > then you should be called vatican Ted. You above said that
> > you were lacking in love and full of malice. Those are not attributes
> > of a Christian. I am spreading nothing but your own words. Is that
> > not what you do to Ted Seeber?
>
> Oh, you mean you spread my words about how Ted Seeber argued against
> liberty and freedom? You spread my words about how he condemned all
> non-Catholics? What would impress you to ignore everything about me
> except something to demonstrate your malice?
>
No I mean posting a DIRECT quote (you saying that you are lacking in love
and full of malice *which you have not denied*) and commenting on it for all
to read. I think that everyone who reads your posts should know that YOU
claim that YOU are lacking in love and full of malice.
> > Also direcly above you say "Remember how it is the worst
> > crime to accuse dangerous people on these newsgroups. " SO now you
> > say you are dangerous. Was Christ dangerous? Lacking in love? Full of
> > Malice? I think not. Repent yourself before you call on others to do
so.
> > It is your own words that convict you not I. I did call you a super
> > ist
> > antichrist supreme because those are the names you like to call others
> > so I thought they would be comforting and familiar to you.
> >
> > BillU
>
> I don't like to call others that. I am enraged that you scoundrels
> are Antichristians. It was your choices and you all refuse to repent.
> Now answer my questions. I predict you will have to ignore them.
>
>
Ted would an Antichristian be filled with love like I am? Or be lacking in
love
and full of malice like you say you are? I'll let the newsgroup decide on
this
one.
BTW My name is not Vatican BillU, just BillU or Bill, U is the first initial
of my
last name.
In God's Love
BillU
Tom A.
billu wrote:
>
> Vatican style evidence? I just posted EXACTLY what you wrote.
> You said you were lacking in love and filled with malice. A Christian
> would *NOT* be like that.
> >
> Where did I ever comment on what you said to Seeber or what Seeber
> said? I didn't. A Christian wouldn't lie like that. More evidence.
>
> >
> No I mean posting a DIRECT quote (you saying that you are lacking in love
> and full of malice *which you have not denied*) and commenting on it for all
> to read. I think that everyone who reads your posts should know that YOU
> claim that YOU are lacking in love and full of malice.
>
> >
> Ted would an Antichristian be filled with love like I am? Or be lacking in
> love
> and full of malice like you say you are? I'll let the newsgroup decide on
> this
> one.
Ohh! Ohh! (Raises hand and waves it) I know I know!
Ted M is (in his own words) lacking love and filled with malice. John
said that anyone who hates his brother walks in darkness. Jesus said He
is the light of the world, but people hate the light. So Ted M must
hate the light, because he's (in his own words) lacking love and filled
with malice.
(pause)
Do I get a gold star?
> In God's Love
> BillU
--
Tom A.
The problem was that Apostles were hard to come by and, worse, they had
a nasty habit of getting crucified or beheaded. -Larry Nolte
billu
dingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingding
You are correct... Bob tell the man what he has won.
Any bible believer would know this. :)
"Tom A." <tar...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3D11E5B9...@my-deja.com...
Cynthia
> dingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingding
> dingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingding
> You are correct... Bob tell the man what he has won.
>
> Any bible believer would know this. :)
Any bible believer would know this. :-)
Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none
good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the
commandments.
Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? JESUS SAID, Thou shalt do no murder,
Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, THOU SHALT NOT BEAR
FALSE WITNESS...
Think it's funny?
Any Bible believer also knows this:
Rev 22:14 Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have
right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Rev 22:15 For without [are] dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and
murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
~ Cindy
Ted McMillan
You left out the facts I related that you are a Vatican-trained and
lying scoundrel. Why did you omit that and did not defend that truth?
>
> > Babble, babble, Vatican babble. That is all you just gave. Did you
> > see a man by the name of Ted Seeber who argued against every principle
> > of liberty? Witch Caillean claimed that, despite that, Seeber is more
> > tolerant than me! After that, Seeber condemned all non-Catholics. I
> > was horrified by that and then exposed him. Naturally you also would
> > have a problem with that, so you join the people that preach against
> > making accusations by making accusations.
> >
> Where did I ever comment on what you said to Seeber or what Seeber
> said? I didn't. A Christian wouldn't lie like that. More evidence.
Why then didn't you join Christianity?
Christians would not be as deceitful as you are. How do I know you?
The only discussion I was having for a while now was about the monster
Ted Seeber. You came in to attack only one person. Not the man who
condemned all liberty and all non-Catholics, but the man who exposed
him.
> > > I am merely using the same tactics
> > > that you use on others back on you. If they are vatican tactics
> > > then you should be called vatican Ted. You above said that
> > > you were lacking in love and full of malice. Those are not attributes
> > > of a Christian. I am spreading nothing but your own words. Is that
> > > not what you do to Ted Seeber?
> >
> > Oh, you mean you spread my words about how Ted Seeber argued against
> > liberty and freedom? You spread my words about how he condemned all
> > non-Catholics? What would impress you to ignore everything about me
> > except something to demonstrate your malice?
> >
> No I mean posting a DIRECT quote (you saying that you are lacking in love
> and full of malice *which you have not denied*) and commenting on it for all
> to read. I think that everyone who reads your posts should know that YOU
> claim that YOU are lacking in love and full of malice.
I don't believe that Protestants or human beings are as stupid as you
eternal criminals think. You have lifted a quote from me and
expressed it as truth without adding my scores of statements that you
people are the unscrupulous exterminators of the Papacy. I have
stated this repeatedly and I would like your unscrupulous soul to
kindly post it as truth.
> > > Also direcly above you say "Remember how it is the worst
> > > crime to accuse dangerous people on these newsgroups. " SO now you
> > > say you are dangerous. Was Christ dangerous? Lacking in love? Full of
> > > Malice? I think not. Repent yourself before you call on others to do
> so.
> > > It is your own words that convict you not I. I did call you a super
> > > ist
> > > antichrist supreme because those are the names you like to call others
> > > so I thought they would be comforting and familiar to you.
> > >
> > > BillU
I will not allow your despot self to put words into my mouth. From
the author of those words you claim I posted, you have lifted those
words in order to demonstrate your talent for deceit and destiny to
all. I am not convicted by you despots of the Antichrist. Your own
actions have convicted you and demonstrates that you are an
antichristian.
> > I don't like to call others that. I am enraged that you scoundrels
> > are Antichristians. It was your choices and you all refuse to repent.
> > Now answer my questions. I predict you will have to ignore them.
> >
> >
> Ted would an Antichristian be filled with love like I am?
YES. You would love only those Catholics who live and believe
everything Rome says. You decree the s of all others. Is that
what moved you to attack me out of the clear blue to bring up an
accusation?
No an Antichristian would not be full of love like I am. It was not
love that made you attack me out of the clear blue with accusations.
You have missed all the false teachings of your fellow members of the
Antichrist.
> Or be lacking in
> love
> and full of malice like you say you are?
You mean like you say I am. That makes sense that I would constantly
combat Caillean's and the other Vatican's lies about me being filled
with malice?
Please quit your Antichrist billu! Please go to the penetentiary and
seek some form of advancement in life before eternity comes!
> I'll let the newsgroup decide on
> this
> one.
You could have done that, but you keep telling me what I am in the
middle of me protesting the slanders of your fellow Vatican
scoundrels. What made you to attack me out of the blue Vatican
Scoundrel Billu, and then make the people to decide how an
Antichristian cannot be as loving as you are?
> BTW My name is not Vatican BillU, just BillU or Bill, U is the first initial
> of my
> last name.
Oh, Sorry Vatican scoundrel Billu.
> In Satan's Vatican love
> BillU
Billu admits to working for Satan!
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
> >
>
> > Vatican style evidence? I just posted EXACTLY what you wrote.
> > You said you were lacking in love and filled with malice. A Christian
> > would *NOT* be like that.
> > >
> > Where did I ever comment on what you said to Seeber or what Seeber
> > said? I didn't. A Christian wouldn't lie like that. More evidence.
> >
> > >
> > No I mean posting a DIRECT quote (you saying that you are lacking in love
> > and full of malice *which you have not denied*) and commenting on it for all
> > to read. I think that everyone who reads your posts should know that YOU
> > claim that YOU are lacking in love and full of malice.
> >
> > >
> > Ted would an Antichristian be filled with love like I am? Or be lacking in
> > love
> > and full of malice like you say you are? I'll let the newsgroup decide on
> > this
> > one.
>
> Ohh! Ohh! (Raises hand and waves it) I know I know!
>
> Ted M is (in his own words) lacking love and filled with malice.
Dear readers,
This shows how stupid your exterminators think that you are, and how
sure they are of destroying your liberty. I made no such statement as
these children of deceit are saying. Does it make sense?
> John
> said that anyone who s his brother walks in darkness.
Ted Seeber and the religion of Tom A. has condemned all non-Catholics.
To them, this is not malice. If I accuse them of doing what they
claim is their duty, they claim that is malice.
> Jesus said He
> is the light of the world, but people the light. So Ted M must
> the light, because he's (in his own words) lacking love and filled
> with malice.
Jesus did not say that all non-Catholics should be persecuted and put
to . Ted Seeber said that. Tom A. cannot be made to see this
because he is a member of the Vatican cult. In my eyes this is the
worst form of malice. Not in his eyes. If Protestants do this to
Catholics, then his Satanic eyes would open, and he would lay a
Vatican egg.
> (pause)
>
> Do I get a gold star?
The lake of fire will give a goldish color.
>
> > In God's Love
> > BillU
Ted McMillan
Caillean McMahon
Theodore;
I spent the mid part of the week at a community living house for
womyn, most of whom are Pagan. I am not Catholic, nor an agent of the
Vatican. In fact, my only interest in the Vatican is that my own faith
occupied it before they were slaughtered in the late 4th century.
Please, please, please, leave me out of your tirades.
I would eally like to be done with you.
Ted McMillan
met before called Vatican Billu, comes out of nowhere to accuse and
attack me. With all the other Vaticanites trying to impress upon the
world that by exposing a monster and their malice clan I am unloving,
isn't it odd that ONLY Billu comes out with the startling "evidence"
that I have said and do conclude that I am full of malice. He is
telling us that I agree to that and have said it. By me saying it, it
is truth, according to him, but what about my constant words and proof
that they are the unscrupulous sons of the Antichrist?
Antichrist Billu, where did you get this singular revelation that no
one else could discover to the point you are telling everyone what I
think of myself and do confess even though I have not done that? You
are another unscrupulous son of the Antichrist. Why do you despise me
for being so accurate?
Ted McMillan
"Cynthia" <synt...@localline.com> wrote in message news:<3d127...@news.teranews.com>...
> "billu" <bi...@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3d1212df$1...@news5.nntpserver.com...
> > dingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingding
> > dingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingdingding
> > You are correct... Bob tell the man what he has won.
> >
> > Any bible believer would know this. :)
>
> Any bible believer would know this. :-)
>
>
> Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none
> good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the
> commandments.
> Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? JESUS SAID, Thou shalt do no ,
> Thou shalt not commit ery, Thou shalt not , THOU SHALT NOT BEAR
> FALSE WITNESS...
>
> Think it's funny?
>
> Any Bible believer also knows this:
>
> Rev 22:14 Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have
> right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
> Rev 22:15 For without [are] dogs, and sorcerers, and mongers, and
> > > said that anyone who s his brother walks in darkness. Jesus said He
> > > is the light of the world, but people the light. So Ted M must
> > > the light, because he's (in his own words) lacking love and filled
> > > with malice.
> > >
> > > (pause)
> > >
> > > Do I get a gold star?
> > >
> > > > In God's Love
> > > > BillU
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tom A.
> > > The problem was that Apostles were hard to come by and, worse, they had
> > > a habit of getting crucified or beheaded. -Larry Nolte
Ted McMillan
Antichrist Billu, I love you too. Why did you come out of nowhere to
attack me in the middle of other scoundrels doing the same thing and
voiding your malice by your lying words? Why are you attacking me for
being so loving?
How come you are telling us that I agree that I am full of malice when
your other scoundrel cult members would have heralded that a long time
ago? Do they also have low IQs? Or are they as scoundrelous as you?
How come they couldn't know this? This is the same unmistakeable
style as MSiciliana, who claimed I was saying Ellen White was the
Antichrist. I demonstrated that wasn't true.
> You above said that
> you were lacking in love and full of malice. Those are not attributes
> of a Christian. I am spreading nothing but your own words. Is that
> not what you do to Ted Seeber?
Why are you changing modes? If I said that, the other snakes would
have said so and would not have waited for you. Don't ask me if that
is what I did to fellow monster Seeber. You have already told
everyone that I was trained back at your Vatican when that was not
true. No, Seeber ducked out after I revealed that he should be
punished under American law. He ducked out NOT because the accusation
was false. I won't duck out to your lies. Ted Seeber argued against
all forms of liberty and the American Constitution. You saw no
offense to that because you are also an enemy of the people and
mankind.
> Also direcly above you say "Remember how it is the worst
> crime to accuse dangerous people on these newsgroups. " SO now you
> say you are dangerous. Was Christ dangerous? Lacking in love? Full of
> Malice? I think not.
Then why are you dangerous, lacking in love and full of malice? I am
not any of those things. Ted Seeber spoke against all forms of
liberty and then condemned all non-Catholics. You didn't take offense
to that. You are also a worker for the antichrist and should be
punished by American law! You are aiding and abetting the enemy!
> Repent yourself before you call on others to do so.
I don't intend on repenting for being loving and mercifully warning
people about someone who would condemn all non-Catholics. Why didn't
you take offense to Seeber condemning all forms of liberty before he
condemned all non-Catholics again? Why did you bring up the lie that
I claim I am full of malice when the other scoundrels somehow didn't
see it except MSiciliana? Please answer, Jesuit.
> It is your own words that convict you not I.
I am not convicted by any lying and babbling despot. I did not do
what you claimed. Tell us again why you are so singular in this mode
of malice and attack and why your other fellow scoundrels couldn't
figure out to attack this way?
> I did call you a super
> ist
> antichrist supreme because those are the names you like to call others
> so I thought they would be comforting and familiar to you.
>
> BillU
I called them that because that is fact, and you also are a scoundrel
worker for the Antichrist. Why didn't you see that Ted Seeber
condemned all forms of liberty again? Why couldn't you see that he
condemned all non-Catholics and then moved to attack me in some new
mode of falsehood the other workers of the Antichrist would have
instantly pointed out if it were true, sinister one?
Please tell us why you are so scoundrelous, dishonest, malicious and
ready to take the lives of others and I will tell you that you need
repentance. Why did you see to attack me from the clear blue, O
scoundrel? Oh! You only just came in and we therefore cannot talk
about Ted Seeber. Same Vatican tactics! I was not trained by your
cult.
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
Scoundrel,
I never claimed that I was unloving and malicious. Other scoundrels,
if I pointed such out, would have pointed it out before your grand new
discovery in deceit.
> If they are vatican tactics
> then you should be called vatican Ted.
But you and the other workers of the Antichrist said not to name-call.
Why did you figure out what you babblingly claim to be something no
one else did, Antichrist despot?
> You above said that
> you were lacking in love and full of malice. Those are not attributes
> of a Christian. I am spreading nothing but your own words. Is that
> not what you do to Ted Seeber?
So, you also came in after our discussion with Ted Seeber and knew
what he did? Did you know that Seeber argued against all forms of
liberty on these newsgroups boldly? Why didn't this touch your
unscrupulous Antichrist soul?
There is another difference. Ted Seeber ducked out after I exposed
him because I told the truth. You now claim to have found something
no other scoundrel did. Why are the other scoundrels stupid? Tell
us, why you attacked me for being so loving in making efforts to save
lives?
> Also direcly above you say "Remember how it is the worst
> crime to accuse dangerous people on these newsgroups. " SO now you
> say you are dangerous. Was Christ dangerous? Lacking in love? Full of
> Malice? I think not.
Then you are in trouble because you are dangerous, lacking in love and
full of malice. You lifted words from what I said and put them in the
wrong context.
Tell me, despot: why can't your fellow monster defend his own
unscrupulous self? Why did you come to attack me on these newsgroups
just because I am full of love and you are trained by Satan?
> Repent yourself before you call on others to do so.
But I don't condemn liberty and I don't condemn peoples lives because
they belong to other faiths. Why did you miss the fact that Seeber
condemned every form of liberty and all non-Catholics again, O full of
lovely one? How can Christians miss such a thing?!!
> It is your own words that convict you not I.
I am not convicted at all. Again, tell us why the other Vatican
unscrupulates could not have picked up what your wild Satanic
imagination has conjured up?
Ted McMillan
billu
You replaced God with Satan... I know I posted 'in God's love.
Then you lied directly beneith it. God has revealed to me that
you are not working for Him, but for the other side. God
also told me to ignore you. So repent before it's too late
Ted.
God Bless
BillU
Ted McMillan
Your own words convicted you, you malicious son of Satan and the Pope
whom God did not notify you that someone spoke against freedom of
speech, religion and the American Constitution.
Your own words convicted you and not mine. I can't help it if you
hate me because I am God's child as the reason why you attacked me out
of the clear blue for exposing someone who has a terrible disrespect
for human life and liberty.
MSiciliana did the same thing in telling the world I said Ellen White
was the Antichrist by taking my words out of context and despotizing
us to believe I was teaching this even while my every post was
combating this. She is probably the one posting here who is so full
of hate to come out of the clear blue and attack me because I work to
save precious lives from their bloodletting and deceitful clan.
Your own words convicted you, Monster Billu. REPENT!
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
Caillean McMahon <caill...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3D1E7A6D...@yahoo.com>...
>
> Theodore;
> I spent the mid part of the week at a community living house for
> womyn, most of whom are Pagan. I am not Catholic, nor an agent of the
> Vatican. In fact, my only interest in the Vatican is that my own faith
> occupied it before they were slaughtered in the late 4th century.
>
> Please, please, please, leave me out of your tirades.
> I would eally like to be done with you.
> Blessings;
> Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Listen again Dear lying worker for Rome and cease your lying
babblings:
I exposed a super-terrorist who told everyone with gladness that Rome
persecuted and exterminated people because they didn't live the bible.
He didn't say Rome persecuted and ed the millions because she
FELT that they didn't live the bible correctly. He said they ed
the Christians because they didn't live the bible. He did this
approvingly after lyingly giving condolenses for the victims of
September 11 who did NOT live the bible according to Catholic
standards.
This was shocking for the exposed ous despot. Rome couldn't
stand it, so she sent in Vatican Cindy/Cynthia/Cindy Ford to help.
She approached to address a concern of hers. Out of the clear blue
the child of Satan entered to tell the world that the Lord showed her
I had a terrible problem with love just because I exposed someone as
wicked as herself. Why couldn't she figure out that President Bush
had the same problem with Osama Bin Laden? Because OSAMA BIN LADEN IS
NOT CATHOLIC!
I kept reminding her what Ted Seeber did, but she refused to look.
She didn't have that Vatican disease with Osama Bin Laden. Bin Laden
is not an Antichrist cult member like she is, so there is a difference
here why she couldn't notice that President Bush and most Americans
have a problem with love. Vatican Cindy kept posting from that
premise how she loves me in order to cover over. Then other despots
from Rome entered because they couldn't understand why I refused to be
stupid enough to accept the Antichrist love of Vatican Cindy.
Soon others came into the fight and they all, like your Vatican hide,
cleverly planted the label of that four letter word opposite of love
to me and made sure that no such connotation was given to Ted Seeber.
Ted Seeber condemned the souls, lives and religions of Cindy Ford,
Angelo Braz, Caillean McMahon and most others here, but all these
claiming to be sane and intelligent made sure that they accused me of
only and kept that name away from the exterminator from the
Inquisitions.
Now Witch Caillean from the Vatican entered also. She also cleverly
planted the accusation opposite of love to me only. Now, just like
the others, her posts have deteriorated. This sane person told us all
that Ted Seeber was more tolerant than I am. How could she know that
when she already told us, like the others, that she came after Seeber
posted and can therefore only accuse me? How can she say that when
Ted Seeber argued against liberty, freedom and the American
Constitution and I was enraged because of that? She then kept showing
her concern that though the man has condemned all non-Catholics, and
this didn't bother her, me exposing what the monster did causes her
concern that hatred for Catholics would be the result.
I told her elementary: I will not keep my mouth shut from exposing a
ist just because that ist is just as Catholic as babbling
Vatican Caillean. She has yet to address the point. Did any
accusation or insult against Osama Bin Laden bother Vatican Angelo?
Cindy? Witch Caillean? NO! Exposing Ted Seeber bothers these despots
from the Inquisitions. Why?
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
> Jesuits work in a wide variety of ministries
> in the United States
They also pose as Protestants and witches on the newsgroups. They
will not care if Osama Bin Laden is insulted and exposed. He is not
Catholic. When a monster Catholic like Ted Seeber is exposed, they
have to label the person exposing him as being filled with malice.
Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics to persecution and
extermination boldly on the newsgroups. This does not affect Vatican
Angelo, Cindy, Caillean nor the others lying to us that they are
non-Catholics, because they are actually Catholic. They will babble
that this is not so, but still they have accused only me of malice
while teaching and preaching against making accusations. Ted Seeber
argued against liberty and the Constitution, but witch Caillean
accused me of being intolerant and akin to and the Communists.
Witchdom did not give her these amazing talents.
She now shows that her unscrupulous soul is concerned that Catholics
would be d if a ist is exposed who is Catholic. She knows
she must carefully avoid why she is not concerned that a non-Catholic
like Osama Bin Laden being exposed might cause hatred of Islamics.
So we see that even her religion of witches being condemned by Seeber
is no problem. She is very loyal and concerned about Catholics. We
know why!
Ted McMillan
Caillean McMahon
Ahhhh Theodore;
I truly believed that you had respected my request to be left alone.
To whom it may concern:
I abhor religious persecution.
I abhor discrimination of any sort.
I am not Catholic, I do not approve of the Vatican's attitude toward my
faith.(I am a Witch)
I also do not approve of people trying to generate fear and hatred
toward Catholics.
Blessings to all;
Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Note to Theodore: A Witch may harm none except in defense. You have just
attacked me. My forbearance continues, but please reconsider your
course.
Caillean, Lady C.
Caillean McMahon
Theodore;
Amazing what you have learned by studying the Inquisition:
You have mastered the technique of the Dominicans: the big lie.
Blessings, Theodore, leave me in peace for my forbearance wanes;
Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Witch and Priestess
Ted McMillan
> > > Theodore;
> > > Does this mean that to Super ist seekers of the destruction of
> > > Catholicism that Harvard and the Sorbonne are not bona fide?
> > > Blessings;
> > > Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
Let's talk about the fact that all non-Catholics were condemned to
persecution and extermination by Ted Seeber on December 5, 2001. You
claim to be a Witch but your only concern has been the fact you are
telling us that all ists can be exposed except if they are
Vatican like your unscrupulous self.
> Theodore;
> You cut a word from my post
Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics to persecution and
extermination. That means Witches are included and the man has cut
far more off of everything. It cannot concern you because you are
Catholic and will use your babbling lies to combat the evidence.
> > Well seek wisdom from Witchdom to first answer the many questions you
> > also find it necessary to evade before asking me any question. You
> > accused me of despising Ted Seeber just because he has a terrible
> > disregard of human life.
>
> Seeber apparently commented on a tragedy of the Middle Ages.
Seeber said that Rome persecuted and ed people because "they
didn't live the bible." He said that they only lived their
interpretation of the bible. He did not tell us that Rome thought
this. He spoke in the absolute. Why not let the man speak himself,
or else figure out why he ducked out and then forced you to use up all
your Witches douche to defend him because you are a Witch condemned by
him and not Catholic?
What is this "apparently?" You mean the Witch who has accused me with
every manner of surety of being a super-terrorist and malice and
despising, can now tell us she can only guess when real monsters are
being examined?
Vatican Caillean: How would you know about what Seeber "apparently"
commented about when you have used the same Jesuit Vatican art used by
Angelo to tell us you can't comment anything about Seeber because you
came into the discussion after Seeber had left? Didn't you accuse me
without the shadow of a doubt of being more intolerant than he and
being akin to and the Communists? Didn't you know that Seeber
argued against every principle of liberty and the American
Constitution?
> I have claimed that you are a Vatican liar
> > for doing that.
> This is a BIG LIE designed to generate hatred and fear of me, Witches,
> and the Vatican.
Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics to persecution and
extermination. What is this disease Vatican Witch Caillean has where
she cannot seem to understand that this would generate hatred of
Witches? Is it true that she is another one of those many who really
work for the Vatican?
> Stalin, Mao, and did that. They are
> Super-Terrorists. This must mean that:
>
> TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST!
But Ted McMillan argued for liberty and the American Constitution.
Ted Seeber argued against these things. That is why Ted McMillan is
not surprised that Ted Seeber then condemned all non-Catholics to
persecution and extermination. Ted McMillan is also not surprised
that Witch Caillean cannot see this. It is obvious she works for
Rome.
> > Now, even though you cannot recognize the lack of
> > love in Seeber by his condemnation of all non-Catholics (which would
> > include you if you were not an infiltrator from Rome)
>
> I was not on the newsgroup at the time of your original conversation
> with Mr. Seeber
Again, the statement says: NOW, even though you cannot recognize the
lack of
love in Seeber by his condemnation of all non-Catholics (which would
include you if you were not an infiltrator from Rome),
You were not there then, you are now. Seeber left and you are
defending him for dear life. If the monster dies, maybe the other
monster will perish also?
But you know that he is more tolerant than me by your words. You told
us that I am akin to Stalin and the s even though I argued for
liberty and the American Constitution and Seeber argued against all
these things as and the Communists did. You have told us so
much about him for his defense and when it is time to now that the man
is a monster you continue to bring the lie that you were not in the
newsgroup and therefore don't know much about Seeber, but you know the
earth about McMillan.
> > you attack me
> > only and then babble your claims that you do not condone the
> > of people.
> I do not condone such behaviours and listed some specifics of my
> condemnation.
You were shown that Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics to
persecution and extermination. This would include your unscrupulous
souls also. Ted McMillan exposed the monster and our monster soul
couldn't stand it. You join the many other Vatican infiltrants to
attack the man who has exposed the monster.
President Bush is exposing another monster, but that doesn't bother
you because Osama is not Catholics. You don't care about the malice
generated toward Arabs and Muslims because you are not Arab or Muslim,
or really a Witch. You are Vatican!
> You now lie about me to get people to me, like the
> Family did of some people . They were Super-Terrorists. This must
> mean that :
>
> TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST
You were shown that Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics to
persecution and extermination. This would include your unscrupulous
souls also. Ted McMillan exposed the monster and our monster soul
couldn't stand it. You join the many other Vatican infiltrants to
attack the man who has exposed the monster.
President Bush is exposing another monster, but that doesn't bother
you because Osama is not Catholics. You don't care about the malice
generated toward Arabs and Muslims because you are not Arab or Muslim,
or really a Witch. You are Vatican!
> You yet have not classified Seeber's behavior, but was
> > quick to classify mine.
> >
> > I respectfully claim again Caillilly,
> You make fun of my name, I always address you by your formal, given
> name.
Does the bible tell us perilous times will come for men will call you
names?
> used to call his enemies by unpleasant names to make
> himself look more impressive.
How would Vatican Cindy know this when, by the order she is loyal to,
she cannot understand that Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics to
persecution and extermination and that this would include her
unscrupulous Vatican soul?
> He was a SUPER-TERRORIST> This must mean
> that:
>
> TED MCMILLAN IS A SUPER-TERRORIST
Hitler didn't believe in liberty nor the American Constitution. He
d these things just as Ted Seeber did. Of course, Ted Seeber arguing
for a long time against these precious things did not bother Vatican
Cindy, Angelo nor Witch Caillean, even though liberty is deeply
related to their practice of religion. In order to cover over the
monster Seeber, they have to be concerned about things human beings
would not be.
Vatican Caillean:
Are you telling us that we can expose ists of every type, but
when they are unscrupulous and Vatican as yourself we cannot do it
since you claim it would generate malice to all Catholics?
> > that I am not an unloving person
> > as you have accused so freely.
> >
> > Kindly get a degree in any kindergarten so that you can understand
> > what I have asked and have been asking for such a long time. You are
> > making a mockery of the mother goddess.
>
> I have my doctorate, a residency, and two post-doc fellowships.
I don't have such a doctorate, but I can tell that a man who condemns
all non-Catholics to persecution and extermination has included
witches, but you cannot tell. Take the doctorate by to the Antichrist
gum-ball machine!
> My Goddess(Her name is capitalized)
You mean HIS name is capitalized and he heads the Vatican
> is loving but wants Her children
> protected from attack and you are formenting hatred to both the
> Catholics and Witches.
You mean your doctorate taught you that if someone exposes and
reproves a man who condemns all non-Catholics to persecution and
, that man is formenting hatred of all Catholics and Witches? Even my
infant son is smarter than that!
Isn't it strange that you frequently move from being unsure about
anything when commenting about your fellow monsters from the Vatican,
but you post as if you are so sure about me? And Caillean knows
nothing about the Inquisitions and has nothing to do with it? Then
Ted Seeber did not "apparently" do anything. You are just lying and
playing the Vatican despot. Show me how I am showing hatred to
witches.
How can you figure out that I am showing hatred to Witches when no one
can seem to show you that a man condemning to persecution and
extermination all non-Catholics would include Witches in the
Inquisition?
> Be careful Ted of the lies that you tell. Each one points out the true
> agitator, -mongerer and thirsty demagogue.
That's why I am exposing you, O unscrupulous Vatican one!
> Be more careful of the antagonism of the Catholics,
You mean I can expose any ist except if he is Catholic? How
many people have you informed to be careful about exposing Osama Bin
Laden lest this causes antagonism to muslims or Arabs, Vatican
Caillean?
> I do not know
> whether or not they have realized that you do not speak for Adventism
> and may believe that All Adventists mean them harm and lie about them.
Has anyone realized yet that you don't give a damn about Witches, but
came to defend your fellow monster from the Vatican Ted Seeber?
> Blessings;
> Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
>
> All that you have to do its to stop mentioning my name or referencing me
> in any way, Theodore, then this stops.
I have not even started yet, but I am working to get a far greater
audience to combat the arrogance of you Vatican people.
Ted McMillan
Tom A.
(I have Ted M. filtered, so I don't see his posts.)
"What the Jesuits Really Do:"
I only knew one Jesuit personally, while I was in grade school and high
school.
He said Mass every morning before school in one of the classrooms. I
went a lot, since there was enough time between when the bus delivered
me and when school started.
We went bowling every week for years.
We talked, argued, discussed various topics during our time together.
He tried to recruit me for the Jesuits.
He was a good man and a friend.
Unfortunately I lost track of him when I moved with my family out of
state about 27 years ago.
Sinister, isn't it.
--
Tom A.
Avon: I'm not stupid, I'm not expendable, I'm not going. - Blake 7
Ted McMillan
Show how this is true. And tis not surprising that Antichrist
Caillean doesn't understand this thread and how it came about with the
injustice and all.
Ted McMillan sees a man condemning all non-Catholics to persecution
and extermination. He is different from Antichrist Caillean posing as
a Witch. He will expose the monster.
Vatican Caillean will not do this. She would have no problem exposing
Osama Bin Laden, because he is Islamic. The problem is that monster
Seeber is just as Vatican as Witch Caillean. She therefore becomes
paranoid that the man is being insulted, so she uses all her energy to
insult Ted McMillan instead. She then comes telling us she fears
exposing the ist would spawn malice against Catholics and does
not care that all non-Catholics--including her order of Witches--has
been condemned to extinction.
What can cover all this evidence that Caillean is another Vatican
monster? She uses the techniques of the Inquisitions to attempt to
babble it away.
Vatican Antichrist Caillean: Christ will not leave you in peace
throughout eternity. I surely won't after your posts have
deteriorated into telling us that Seeber "apparently" is and
tolerant, while I am DEFINITELY a super ists because I defended
the Constitution of the United States and all liberty and all
non-Catholics and even most Catholics.
How many Catholics today lives according to the teachings of the
Catholic Church? You should know, Antichrist infiltrator to Witchdoom
Caillean!
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
> Ahhhh Theodore;
> I truly believed that you had respected my request to be left alone.
Ahhh Antichrist member to Witchdom Caillean;
From the beginning, I truly believe that you would understand that it
is far worse to be a mass-exterminator than to expose one. You were
concerned that someone would be insulted. So in your turn to attack
Ted McMillan as Antichrist Cindy and others have done in turn, your
posts have deteriorated to the point where they are worse than what
they were reproving me for.
> To whom it may concern:
Who is stupid enough to listen to members of the Antichrist...
> I abhor religious persecution.
Nothing but babbling claims and lies, but someone has told us all
non-Catholic should be persecuted and exterminated. This would
include the order of Witches which Vatican Caillean falsely claims to
be supremely loyal to, but this did not bother Antichrist Caillean
infiltrated into the order of Witches. She doesn't care if you
condemn Osama Bin Laden, because he is not Catholic. She became very
concerned that I exposed monster Seeber who ducked out of discussion
for obvious reasons, condemning all non-Catholics during the climate
of 911.
To whom it may concern:
Contrary to the slanders of Antichrist Caillean concerned that I am
accusing people: I am not unloving nor intolerant just because I
exposed a man who argued against liberty, the Constitution of the
United States and the existence of all non-Catholics as Antichrist
Witch Caillean insists while teaching me not to accuse. If Osama Bin
Laden is a mass exterminator, I am going to point him out without
having any pseudo-concern that I would spark hatred to Muslims or
Arabs. I will do the same to Ted Seeber who is a mass exterminator
who is Catholic. This will bother Antichrist Caillean immensely
because her claims to not fit her actions.
> I abhor discrimination of any sort.
Nothing but babbling claims and lies, but someone has told us all
non-Catholic should be persecuted and exterminated. This would
include the order of Witches which Vatican Caillean falsely claims to
be supremely loyal to, but this did not bother Antichrist Caillean
infiltrated into the order of Witches. She doesn't care if you
condemn Osama Bin Laden, because he is not Catholic. She became very
concerned that I exposed monster Seeber who ducked out of discussion
for obvious reasons, condemning all non-Catholics during the climate
of 911.
> I am not Catholic, I do not approve of the Vatican's attitude toward my
> faith.(I am a Witch)
But Antichrist Vatican Caillean knows that Seeber condemned all
non-Catholics, including Witches. She avoids being concerned about
this, but tells the world she is very concerned that me exposing a
Catholic who condemns all non-Catholics to extermination may cause
malice against all Catholics. Do I care? Should you? All the more
to put the monster out of the way to vindicate Catholics and the
Catholic Church. She is telling us this can't be done because she is
concerned about Catholics, but refuses to understand that the man
condemned even all Witches.
Vatican Caillean is not a Witch in actuality. Witches are not trained
to lie and be as unscrupulous as these workers of the Papacy here. If
what Antichrist Caillean was saying was true, she would be concerned
about the safety of even her own order. THE STATEMENT SEEBER MADE
ALSO CONDEMNS MOST CATHOLICS. Most hardly attend church. Most don't
believe in the infallibility of the Papacy, the Confessional, etc.
Antichrist Caillean cannot possibly be concerned even about this!
> I also do not approve of people trying to generate fear and hatred
> toward Catholics.
Because she is Catholic. But her mind is incredibly because she
has to promote the idea that people can expose all mass-exterminators
like Osama Bin Laden, but something goes all out of whack if the
criminal is Catholic.
I did not generate hatred or fear of people like Caillean. She
slipped that in as it came from her despot training. But still again,
Catholics should be concerned by the statement of Seeber if they don't
believe EVERYTHING the Vatican teaches.
> Blessings to all;
If you want to be fooled by one of the prophet workers of the
Antichrist infiltrated into Witchdom.
> Caillean `aSiobhan, Lady Carrigaholt
>
> Note to Theodore: A Witch may harm none except in defense. You have just
> attacked me.
I did not know Antichrist Caillean. She comes just like the others in
attacking using sweet words and then telling the world how I attacked
them out of the clear blue.
Antichrist Caillean is a monsterous member of the Antichrist, and she
condones by her actions the mass-exterminations of all non-Catholics.
> My forbearance continues, but please reconsider your
> course.
> Caillean, Lady C.
I will continue to expose these monsters. Antichrist Caillean has to
keep posting because of her backward concerns and injustice. Consider
all the evidence and don't look at her babbling despot inquisitor
claims and words. She doesn't listen to anybody else claims. Only
the evidence will work and you need to ask the female monster about
the evidence as it relates to her actions and the points presented.
Ted McMillan
Cynthia
I am not going to quote scripture here, because you know as well as I do
what it says about willful blindness, and willful sin. We are both aware of
the dangers of accusing the brethren and what happens if you do not repent,
and make restitution to the best of your ability, or cannot forgive others.
I did not always know this, and of course you could see this, and my
resulting hypocrisy, in judging you and then telling you not to judge, and
of insisting that although I did love you, you couldn't possibly love me.
You could also see the hypocrisy of me accusing you and turning a blind eye
to Ted Seeber, and others.
I can also see the hypocrisy of Caillean, and I can understand that she
cannot. It is hard when you are in Babylon, to see it clearly, having been
there I know first hand. In the topsy turvy world of the antichrist
everything appears in it's opposite light.
I do see where Ted Seeber was wrong now. I have apologized. I have tried to
make restitution, I have tried to put that type of behavior behind me.
You are using my name alot here, you have called me a child of Satan. Jesus
said this would happen so the fact that someone might do so is not a
surprise. I would like to know though; What am I doing now, that causes you
to believe this?
Am I in error? Than I want to know how.
Am I still doing the same things, and saying the same things I did before?
If so I want to know how, so I can see it.
I fully admit I was in error last year, and for quite some time afterwards,
what I am concerned about is the here and now.
Please explain.
~ Cindy
"Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:dfc66dfc.02071...@posting.google.com...
Ted McMillan
> Sorry, Lady Caillean, I'm not really responding to you, just the title.
> (I have Ted M. filtered, so I don't see his posts.)
>
> "What the Jesuits Really Do:"
>
> I only knew one Jesuit personally, while I was in grade school and high
> school.
> He said Mass every morning before school in one of the classrooms. I
> went a lot, since there was enough time between when the bus delivered
> me and when school started.
>
> We went bowling every week for years.
>
> We talked, argued, discussed various topics during our time together.
>
> He tried to recruit me for the Jesuits.
>
> He was a good man and a friend.
>
> Unfortunately I lost track of him when I moved with my family out of
> state about 27 years ago.
>
> Sinister, isn't it.
I know of many Arabs and Muslim who are good people and live clean lives.
Sinister, isn't it?
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
In all of your collective attacks against me, all of you skillfully
planted the four-letter accusative word against me that is the
opposite of love. All of you made sure that you didn't put any such
word against a man who condemned your religions, your posterity and
even your lives being non-Catholics according to your claims. None of
you even placed that four-letter word against the fact that Ted
Seeber's remarks ALSO CONDEMNS MOST CATHOLICS!
You say that you do see where Ted Seeber is wrong now. Stop this
deception! Ted Seeber IS FAR MORE THAN JUST WRONG!! This is not an
issue from Court TV where someone is wrong for taking a loan and not
repaying! You do have common sense, and I still say that your are
trying to deceive here. What Ted Seeber did WAS DELIBERATE, coming
after years of attacking liberty and the American Constitution. It is
the inevitable result that comes from much practice in deceit and
cover up. All the rest, including you, have the same hostility to
liberty. Ted Seeber became so bold that he was careless in revealing
his ability to take human life profusely. That is the natural result
of him having such a communistic and view against liberty. ALL
of his statements against liberty and the Constitution should have
impressed ALL OF YOU that there may be issue with the way you claim
you worship.
Even this post is a post against me while another worse Osama is
protected. This is against American law in the aiding and abetting of
mass-exterminators since 911!
Ted McMillan
"Cynthia" <synt...@localline.com> wrote in message news:<3d383...@news.teranews.com>...
Cynthia
That is not what I asked you Ted. I know what repentance is. I do not need
you tell tell me if I am repentant or not anymore. Neither did I ask you to
bring up the past.
"No repentance is genuine that does not work reformation. The righteousness
of Christ is not a cloak to cover UNCONFESSED and UNFORSAKEN sin; it is a
principle of life that transforms the character and controls the conduct.
Holiness is wholeness for God; it is the entire surrender of heart and life
to the indwelling of the principles of heaven." E.G.W DA p. 555-56.
The word you are speaking about below and do not mention is *Hate*
~ Cindy
Caillean McMahon
Cynthia;
Loved seeing you at the "Vat" last week. Wasn't Rome wonderful?
Since Ted does not buy the repentance act, you might as well take the
Mary medal out and wear it proudly, fellow Jesuit.
Yup Ted--we are both Jesuits.
Blessings;
Sr. Mary Caillean, S.J.
Paul
Adventists. There are some on this NG (Adventist) that tell us that they
have taken over, or at least infiltrated that organization--sigh
Paul
"Tom A." <tar...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:3D3815F2...@my-deja.com...
-----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Cynthia
Hmmmm...
Most likely your post to me has to do with my hypocrisy comment. That had to
do with the fact that you tell Ted to leave you alone and can't leave him
alone, and because you tell him not to judge and yet keep judging him,
incidentally you are also judging Ted Seeber while you pretend you cannot do
that, You are judging him innocent, despite his comments to the contrary.
Not amused Caillean.
Thanks for the introduction to the Marian issue though, I can see why that
is of importance to you.
For all the real Jesuits and Vaticanites:
N E W S F L A S H
Mary is dead, if she was taken to heaven the bible would have recorded it,
as a major event. It wasn't even completed till 60 years after your
tradition states she was either translated or resurrected.
She *WAS* a virgin:
Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a
son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God
with us.
Mat 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord
had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
She obviously *did not remain a Virgin*.
Mat 1:25 And *KNEW* her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son:
and he called his name Jesus.
Biblically that means the marriage was consummated.
Jesus had brothers and sisters:
"Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his
BRETHREN, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his SISTERS, are they
not all with us? Whence then hath this man all these things?" Matt 13:55-56
Note James and Joses his brothers?
Mat 27:56 Among which was Mary Magdalene, and *Mary the mother of James and
Joses,* and the mother of Zebedee's children.
Gal 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save *James the Lord's
brother*.
Luk 8:20 And it was told him [by certain] which said, Thy mother and thy
brethren stand without, desiring to see thee.
Luk 8:21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren
are these which HEAR THE WORD OF GOD AND DO IT.
I know your traditions teach that Mary only gave birth to Jesus and stayed a
virgin forever, but plainly Her husband Joseph *knew* her, and in case you
missed the reference before, Jesus was her *firstborn* NOT an only son.
Luk 2:7 And she brought forth *HER FIRSTBORN SON,* and wrapped him in
swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for
them in the inn.
So who are you praying to? An abomination.
You may find the following enlightening. Caillean's Goddess and The
Catholic Queen of heaven (AKA Virgin Mary )have been around since Babylonian
days:
Jer 44:2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Ye have seen all
the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, and upon all the cities of
Judah; and, behold, this day they [are] a desolation, and no man dwelleth
therein,
Jer 44:3 Because of their wickedness which they have committed to provoke me
to anger, in that they went to burn incense, [and] to serve other gods, whom
they knew not, [neither] they, ye, nor your fathers.
Jer 44:4 Howbeit I sent unto you all my servants the prophets, rising early
and sending [them], saying, Oh, DO NOT THIS ABOMINABLE THING THAT I HATE
Jer 44:5 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear to turn from their
wickedness, to burn no incense unto other gods.
Jer 44:15 Then all the men which knew that their wives had burned incense
unto other gods, and all the women that stood by, a great multitude, even
all the people that dwelt in the land of Egypt, in Pathros, answered
Jeremiah, saying,
Jer 44:16 AS FOR THE WORD THOU HAST SPOKEN UNTO US IN THE NAME OF THE LORD,
WE WILL NOT HARKEN TO THEE.
Jer 44:17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our
own mouth, to burn incense, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we
have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of
Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for [then] had we plenty of
victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.
Jer 44:18 But since we left off to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and
to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all [things], and have
been consumed by the sword and by the famine.
Jer 44:19 And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out
drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out
drink offerings unto her, without our men?
Jer 44:20 Then Jeremiah said unto all the people, to the men, and to the
women, and to all the people which had given him [that] answer, saying,
Jer 44:21 The incense that ye burned in the cities of Judah, and in the
streets of Jerusalem, ye, and your fathers, your kings, and your princes,
and the people of the land, did not the LORD remember them, and came it
[not] into his mind?
Jer 44:22 So that the LORD could no longer bear, because of the evil of your
doings, [and] because of the abominations which ye have committed; therefore
is your land a desolation, and an astonishment, and a curse, without an
inhabitant, as at this day.
Jer 44:23 Because ye have burned incense, and because ye have sinned against
the LORD, and have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, nor walked in his law,
nor in his statutes, nor in his testimonies; therefore this evil is happened
unto you, as at this day.
Jer 44:24 Moreover Jeremiah said unto all the people, and to all the women,
Hear the word of the LORD, all Judah that [are] in the land of Egypt:
Jer 44:25 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and
your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled with your hand,
saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense
to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will
surely accomplish your vows, and surely perform your vows.
Jer 44:26 Therefore hear ye the word of the LORD, all Judah that dwell in
the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by my great name, saith the LORD,
that my name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all
the land of Egypt, saying, The Lord GOD liveth.
Jer 44:27 Behold, I will watch over them for evil, and not for good: and all
the men of Judah that [are] in the land of Egypt shall be consumed by the
sword and by the famine, until there be an end of them.
Jer 44:28 Yet a small number that escape the sword shall return out of the
land of Egypt into the land of Judah, and all the remnant of Judah, that are
gone into the land of Egypt to sojourn there, shall know whose words shall
stand, mine, or theirs.
Jer 44:29 And this [shall be] a sign unto you, saith the LORD, that I will
punish you in this place, that ye may know that my words shall surely stand
against you for evil:
~ Cindy
Ted McMillan
Don't forget your carry-out Eucharist wafers!
Caillean works for the Vatican because:
She witnessed Ted Seeber, a Dark Ages Catholic, speak for a long time
against liberty, freedom and every principle of the American
Constitution. This did not bother her. Soon Ted Seeber told us that
all Non-Catholics should be persecuted and exterminated. This did not
bother her even though Witches are included in the condemnation.
Ted McMillan appeared to expose and reprove the monster. THIS
concerned Caillean very much. She then keeps talking about her
concern that a Catholic exterminator being exposed may spawn malice
against all Catholics. She showed no such concern for Muslims or
Arabs if Osama Bin Laden is exposed. SHE SHOWED NO SUCH CONCERN THAT
NON-CATHOLICS AND EVEN WITCHES MAY BE EXPOSED TO MALICE BY THE
STATEMENTS OF SEEBER. She came from the clear blue to act upon her
concerns constantly for the benefit of the Vatican and she uses all
her lying Inquisitorial babbling to try and convince the world that
the evidence of her actions can be neutralized by her worthless
claims.
Caillean McMahon, claiming to be a Witch, is really loyal to and
trained by the Vatican. If anything, she has infiltrated the order of
Witches that was condemned to persecution and extermination by Ted
Seeber without a word of remonstrance from Caillean.
Ted McMillan
Ted McMillan
> "Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote in message
> news:dfc66dfc.02071...@posting.google.com...
> > Your statements of repentance are not true Cindy.
>
> That is not what I asked you Ted. I know what repentance is. I do not need
> you tell tell me if I am repentant or not anymore. Neither did I ask you to
> bring up the past.
>
> "No repentance is genuine that does not work reformation. The righteousness
> of Christ is not a cloak to cover UNCONFESSED and UNFORSAKEN sin; it is a
> principle of life that transforms the character and controls the conduct.
> Holiness is wholeness for God; it is the entire surrender of heart and life
> to the indwelling of the principles of heaven." E.G.W DA p. 555-56.
>
>
> ~ Cindy
True repentance would correct wrongs and not skillfully move forward
with the same agenda and the idea that someone who does not accept
such a repentance without the correction is .
The whole discussion is about the past. The claim to repentance
refers to the past. Cindy mentioned the past to show she has
repented.
I know what the four letter word is, but it doesn't print out when I
post to Google. But Antichrist Vatican Caillean can babble all she
wants that she is not Catholic. No Witch or no Non-Catholic would do
what she does to the complete despising of her own order for the
benefit of Rome. She can babble all she wants that she doesn't
support exterminations of people. Her behavior is what tells the
tale. She will surely not accept my claims for anything that I am
loving. I committed the crime of speaking up for all non-Catholics
who were condemned to extermination and persecution by Ted Seeber.
Antichrist Caillean has to constantly and exclusively protect the
monster who made such a condemnation and constantly publish how loving
she actually is. She is working from the principle of the
Inquisitions, where despot and lying babbling replaces all natural
evidence of everything.
Ted McMillan
Mike I
I wondered how long it would take before you would attack along with Ted. It
was less than 24 hours.. Hey you Broke the Saturday Sabbath to do it.. shame
on you
I find your interpretation of Matthew to be a little dirty minded. However,
maybe you should look at the Greek words used by Mathew 'heos hou eteken'
it's bad use of Greek grammar for you to imply that Joseph had relations with
Mary.
It's clear that Mathew was speaking of Isaiah 7:14 The Lord will give you a
sign in any case: It is this: the young woman is with child and will give
birth to a son whom she will call Immanuel.
I wonder why:
In Mark 6:3 "the son of Mary" is used and not "a son of Mary"
Or why there are no other Children mentioned when He is in the temple at age
12. Luke 2:41-51
Why in John 19:26 did Christ entrusted Mary to John, not a younger sibling?
Could it be, that there were NO other Children.
Even Martin Luther, Calvin and Zwingli understood the Gospels, that Mary "as a
pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after
childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin" (Zwingli Opera, v.1 p. 424)
I wonder why you do not Honor the Mother of God, they way He did? He surly
kept the commandment to "Honor your father and your mother." Why don't you?
Since we are the brothers and sisters of, and in Christ, then she is our
mother.
BTW NEWSFLASH she isn't dead nor are the Saints, nor are those who die in
Christ. For "He is the God of the Living"
But you know this.
What do you seek?
--
Mike
"Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing, God is
unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to him who has God: God
alone is sufficient." (St. Teresa of Avila)
"Cynthia" <synt...@localline.com> wrote in message
news:3d38c...@news.teranews.com...
Mike I
You once asked me not to put all of the SDA in the same category as Ted M. and
Nich.
I assure you, I will not do that "anymore". Please forgive me.
May the Peace of Christ be with you.
--
Mike
"Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing, God is
unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to him who has God: God
alone is sufficient." (St. Teresa of Avila)
"Paul" <pa...@tooley.com> wrote in message
news:3d38cffd$1...@corp-goliath.newsgroups.com...
Bill
then she is greater than God. If she is Greater than God then God is not as
powerful as Mary. She is also called the Queen of heaven. But that would
mean that she is equal with God. Jesus is the King of Kings. So if Mary is
the Queen of Heaven and Kings and Queens were married to each other that
would mean that Jesus and Mary are married to each other as man and wife.
But that doesn't sound right. So while I will admit freely that Mary is
blessed above all woman, she is only venerated by the Catholic Church's
authority and not by God.
She was promoted to her present status by the Church and not by God or
Christ. And remember...there is only one mediator between God and man the
Lord Christ, Jesus. Mary does not make intercession because that is
mediation by another name. If she does make intercession then God is a liar
and Jesus is too.
"Mike I" <hope2b...@justice.com> wrote in message
news:jWd_8.21695$jq5....@news2.central.cox.net...
Mike I
were talking about him.
--
Mike
"Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing, God is
unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to him who has God: God
alone is sufficient." (St. Teresa of Avila)
"Bill" <al...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:efe_8.72602$DS.19...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
Caillean McMahon
Cynthia wrote:
>
> "Caillean McMahon" <cail...@gallae.com> wrote in message
> news:3D38C246...@gallae.com...
> >
> >
> > Cynthia;
> > Loved seeing you at the "Vat" last week. Wasn't Rome wonderful?
> > Since Ted does not buy the repentance act, you might as well take the
> > Mary medal out and wear it proudly, fellow Jesuit.
> >
> > Yup Ted--we are both Jesuits.
> > Blessings;
> > Sr. Mary Caillean, S.J.
>
> Hmmmm...
>
> Most likely your post to me has to do with my hypocrisy comment. That had to
> do with the fact that you tell Ted to leave you alone and can't leave him
> alone,
I did for as long as he did not use my name......
and because you tell him not to judge and yet keep judging him,
When he lies about me I call him on it.
> incidentally you are also judging Ted Seeber while you pretend you cannot do
> that, You are judging him innocent, despite his comments to the contrary.
I publically have deplored his remarks. I still believe that the issue
ought to be let go of now that multiple people have deplored the remarks
and so much time has elapsed.
>
> Not amused Caillean.
>
> Thanks for the introduction to the Marian issue though, I can see why that
> is of importance to you.
It is important to me because she is a representation of the Goddess to
me.
>
> For all the real Jesuits and Vaticanites:
Ahhhhh---do you actually know what a Jesuit is? Also, I find the term
Vaticanite a bit perjorative.
Why not just say "Catholic?" (which I am not, btw.)
Cynthia
> I wondered how long it would take before you would attack along with Ted.
And I somehow you knew you would respond Mike. And why is it, that standing
up for the truth is always perceived as an attack? I do not choose to take
your words that way just because you disagree. You know that I do care, do
not suddenly assume that thinking someone is dead wrong is hate, and do not
assume that I do not know you, nor care about you.
> It was less than 24 hours.. Hey you Broke the Saturday Sabbath to do it..
shame
> on you
The Pharisee's frequently said the same thing to Jesus Christ. They were
lacking wisdom, and understanding. He never praised them once.
Psa 111:10 The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of wisdom: a good
understanding have all they that do [his commandments]: his praise endureth
for ever.
Mar 3:4 And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath
days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace.
Mar 3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being
grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch
forth thine hand. And he stretched [it] out: and his hand was restored whole
as the other.
> I find your interpretation of Matthew to be a little dirty minded.
That says more about you than me.
Fact: God created sex. Sex outside of marriage is what's sin.
Gen 4:1 And Adam *knew* Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and
said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
Gen 4:25 And Adam *knew* his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his
name Seth: For God, [said she], hath appointed me another seed instead of
Abel, whom Cain slew.
>However,
> maybe you should look at the Greek words used by Mathew 'heos hou eteken'
> it's bad use of Greek grammar for you to imply that Joseph had relations
with
> Mary.
Where are those words used? It is deceitful to supply a word not even in the
text.
And [2532] kai
knew [1097] ginosko
her [846] autos
not [3756] ou
till [2193] heos
(with Strongs #) [3757] hou
she had brought forth [5088] tikto
her [846] autos
firstborn [4416] prototokos
son: [5207] huios
and [2532] kai
he called [2564] kaleo
his [846] autos
name [3686] onoma
JESUS. [2424] Iesous
*Knew* in the Greek: Ginosko meaning 1) to learn to know, come to know, get
a knowledge of perceive, feel1a) to become known 2) to know, understand,
perceive, have knowledge of2a) to understand 2b) to know 3) Jewish idiom for
sexual intercourse between a man and a woman.
Mat 1:24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord
commanded him; he took his wife,
Mat 1:25 but *knew* her not *UNTIL* she had borne a son; and he called his
name Jesus. RSV
Mat 1:25 and didn't know her sexually until she had brought forth her
firstborn son. He named him Yeshua. (Hebrew Names version)
> It's clear that Mathew was speaking of Isaiah 7:14 The Lord will give you
a
> sign in any case: It is this: the young woman is with child and will give
> birth to a son whom she will call Immanuel.
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a
virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isa 7:15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the
evil, and choose the good.
Isa 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose
the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
The sign was that a Virgin would conceive. No where is it ever said or
implied she'd stay that way. The root of the problem here, is this blasts
away the error of the doctrine of the immaculate conception, which can not
be found or proven in scripture. Mary was not made sinless at birth. The
Catholic traditions have to say this to back up their *infallible* decrees
that Jesus was born without original sin, because his Mother was made sin
free. If they agree with the scriptures that she had more than one child,
there's a big problem there. So they *MADE UP* the teaching that the
brothers and sisters were Josephs by a previous marriage. NONE of those
doctrines can be proven with scripture. Guess what? You aren't a born sinner
either! So "cease to sin" Jesus came to save you *from* your sins.
>
> I wonder why:
> In Mark 6:3 "the son of Mary" is used and not "a son of Mary"
> Or why there are no other Children mentioned when He is in the temple at
age
> 12. Luke 2:41-51
> Why in John 19:26 did Christ entrusted Mary to John, not a younger
sibling?
> Could it be, that there were NO other Children.
Clearly you are grasping at straws. The scriptures plainly say he had
brothers and sisters. God's word does NOT contradict itself.
>
> Even Martin Luther, Calvin and Zwingli understood the Gospels, that Mary
"as a
> pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and
after
> childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin" (Zwingli Opera, v.1 p.
424)
Getting amused now. :-D Opera's are not evidence of truth, nor are private
interpretation, or additions to God's word.
>
> I wonder why you do not Honor the Mother of God, they way He did? He surly
> kept the commandment to "Honor your father and your mother." Why don't
you?
First off, I do honor my parents, and also my Father in heaven, he did not
tell me to worship Mary, on the contrary he said do NOT worship other Gods!
and "him only shalt thou serve" Ex 20
Mary was blessed among women, and that is because every woman of faith from
Eve on, prayed and hoped that they would give birth to the Messiah so that
God's people could be saved and Satan defeated. Mary is not called Mother of
God anywhere in scripture. Only Pagan Goddesses are ever called that. And no
matter which one you research they all are variations of the same story.
Semiramis was one of the first, she also bore a Son, and later is called the
Queen of heaven, and is somehow married to him. She supposedly concieved by
the *SUN* and gave birth to Tammuz. When he died he somehow became the sun,
and was worshipped as such. So he became his Father somehow.This originated
in ancient Babel. The Women wept for Tammuz and made cakes in his honor with
little crosses on them (hot crossed buns) they had 40 days of mourning
(lent~ nowhere to be found in scripture)and an annual festival was
established to commemorate his assension to heaven to become the sun.
(Easter)Check out a encyclopedia, or twelve.
God did not like this at all! Did you read my previous reference to the
*Queen of heaven*? and how the people refused to hearken to the word of the
Lord?
check out this one:
Eze 8:14 Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the LORD'S house
which [was] toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for
Tammuz.
Eze 8:15 Then said he unto me, Hast thou seen [this], O son of man? turn
thee yet again, [and] thou shalt see greater abominations than these.
Eze 8:16 And he brought me into the inner court of the LORD'S house, and,
behold, at the door of the temple of the LORD, between the porch and the
altar, [were] about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple
of the LORD, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun
toward the east.
> I wonder why:
> In Mark 6:3 "the son of Mary" is used and not "a son of Mary"
> Or why there are no other Children mentioned when He is in the temple at
age
> 12. Luke 2:41-51
> Why in John 19:26 did Christ entrusted Mary to John, not a younger
sibling?
> Could it be, that there were NO other Children.
Well stop "wondering" please.
Mar 3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and
my sister, and mother.
Luk 8:21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are
these which hear the word of God, and do it.
>
> BTW NEWSFLASH she isn't dead nor are the Saints, nor are those who die in
> Christ. For "He is the God of the Living"
>
> But you know this.
> What do you seek?
Luk 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for
it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve.
~ Cindy
P.S.
Are liberty and privacy outdated and useless?
> --
> Mike
> "Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing,
God is
> unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to him who has God: God
> alone is sufficient." (St. Teresa of Avila)
She's right, Repent, and give up your Goddess worship please.
>
Cynthia
> I wondered how long it would take before you would attack along with Ted.
And I somehow you knew you would respond Mike. And why is it, that standing
up for the truth is always perceived as an attack? I do not choose to take
your words that way just because you disagree. You know that I do care, do
not suddenly assume that thinking someone is dead wrong is hate, and do not
assume that I do not know you, nor care about you.
> It was less than 24 hours.. Hey you Broke the Saturday Sabbath to do it..
shame
> on you
The Pharisee's frequently said the same thing to Jesus Christ. They were
lacking wisdom, and understanding. He never praised them once.
Psa 111:10 The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of wisdom: a good
understanding have all they that do [his commandments]: his praise endureth
for ever.
Mar 3:4 And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath
days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace.
Mar 3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being
grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch
forth thine hand. And he stretched [it] out: and his hand was restored whole
as the other.
> I find your interpretation of Matthew to be a little dirty minded.
That says more about you than me.
Fact: God created sex. Sex outside of marriage is what's sin.
Gen 4:1 And Adam *knew* Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and
said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
Gen 4:25 And Adam *knew* his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his
name Seth: For God, [said she], hath appointed me another seed instead of
Abel, whom Cain slew.
>However,
> maybe you should look at the Greek words used by Mathew 'heos hou eteken'
> it's bad use of Greek grammar for you to imply that Joseph had relations
with
> Mary.
Where are those words used? It is deceitful to supply a word not even in the
text.
> It's clear that Mathew was speaking of Isaiah 7:14 The Lord will give you
a
> sign in any case: It is this: the young woman is with child and will give
> birth to a son whom she will call Immanuel.
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a
virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Isa 7:15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the
evil, and choose the good.
Isa 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose
the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
The sign was that a Virgin would conceive. No where is it ever said or
implied she'd stay that way. The root of the problem here, is this blasts
away the error of the doctrine of the immaculate conception, which can not
be found or proven in scripture. Mary was not made sinless at birth. The
Catholic traditions have to say this to back up their *infallible* decrees
that Jesus was born without original sin, because his Mother was made sin
free. If they agree with the scriptures that she had more than one child,
there's a big problem there. So they *MADE UP* the teaching that the
brothers and sisters were Josephs by a previous marriage. NONE of those
doctrines can be proven with scripture. Guess what? You aren't a born sinner
either! So "cease to sin" Jesus came to save you *from* your sins.
>
> I wonder why:
> In Mark 6:3 "the son of Mary" is used and not "a son of Mary"
> Or why there are no other Children mentioned when He is in the temple at
age
> 12. Luke 2:41-51
> Why in John 19:26 did Christ entrusted Mary to John, not a younger
sibling?
> Could it be, that there were NO other Children.
Clearly you are grasping at straws. The scriptures plainly say he had
brothers and sisters. God's word does NOT contradict itself.
>
> Even Martin Luther, Calvin and Zwingli understood the Gospels, that Mary
"as a
> pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and
after
> childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin" (Zwingli Opera, v.1 p.
424)
Getting amused now. :-D Opera's are not evidence of truth, nor are private
interpretation, or additions to God's word.
>
> I wonder why you do not Honor the Mother of God, they way He did? He surly
> kept the commandment to "Honor your father and your mother." Why don't
you?
First off, I do honor my parents, and also my Father in heaven, he did not
check out this one:
> I wonder why:
> In Mark 6:3 "the son of Mary" is used and not "a son of Mary"
> Or why there are no other Children mentioned when He is in the temple at
age
> 12. Luke 2:41-51
> Why in John 19:26 did Christ entrusted Mary to John, not a younger
sibling?
> Could it be, that there were NO other Children.
Well stop "wondering" please.
Mar 3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and
my sister, and mother.
Luk 8:21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are
these which hear the word of God, and do it.
>
> BTW NEWSFLASH she isn't dead nor are the Saints, nor are those who die in
> Christ. For "He is the God of the Living"
>
> But you know this.
> What do you seek?
Luk 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for
it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve.
~ Cindy
P.S.
Are liberty and privacy outdated and useless?
> --
> Mike
> "Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing,
God is
> unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to him who has God: God
> alone is sufficient." (St. Teresa of Avila)
She's right, Repent, and give up your Goddess worship please.
>
Cynthia
>
>
> Cynthia wrote:
> >
> > "Caillean McMahon" <cail...@gallae.com> wrote in message
> > news:3D38C246...@gallae.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > Cynthia;
> > > Loved seeing you at the "Vat" last week. Wasn't Rome wonderful?
> > > Since Ted does not buy the repentance act, you might as well take the
> > > Mary medal out and wear it proudly, fellow Jesuit.
> > >
> > > Yup Ted--we are both Jesuits.
> > > Blessings;
> > > Sr. Mary Caillean, S.J.
> >
> > Hmmmm...
> >
> > Most likely your post to me has to do with my hypocrisy comment. That
had to
> > do with the fact that you tell Ted to leave you alone and can't leave
him
> > alone,
>
>
> I did for as long as he did not use my name......
And he responds to you. The difference?
>
> and because you tell him not to judge and yet keep judging him,
>
>
>
> When he lies about me I call him on it.
When you lie about him, he calls you on it. The difference?
>
> > incidentally you are also judging Ted Seeber while you pretend you
cannot do
> > that, You are judging him innocent, despite his comments to the
contrary.
>
> I publically have deplored his remarks.
And you have pubically said that he made a *mistake*. Ted S. himself came
back and confirmed that is exactly what he said and he never said "I made a
mistake"
>I still believe that the issue
> ought to be let go of now that multiple people have deplored the remarks
> and so much time has elapsed.
Well possibly it would be, if these multiple people responded to the issues
instead of just attacking Ted's character.Who are these multiple people who
deplored Ted Seeber's remarks? I seem to have missed their posts. Do you
have links to them?
>
> >
> > Not amused Caillean.
> >
> > Thanks for the introduction to the Marian issue though, I can see why
that
> > is of importance to you.
>
> It is important to me because she is a representation of the Goddess to
> me.
Yes I know. The difference would be that you admit you are Pagan. They
believe they are Christian.
>
> >
> > For all the real Jesuits and Vaticanites:
>
> Ahhhhh---do you actually know what a Jesuit is?
Yes
>Also, I find the term
> Vaticanite a bit perjorative.
and?
> Why not just say "Catholic?" (which I am not, btw.)
[I know you are a Witch, it matters not, there are only two sides, either
you belong to God's Church, or the World's (Universal~Satan) You have
already said you do not worship God, so whether you admit it or not you are
part of Babylon.]
Because there are honest catholics, and Jesus calls them *my people*
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, *my people*
that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her
plagues.(Rev 18:4)My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow
me:(Jn 10:27) If ye love me, keep my commandments(Jn 14:15)
God said:
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected
knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me:
seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy
children.(Hos 4:5) To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not
according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them(Is 8:20)
For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after
those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write
them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a
people: (Hbr 8:10) Here is the patience of the saints: here [are] they that
keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.(Rev 14:12)Blessed
[are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of
life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.(rev22:14)
Rev 22:15 For without [are] dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and
murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie...
Rev 22:10-13 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of
this book: for THE TIME IS AT HAND. He that is unjust, let him be unjust
still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is
righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy
still. And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward [is] with me, to give
every man according as his work shall be.
~ Cindy
Cynthia
"Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:dfc66dfc.02071...@posting.google.com...
> "Cynthia" <synt...@localline.com> wrote in message
news:<3d38a...@news.teranews.com>...
> > "Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote in message
> > news:dfc66dfc.02071...@posting.google.com...
> > > Your statements of repentance are not true Cindy.
> >
> > That is not what I asked you Ted. I know what repentance is. I do not
need
> > you tell tell me if I am repentant or not anymore. Neither did I ask you
to
> > bring up the past.
> >
> > "No repentance is genuine that does not work reformation. The
righteousness
> > of Christ is not a cloak to cover UNCONFESSED and UNFORSAKEN sin; it is
a
> > principle of life that transforms the character and controls the
conduct.
> > Holiness is wholeness for God; it is the entire surrender of heart and
life
> > to the indwelling of the principles of heaven." E.G.W DA p. 555-56.
> >
> >
> > ~ Cindy
>
> True repentance would correct wrongs and not skillfully move forward
> with the same agenda and the idea that someone who does not accept
True. And claims are not repentance."He answered and said unto them, Well
hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people
honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me." Mk 7:6
God knows the heart. Man can only go by the outward appearance, and so,
trust has to be earned. Trust is only earned with time, but can be destroyed
in a instant.
>
> The whole discussion is about the past. The claim to repentance
> refers to the past. Cindy mentioned the past to show she has
> repented.
True. It is easier for me to say it, than to hear it however. Not your
problem, mine.
>
> I know what the four letter word is, but it doesn't print out when I
> post to Google. But Antichrist Vatican Caillean can babble all she
> wants that she is not Catholic. No Witch or no Non-Catholic would do
> what she does to the complete despising of her own order for the
> benefit of Rome. She can babble all she wants that she doesn't
> support exterminations of people. Her behavior is what tells the
> tale. She will surely not accept my claims for anything that I am
> loving. I committed the crime of speaking up for all non-Catholics
> who were condemned to extermination and persecution by Ted Seeber.
> Antichrist Caillean has to constantly and exclusively protect the
> monster who made such a condemnation and constantly publish how loving
> she actually is. She is working from the principle of the
> Inquisitions, where despot and lying babbling replaces all natural
> evidence of everything.
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come],
except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the
son of perdition;
2Th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or
that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing
himself that he is God.
2Th 2:5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these
things?
2Th 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his
time.
2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now
letteth [will let], until he be taken out of the way.
2Th 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume
with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his
coming:
2Th 2:9 [Even him], whose coming is after the working of Satan with all
power and signs and lying wonders,
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish;
because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they
should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had
pleasure in unrighteousness.
Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth,
neither [whatsoever] worketh abomination, or [maketh] a lie: but they which
are written in the Lamb's book of life.
~Cindy
>
>
> Ted McMillan
Paul
strange relationship going. She loves(platonic) him while he is convinced
she is a Vatican, Jesuit spy. You put these people in a room together and
who knows what would happen.
Paul
"Mike I" <hope2b...@justice.com> wrote in message
news:ffe_8.21697$jq5....@news2.central.cox.net...
Mike I
>
> "Mike I" <hope2b...@justice.com> wrote in message
> news:jWd_8.21695$jq5....@news2.central.cox.net...
> > Cynthia
> > I wondered how long it would take before you would attack along with Ted.
>
> And I somehow you knew you would respond Mike. And why is it, that standing
> up for the truth is always perceived as an attack? I do not choose to take
> your words that way just because you disagree. You know that I do care, do
> not suddenly assume that thinking someone is dead wrong is hate, and do not
> assume that I do not know you, nor care about you.
Of couse you care, but I would have phrased you sentence a little different
though. "that standing up for what I perceive as the turth is always taken as
an attack." For you know I do not except your or EGW interprtation of the Word
of God. Well not all of it, you do get somethings right.
>
> > It was less than 24 hours.. Hey you Broke the Saturday Sabbath to do it..
> >shame on you
>
> The Pharisee's frequently said the same thing to Jesus Christ. They were
> lacking wisdom, and understanding. He never praised them once.
Humm are claiming to be Jesus Christ? I'm sure your not.
>
> > I find your interpretation of Matthew to be a little dirty minded.
>
> That says more about you than me.
I don't think so Cindy, I'm not the one saying Mary had sex with Joseph and
made more Childern.
> Fact: God created sex. Sex outside of marriage is what's sin.
>
Duh!
> snip
> >However,
> > maybe you should look at the Greek words used by Mathew 'heos hou eteken'
> > it's bad use of Greek grammar for you to imply that Joseph had relations
> >with Mary.
>
> Where are those words used? It is deceitful to supply a word not even in the
> text.
Why Cindy, me deceitful? You knew excaclty what I was talking about. Humm
Let's see, the word until (heos) or til seems to be the issue. This (heos)
didn't indciate a change in Jospehs sexual abstinence, as you would have it.
If it did then, well let's look at 1 Corinthians 15:25 For he must reign,
till he hath put all enemies under his feet. KJV
If I take your translation of the word (heos) to mean there was a change, then
Christ's reign will stop when all of his enemies are under his feet. Buzz
wrong answer! Christ will reign will reign forever (Luke 1:32-33).
>
> > It's clear that Mathew was speaking of Isaiah 7:14 The Lord will give you
> > a sign in any case: It is this: the young woman is with child and will
give
> > birth to a son whom she will call Immanuel.
>
> Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a
> virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
>
> Isa 7:15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the
> evil, and choose the good.
>
> Isa 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose
> the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
>
>
> The sign was that a Virgin would conceive. No where is it ever said or
> implied she'd stay that way. The root of the problem here, is this blasts
> away the error of the doctrine of the immaculate conception, which can not
> be found or proven in scripture. Mary was not made sinless at birth. The
> Catholic traditions have to say this to back up their *infallible* decrees
> that Jesus was born without original sin, because his Mother was made sin
> free. If they agree with the scriptures that she had more than one child,
> there's a big problem there. So they *MADE UP* the teaching that the
> brothers and sisters were Josephs by a previous marriage. NONE of those
> doctrines can be proven with scripture. Guess what? You aren't a born sinner
> either! So "cease to sin" Jesus came to save you *from* your sins.
>
My my Cindy, you are all over the place, which topic do you wish to discuss?
>
> >
> > I wonder why:
> > In Mark 6:3 "the son of Mary" is used and not "a son of Mary"
> > Or why there are no other Children mentioned when He is in the temple at
> > age 12. Luke 2:41-51
> > Why in John 19:26 did Christ entrusted Mary to John, not a younger
> > sibling? Could it be, that there were NO other Children.
>
> Clearly you are grasping at straws. The scriptures plainly say he had
> brothers and sisters. God's word does NOT contradict itself.
No I'm not grasping at straws and your right God's word does Not Contradict
itself, it is personal intpertation that is in error.
> >
> > Even Martin Luther, Calvin and Zwingli understood the Gospels, that Mary
> "as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and
> after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin" (Zwingli Opera,
v.1 p.
> 424)
>
> Getting amused now. :-D Opera's are not evidence of truth, nor are private
> interpretation, or additions to God's word.
I like this Cindy, you disagree with Luther, Calvin and Zwingli who all state
that the Gosples clearly say that Mary was a perpetual virgin.
"Not evidence, nor private interpretation or additions to God's word. Wow!!! I
think there has been a break through. So you argree that private
interpretation are in error.. what is "mother" to do?
> > I wonder why you do not Honor the Mother of God, they way He did? He surly
> > kept the commandment to "Honor your father and your mother." Why don't
> you?
>
> First off, I do honor my parents, and also my Father in heaven, he did not
> tell me to worship Mary, on the contrary he said do NOT worship other Gods!
> and "him only shalt thou serve" Ex 20
I don't worship Mary nor do I think she is a God. So what is the problem?
>
> Mary was blessed among women, and that is because every woman of faith from
> Eve on, prayed and hoped that they would give birth to the Messiah so that
> God's people could be saved and Satan defeated. Mary is not called Mother of
> God anywhere in scripture. Only Pagan Goddesses are ever called that. And no
> matter which one you research they all are variations of the same story.
> Semiramis was one of the first, she also bore a Son, and later is called the
> Queen of heaven, and is somehow married to him. She supposedly concieved by
> the *SUN* and gave birth to Tammuz. When he died he somehow became the sun,
> and was worshipped as such. So he became his Father somehow.This originated
> in ancient Babel. The Women wept for Tammuz and made cakes in his honor with
> little crosses on them (hot crossed buns) they had 40 days of mourning
> (lent~ nowhere to be found in scripture)and an annual festival was
> established to commemorate his assension to heaven to become the sun.
> (Easter)Check out a encyclopedia, or twelve.
Oh Child I wish you would open your eyes and your ears. To deny that Mary is
the Mother of God is to deny that Christ is the Son of God, that Christ is
truly God and truly man, in one being with the Father, the second part of the
Holy Trinity.
Are you married, do you wear a ring.. Look out your a pagan! For that matter
the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not called the Trinity.
Your little story is nice, there are similarities in a lot of relgions, but
they are not the story of Christ.
> God did not like this at all! Did you read my previous reference to the
> *Queen of heaven*? and how the people refused to hearken to the word of the
> Lord?
No sorry, I haven't read your *Queen of Heaven* dissertation.
> check out this one:
>
> Eze 8:14 Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the LORD'S house
> which [was] toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for
> Tammuz.
> Eze 8:15 Then said he unto me, Hast thou seen [this], O son of man? turn
> thee yet again, [and] thou shalt see greater abominations than these.
> Eze 8:16 And he brought me into the inner court of the LORD'S house, and,
> behold, at the door of the temple of the LORD, between the porch and the
> altar, [were] about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple
> of the LORD, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun
> toward the east.
And your point is what?
> > I wonder why:
> > In Mark 6:3 "the son of Mary" is used and not "a son of Mary"
> > Or why there are no other Children mentioned when He is in the temple at
> > age 12. Luke 2:41-51 Why in John 19:26 did Christ entrusted Mary to
> > John, not a younger sibling? Could it be, that there were NO other
Children.
>
> Well stop "wondering" please.
>
> Mar 3:35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and
> my sister, and mother.
> Luk 8:21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are
> these which hear the word of God, and do it.
Cindy Cindy, Would you like to continue shoot verses back and forth, we can if
you like.
> > BTW NEWSFLASH she isn't dead nor are the Saints, nor are those who die in
> > Christ. For "He is the God of the Living"
> >
> > But you know this.
> > What do you seek?
>
> Luk 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for
> it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
> serve.
Maybe you should apply your quote to EGW.
But you know this.
What do you seek?
--
Mike
"Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing, God is
unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to him who has God: God
alone is sufficient." (St. Teresa of Avila)
> ~ Cindy
>
> P.S.
>
> Are liberty and privacy outdated and useless?
>
> > --
> > Mike
> > "Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing,
> God is
> > unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to him who has God: God
> > alone is sufficient." (St. Teresa of Avila)
>
> She's right, Repent, and give up your Goddess worship please.
> >
Cindy, your to funny. I'm not the follower of EGW maybe you should heed your
own words.
>
>
Lamarr Edwards
Mary, mother of God ? Of course not !
Should we then logically say," God, father of himself?"
Or how about, " God created everything, including his own mother" ?
If he created his mother, then he created himself, right?
Or, how about, "God existed before his mother, but he was, his own
father, so therefore he must have existed before his father, who was,
himself"?
Marvelously logical.
Mary was the human mother, of the human manifestation of God.
The human manifestation of God, no longer exists as a human, and Mary,
no longer exists.
Mary was a sinful human, who was chosen by God, to bear the human
manifistation of God.
She was a virgin, at the time, but had a husband, and other children by
him, later. LE
Tom A.
Bill wrote:
>
> Mother of God implies that Mary gave birth to God.
Indeed. She gave birth to Jesus, second person in the Trinity - True
God, eternally begotten of the Father.
> If Mary gave birth to God
> then she is greater than God.
BEEP. The previous sentence is incorrect. Thanks for playing. Next
time use logic. Snipping illogic based on false premise.
> Jesus is the King of Kings. So if Mary is
> the Queen of Heaven and Kings and Queens were married to each other that
> would mean that Jesus and Mary are married to each other as man and wife.
Beep. Illogical, and unbiblical. David's mother was call the queen
while David was king. The current English construct "Queen mother" used
of the recently passed mother of Queen Elizabeth of Great Britain should
have clued you in.
> So while I will admit freely that Mary is
> blessed above all woman, she is only venerated by the Catholic Church's
> authority and not by God.
She is honored by the author of the ten commandments as stated in the
commandment to honor your parents. Are you claiming God does not obey
His own commandments?
> She was promoted to her present status by the Church and not by God or
> Christ.
And what "status" is that? You're incorrect conclusion? Or the honor
given her by God, and the titled "blessed" used by all the generations
of the Church since her life on earth ended?
> And remember...there is only one mediator between God and man the
> Lord Christ, Jesus.
And no one disputes this.
> Mary does not make intercession because that is
> mediation by another name.
Wrong. Learn the difference.
> If she does make intercession then God is a liar
> and Jesus is too.
Wrong. She is a member of the Church. She is alive, because God is the
God of the living, not the dead, and He was her God. Those absent of
body are present in the Lord, and those in the Body are told to
intercede for each other as amply demonstrated by Paul's constant
prayers for intercessions for him, and intercessions for the people and
communities he wrote to.
Ted McMillan
> "Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote in message
> news:dfc66dfc.02071...@posting.google.com...
> > "Cynthia" <synt...@localline.com> wrote in message
> news:<3d38a...@news.teranews.com>...
> > > "Ted McMillan" <t-m...@juno.com> wrote in message
> > > news:dfc66dfc.02071...@posting.google.com...
> > > > Your statements of repentance are not true Cindy.
> > >
> > > That is not what I asked you Ted. I know what repentance is. I do not
> need
> > > you tell tell me if I am repentant or not anymore. Neither did I ask you
> to
> > > bring up the past.
> > >
> > > "No repentance is genuine that does not work reformation. The
> righteousness
> > > of Christ is not a cloak to cover UNCONFESSED and UNFORSAKEN sin; it is
> a
> > > principle of life that transforms the character and controls the
> conduct.
> > > Holiness is wholeness for God; it is the entire surrender of heart and
> life
> > > to the indwelling of the principles of heaven." E.G.W DA p. 555-56.
> > >
> > >
> > > ~ Cindy
> >
> > True repentance would correct wrongs and not skillfully move forward
> > with the same agenda and the idea that someone who does not accept
>
> True. And claims are not repentance."He answered and said unto them, Well
> hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people
> honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me." Mk 7:6
>
> God knows the heart. Man can only go by the outward appearance, and so,
> trust has to be earned. Trust is only earned with time, but can be destroyed
> in a instant.
If only God knows the heart, why not explain your first advance to
help monster Seeber. You approached and told the world the Lord
showed you that I had a terrible problem with love. The man who
condemned all non-Catholics to persecution and extermination (which is
supposed to include you) did not compel you to any effort of mercy.
> > The whole discussion is about the past. The claim to repentance
> > refers to the past. Cindy mentioned the past to show she has
> > repented.
>
> True. It is easier for me to say it, than to hear it however. Not your
> problem, mine.
You can attempt to explain your behavior, but you know that is an
impossibility. It is impossible to accomplish what you all have done
by accident.
Ted McMillan
> Cynthia wrote:
> >
> > "Caillean McMahon" <cail...@gallae.com> wrote in message
> > news:3D38C246...@gallae.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > Cynthia;
> > > Loved seeing you at the "Vat" last week. Wasn't Rome wonderful?
> > > Since Ted does not buy the repentance act, you might as well take the
> > > Mary medal out and wear it proudly, fellow Jesuit.
> > >
> > > Yup Ted--we are both Jesuits.
> > > Blessings;
> > > Sr. Mary Caillean, S.J.
> >
> > Hmmmm...
> >
> > Most likely your post to me has to do with my hypocrisy comment. That had to
> > do with the fact that you tell Ted to leave you alone and can't leave him
> > alone,
>
>
> I did for as long as he did not use my name......
>
> and because you tell him not to judge and yet keep judging him,
>
> When he lies about me I call him on it.
Who lies about you Vatican Caillean? I don't care about your claims.
You saw your Witch order condemned, but that didn't mean anything to
you. When I exposed the monster who condemned them, you ran out of
Midol and tell us all exterminating criminals can be expose except if
they are Vatican as yourself.
If you are concerned about lies, just answer the questions, and just
one:
Where in the Vatican or hell did you acquire the conscience to accuse
me of being more intolerant than Ted Seeber (after you said you don't
know much about him since you butted into our discussion after he
ducked out) and likened me to and the communists when I have
been defending liberty and the Constitution of the USA, and Seeber had
been condemning these? As a Vatican, you have been skillfully
avoiding these otherwise very easy questions. You are a trained liar.
As such you will lie on people and naturally show false concern that
an accurate expose on you consists of lies.
> > incidentally you are also judging Ted Seeber while you pretend you cannot do
> > that, You are judging him , despite his comments to the contrary.
>
> I publically have deplored his remarks. I still believe that the issue
> ought to be let go of now that multiple people have deplored the remarks
> and so much time has elapsed.
How can the Witch infiltrator from the Vatican claim that she deplores
Seeber's remarks when she has been saying that he didn't say anything
wrong, but was just misunderstood? It is just even like Vatican
Angelo. He spends all emotion and manhours posting attacks against
Ted McMillan for pointing out the monster despot, and then to
demonstrate his total disrespect for the intelligence of the human
race merely three times tells us he said Ted Seeber was wrong, and
then he claims to be a sane member of the human race.
If Vatican Caillean really deplored Seeber's remarks, she would have
attacked them at least. But she knows well that, in light of the
thinking of human being, SEEBER IS MORE THAN JUST WRONG!
How can Vatican Caillean get to heaven with the Saints that were
exterminated by monsters like Seeber? How can she be with Witches
when she has ed on all their graves and really thinks the
Protestants and even Catholics here are too stupid and damned to
understand that she has been favoring a mass-exterminator in order to
attack someone who pointed him out. She acts just like all the other
Vatican here. Simple questions are not answered. She makes the
stupid statements like Angelo Braz, telling us she knows nothing about
Seeber since she came after his obvious disappearance and cannot know
Seeber even with all the links and copies of his words that I post!
> > Not amused Caillean.
> >
> > Thanks for the introduction to the Marian issue though, I can see why that
> > is of importance to you.
>
> It is important to me because she is a representation of the Goddess to
> me.
What about your order of Witches that was condemned by Seeber. I
defend them, and then another unbelievable papist attacks me by the
name of Caillean.
> > For all the real Jesuits and Vaticanites:
>
> Ahhhhh---do you actually know what a Jesuit is? Also, I find the term
> Vaticanite a bit perjorative.
> Why not just say "Catholic?" (which I am not, btw.)
She ought to know! That order to her is more important than anything
else!
Ted McMillan