info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the church they were raised in?
72 views
Skip to first unread message
MattB
Dec 17, 2015, 5:26:40 PM12/17/15
to
Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
church they were raised in?
If yes is it a unforgivable sin?
No Pet
Dec 17, 2015, 7:32:58 PM12/17/15
to
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>church they were raised in?
>
>If yes is it a unforgivable sin?
It has never been a biblical sin to ask a question about anything.
Some churches at various times may call it a sin against their
religion, but never has it been a sin against God.
1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits
whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into
the world.
It is a sin to test God.
Luk 4:12 And Jesus replied to him, [The Scripture] says, You shall
not tempt (try, test exceedingly) the Lord your God. [Deut. 6:16.]
Not to question Him with any sincere question, but to shove it in His
face with something like a petulant kid might say would be, like "if
your really loved me, blah, blah, blah".
wrote:
>
>
>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>church they were raised in?
>
>If yes is it a unforgivable sin?
Some churches at various times may call it a sin against their
religion, but never has it been a sin against God.
1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits
whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into
the world.
It is a sin to test God.
Luk 4:12 And Jesus replied to him, [The Scripture] says, You shall
not tempt (try, test exceedingly) the Lord your God. [Deut. 6:16.]
Not to question Him with any sincere question, but to shove it in His
face with something like a petulant kid might say would be, like "if
your really loved me, blah, blah, blah".
PATRICK
Dec 17, 2015, 9:28:17 PM12/17/15
to
MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>church they were raised in?
Nope
>
>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>church they were raised in?
Steve Hayes
Dec 18, 2015, 1:22:13 AM12/18/15
to
>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>church they were raised in?
There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>church they were raised in?
ask them all?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Kenny McCormack
Dec 18, 2015, 7:17:32 AM12/18/15
to
In article <sd977bhrq0ah3ie4c...@4ax.com>,
Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
heard?
In any case, since there are only a couple of them in the world, it
shouldn't be too hard to ask both of them a question or two.
--
> No, I haven't, that's why I'm asking questions. If you won't help me,
> why don't you just go find your lost manhood elsewhere.
CLC in a nutshell.
Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
...
>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>ask them all?
What is a milliard Christian? Is that some new sect of which I have not
>ask them all?
heard?
In any case, since there are only a couple of them in the world, it
shouldn't be too hard to ask both of them a question or two.
--
> No, I haven't, that's why I'm asking questions. If you won't help me,
> why don't you just go find your lost manhood elsewhere.
CLC in a nutshell.
duke
Dec 18, 2015, 7:18:50 AM12/18/15
to
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:21:32 +0200, Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>church they were raised in?
>
>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>ask them all?
Thanks, Steve. Today we use the word "billion" in lieu of a milliard.
>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>church they were raised in?
>
>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>ask them all?
the dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
a425couple
Dec 18, 2015, 1:19:57 PM12/18/15
to
"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
And, they pointed the way to changes.
But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
they way they were.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
Luther's defeat.
> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
> church they were raised in?
Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
> church they were raised in?
And, they pointed the way to changes.
But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
they way they were.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
Luther's defeat.
MattB
Dec 18, 2015, 2:38:26 PM12/18/15
to
MattB
Dec 18, 2015, 2:39:56 PM12/18/15
to
>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>church they were raised in?
>
>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>ask them all?
Well I was asking opinions from these NGs. Do you have a little
>wrote:
>
>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>church they were raised in?
>
>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>ask them all?
scientology in you?
duke
Dec 18, 2015, 4:56:50 PM12/18/15
to
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 12:17:30 +0000 (UTC), gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny
McCormack) wrote:
>In article <sd977bhrq0ah3ie4c...@4ax.com>,
>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>...
>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>ask them all?
Milliard = 1 billion.
McCormack) wrote:
>In article <sd977bhrq0ah3ie4c...@4ax.com>,
>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>...
>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>ask them all?
>What is a milliard Christian? Is that some new sect of which I have not
>heard?
>
>In any case, since there are only a couple of them in the world, it
>shouldn't be too hard to ask both of them a question or two.
Steve Hayes
Dec 18, 2015, 11:16:32 PM12/18/15
to
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:56:48 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 12:17:30 +0000 (UTC), gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny
>McCormack) wrote:
>
>>In article <sd977bhrq0ah3ie4c...@4ax.com>,
>>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>...
>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>ask them all?
>
>Milliard = 1 billion.
Milliard = 10^9.
>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 12:17:30 +0000 (UTC), gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny
>McCormack) wrote:
>
>>In article <sd977bhrq0ah3ie4c...@4ax.com>,
>>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>...
>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>ask them all?
>
>Milliard = 1 billion.
Billion = 10^9 (sometimes) and 10^12 (other times).
Therefore "milliard" is an ascertainable number, while "billion" just
means "a lot" (or "alot" in some people's English.
duke
Dec 19, 2015, 7:48:21 AM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 06:15:53 +0200, Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:56:48 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 12:17:30 +0000 (UTC), gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny
>>McCormack) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <sd977bhrq0ah3ie4c...@4ax.com>,
>>>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>...
>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>ask them all?
>>
>>Milliard = 1 billion.
>
>Milliard = 10^9.
>
>Billion = 10^9 (sometimes) and 10^12 (other times).
>
>Therefore "milliard" is an ascertainable number, while "billion" just
>means "a lot" (or "alot" in some people's English.
Unfortunately, and as far as I know, few people have a clue as to what a
>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:56:48 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 12:17:30 +0000 (UTC), gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny
>>McCormack) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <sd977bhrq0ah3ie4c...@4ax.com>,
>>>Steve Hayes <haye...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>...
>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>ask them all?
>>
>>Milliard = 1 billion.
>
>Milliard = 10^9.
>
>Billion = 10^9 (sometimes) and 10^12 (other times).
>
>Therefore "milliard" is an ascertainable number, while "billion" just
>means "a lot" (or "alot" in some people's English.
milliard is.
duke
Dec 19, 2015, 7:52:08 AM12/19/15
to
>"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>> church they were raised in?
>
>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>
>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>they way they were.
And so the protest march resulting in non-Catholic churches turning away from
>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>> church they were raised in?
>
>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>
>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>they way they were.
the Church founded by Jesus Christ.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
>"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
>confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
>therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
>Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
>heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
>Luther's defeat.
scripture in the big picture with a jaded eye.
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 7:52:18 AM12/19/15
to
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:39:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
You are listening and learning the head games, aren't you?
wrote:
duke
Dec 19, 2015, 7:52:46 AM12/19/15
to
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 7:54:11 AM12/19/15
to
What are you trying to do here?
Are you trying to make an alliance with 425?
You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
MattB
Dec 19, 2015, 2:22:18 PM12/19/15
to
were there orders from the Popes?
Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also. They will lie and use
threats also. Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
also?
You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
officers like the Pope.
MattB
Dec 19, 2015, 2:30:32 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:54:09 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
agreeing with it.
>What are you trying to do here?
Truth before all.
>Are you trying to make an alliance with 425?
I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
wrote:
>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:38:20 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:29 -0800, "a425couple"
>><a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>> church they were raised in?
>>>
>>>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>>>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>>>
>>>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>>>they way they were.
>>>
>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
>>>"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
>>>confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
>>>therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
>>>Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
>>>heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
>>>Luther's defeat.
>>
>>Patrick and Duke claim the RCC never had anyone burned at the Stake.
>
>I don't think I've ever made that claim.
Then you admit the RCC had people burned at the Stake for just not
>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:38:20 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:29 -0800, "a425couple"
>><a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>> church they were raised in?
>>>
>>>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>>>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>>>
>>>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>>>they way they were.
>>>
>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
>>>"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
>>>confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
>>>therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
>>>Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
>>>heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
>>>Luther's defeat.
>>
>>Patrick and Duke claim the RCC never had anyone burned at the Stake.
>
>I don't think I've ever made that claim.
agreeing with it.
>What are you trying to do here?
>Are you trying to make an alliance with 425?
the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
MattB
Dec 19, 2015, 2:36:19 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:52:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
What you don't like different opinions.
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 2:57:35 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:36:19 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
your father is labeled) in you?
wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:52:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:39:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:21:32 +0200, Steve Hayes
>>><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>>
>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>ask them all?
>>>
>>>
>>>Well I was asking opinions from these NGs. Do you have a little
>>>scientology in you?
>>
>>You are listening and learning the head games, aren't you?
>
>What you don't like different opinions.
Why would you insult him by asking if had some scientology in him?
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:52:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:39:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:21:32 +0200, Steve Hayes
>>><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>>
>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>ask them all?
>>>
>>>
>>>Well I was asking opinions from these NGs. Do you have a little
>>>scientology in you?
>>
>>You are listening and learning the head games, aren't you?
>
>What you don't like different opinions.
That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
your father is labeled) in you?
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 3:02:58 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:22:18 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Didn't you know?
This was hundreds of years agp.
>Who were the judges
I don't know their names.
This was hundreds of years ago.
> and why
>were there orders from the Popes?
What orders?
>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
Really?
Tell me more.....
I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
Maybe he was an injun.
>They will lie and use threats also.
Who? Injuns?
We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
Look at yourself.
> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>also?
Could you be a little more specific?
Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
So was John Glenn.
>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>officers like the Pope.
The pope is not an officer.
Would you like to discuss this?
wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 06:52:45 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:38:20 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:29 -0800, "a425couple"
>>><a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>> church they were raised in?
>>>>
>>>>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>>>>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>>>>
>>>>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>>>>they way they were.
>>>>
>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
>>>>"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
>>>>confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
>>>>therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
>>>>Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
>>>>heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
>>>>Luther's defeat.
>>>
>>>Patrick and Duke claim the RCC never had anyone burned at the Stake.
>>
>>The sheriff did it for civil crimes.
>
>So there was a civilian crime for Heresy?
Yes.
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 06:52:45 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:38:20 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:29 -0800, "a425couple"
>>><a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>> church they were raised in?
>>>>
>>>>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>>>>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>>>>
>>>>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>>>>they way they were.
>>>>
>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
>>>>"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
>>>>confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
>>>>therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
>>>>Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
>>>>heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
>>>>Luther's defeat.
>>>
>>>Patrick and Duke claim the RCC never had anyone burned at the Stake.
>>
>>The sheriff did it for civil crimes.
>
>So there was a civilian crime for Heresy?
Didn't you know?
This was hundreds of years agp.
>Who were the judges
I don't know their names.
This was hundreds of years ago.
> and why
>were there orders from the Popes?
>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
Tell me more.....
I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
Maybe he was an injun.
>They will lie and use threats also.
We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
Look at yourself.
> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>also?
Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
So was John Glenn.
>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>officers like the Pope.
Would you like to discuss this?
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 3:05:25 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:30:32 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
The RCC did not do any burning.
And they didn't agree with anything.
>>What are you trying to do here?
>
>Truth before all.
>
>>Are you trying to make an alliance with 425?
>
>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
Do you mean "THEIR" ways?
You just keep on wondering.
Did I mention you are an idiot?
>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>
>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
Julia.
And they didn't agree with anything.
>>What are you trying to do here?
>
>Truth before all.
>
>>Are you trying to make an alliance with 425?
>
>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
You just keep on wondering.
Did I mention you are an idiot?
>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>
>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
MattB
Dec 19, 2015, 3:21:23 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 14:57:37 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
got there brainwashing and intimidation strategies from. Very
similar.
>That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
>your father is labeled) in you?
Well people can look up Scientology brainwashing and intimidation
methods and see what I say has merit.
Your claim, you just made up in desperation.
wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:36:19 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:52:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:39:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:21:32 +0200, Steve Hayes
>>>><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>>>
>>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>>ask them all?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Well I was asking opinions from these NGs. Do you have a little
>>>>scientology in you?
>>>
>>>You are listening and learning the head games, aren't you?
>>
>>What you don't like different opinions.
>
>Why would you insult him by asking if had some scientology in him?
Because the Catholic Churches history might be where the Scientologist
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:36:19 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:52:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:39:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:21:32 +0200, Steve Hayes
>>>><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>>>
>>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>>ask them all?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Well I was asking opinions from these NGs. Do you have a little
>>>>scientology in you?
>>>
>>>You are listening and learning the head games, aren't you?
>>
>>What you don't like different opinions.
>
>Why would you insult him by asking if had some scientology in him?
got there brainwashing and intimidation strategies from. Very
similar.
>That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
>your father is labeled) in you?
methods and see what I say has merit.
Your claim, you just made up in desperation.
MattB
Dec 19, 2015, 3:33:42 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 15:03:01 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Who decided what was heresy and did the Pope approve?
>
>>Who were the judges
>
>I don't know their names.
>This was hundreds of years ago.
Yes the were called
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial
system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy. It
started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in
particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were
investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Husites
(followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s,
inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order,
to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2]
The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th
century.
The current RCC has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a
hate filled BS group.
>
>
>> and why
>>were there orders from the Popes?
>
>What orders?
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
The first medieval inquisition, the episcopal inquisition, was
established in the year 1184 by a papal bull of Pope Lucius III
entitled Ad abolendam, "For the purpose of doing away with." It was a
response to the growing Catharist movement in southern France. It was
called "episcopal" because it was administered by local bishops, which
in Latin is episcopus, and obliged bishops to visit their diocese
twice a year in search of heretics.[1]
In 1231 Pope Gregory IX appointed a number of Papal Inquisitors
(Inquisitores haereticae pravitatis), mostly Dominicans and
Franciscans, for the various regions of Europe. As mendicants, they
were accustomed to travel. Unlike the haphazard episcopal methods, the
papal inquisition was thorough and systematic, keeping detailed
records. Some of the few documents from the Middle Ages involving
first-person speech by medieval peasants come from papal inquisition
records. This tribunal or court functioned in France, Italy and parts
of Germany and had virtually ceased operation by the early fourteenth
century.[3]
reading Catholic History and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith. His repressive techniques are very much like Catholics except
maybe without the burnings I hope.
and call her Mary. Strange group you belong to.
>Would you like to discuss this?
Sure if you can provide actual provable evidence. Catholic tradition
is not evidence or scripture.
>
>>Who were the judges
>
>I don't know their names.
>This was hundreds of years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial
system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy. It
started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in
particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were
investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Husites
(followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s,
inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order,
to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2]
The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th
century.
The current RCC has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a
hate filled BS group.
>
>
>> and why
>>were there orders from the Popes?
>
>What orders?
>
The first medieval inquisition, the episcopal inquisition, was
established in the year 1184 by a papal bull of Pope Lucius III
entitled Ad abolendam, "For the purpose of doing away with." It was a
response to the growing Catharist movement in southern France. It was
called "episcopal" because it was administered by local bishops, which
in Latin is episcopus, and obliged bishops to visit their diocese
twice a year in search of heretics.[1]
In 1231 Pope Gregory IX appointed a number of Papal Inquisitors
(Inquisitores haereticae pravitatis), mostly Dominicans and
Franciscans, for the various regions of Europe. As mendicants, they
were accustomed to travel. Unlike the haphazard episcopal methods, the
papal inquisition was thorough and systematic, keeping detailed
records. Some of the few documents from the Middle Ages involving
first-person speech by medieval peasants come from papal inquisition
records. This tribunal or court functioned in France, Italy and parts
of Germany and had virtually ceased operation by the early fourteenth
century.[3]
>
>
>>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
>
>Really?
>Tell me more.....
>I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
>Maybe he was an injun.
No not a Ijun. Though he might have learned his techniques from
>
>>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
>
>Really?
>Tell me more.....
>I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
>Maybe he was an injun.
reading Catholic History and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith. His repressive techniques are very much like Catholics except
maybe without the burnings I hope.
>
>
>>They will lie and use threats also.
>
>Who? Injuns?
>We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
>Look at yourself.
No firewater today.
>
>>They will lie and use threats also.
>
>Who? Injuns?
>We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
>Look at yourself.
>
>
>
>> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>>also?
>
>Could you be a little more specific?
>Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
>So was John Glenn.
Well you do believe in the fake saints and worship the mother goddess
>
>
>> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>>also?
>
>Could you be a little more specific?
>Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
>So was John Glenn.
and call her Mary. Strange group you belong to.
>
>
>
>
>>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>>officers like the Pope.
>
>The pope is not an officer.
He is a freak and idiot that support genocide.
>
>
>
>>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>>officers like the Pope.
>
>The pope is not an officer.
>Would you like to discuss this?
is not evidence or scripture.
MattB
Dec 19, 2015, 3:39:10 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 15:05:29 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
What is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
"Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which
conflicts with church dogma must be burned without pity."
Pope Innocent III
>
>
>
>>>What are you trying to do here?
>>
>>Truth before all.
>>
>>>Are you trying to make an alliance with 425?
>>
>>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>
>Do you mean "THEIR" ways?
>You just keep on wondering.
>Did I mention you are an idiot?
Deflection noted
Here is a list feel free to do more guessing ROFL
http://www.randomnames.com/all-girls-names.asp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
What is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
"Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which
conflicts with church dogma must be burned without pity."
Pope Innocent III
>
>
>
>>>What are you trying to do here?
>>
>>Truth before all.
>>
>>>Are you trying to make an alliance with 425?
>>
>>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>
>Do you mean "THEIR" ways?
>You just keep on wondering.
>Did I mention you are an idiot?
>
>
>>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>>
>>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
>
>Julia.
Keep trying only a few more hundred to go.
>
>>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>>
>>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
>
>Julia.
Here is a list feel free to do more guessing ROFL
http://www.randomnames.com/all-girls-names.asp
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 6:55:40 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 12:21:24 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Might be?
> the Scientologist
>got there brainwashing and intimidation strategies from. Very
>similar.
If you don't know, why do you embarrass yourself by making such stupid
statements?
>>That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
>>your father is labeled) in you?
>
>Well people can look up Scientology brainwashing and intimidation
>methods and see what I say has merit.
Why?
Why would anyone want to look into something so stupid?
wrote:
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 14:57:37 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:36:19 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:52:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:39:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:21:32 +0200, Steve Hayes
>>>>><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>>>ask them all?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Well I was asking opinions from these NGs. Do you have a little
>>>>>scientology in you?
>>>>
>>>>You are listening and learning the head games, aren't you?
>>>
>>>What you don't like different opinions.
>>
>>Why would you insult him by asking if had some scientology in him?
>
>Because the Catholic Churches history might be where
Might be?
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 14:57:37 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 11:36:19 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 07:52:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:39:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 08:21:32 +0200, Steve Hayes
>>>>><haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There are a couple of milliard Christians in the world, who's going to
>>>>>>ask them all?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Well I was asking opinions from these NGs. Do you have a little
>>>>>scientology in you?
>>>>
>>>>You are listening and learning the head games, aren't you?
>>>
>>>What you don't like different opinions.
>>
>>Why would you insult him by asking if had some scientology in him?
>
>Because the Catholic Churches history might be where
Might be?
> the Scientologist
>got there brainwashing and intimidation strategies from. Very
>similar.
statements?
>>That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
>>your father is labeled) in you?
>
>Well people can look up Scientology brainwashing and intimidation
>methods and see what I say has merit.
Why would anyone want to look into something so stupid?
MattB
Dec 19, 2015, 7:06:46 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 18:55:44 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Looks that way many similar attitudes and methods.
Might be can you prove it is not?
>
>
>> the Scientologist
>>got there brainwashing and intimidation strategies from. Very
>>similar.
>
>If you don't know, why do you embarrass yourself by making such stupid
>statements?
LOL Can you prove my views wrong? If not then I'd say you are
stupid.
>
>
>
>
>>>That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
>>>your father is labeled) in you?
>>
>>Well people can look up Scientology brainwashing and intimidation
>>methods and see what I say has merit.
>
>Why?
>Why would anyone want to look into something so stupid?
To find the truth. You know truth does matter.
Might be can you prove it is not?
>
>
>> the Scientologist
>>got there brainwashing and intimidation strategies from. Very
>>similar.
>
>If you don't know, why do you embarrass yourself by making such stupid
>statements?
stupid.
>
>
>
>
>>>That would be like me asking if you have any Tier 2 Sex offender (as
>>>your father is labeled) in you?
>>
>>Well people can look up Scientology brainwashing and intimidation
>>methods and see what I say has merit.
>
>Why?
>Why would anyone want to look into something so stupid?
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 7:07:02 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 12:33:42 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
The lawmakers.
They make the laws.
And who knows if the pope approves of such laws?
>>>Who were the judges
>>
>>I don't know their names.
>>This was hundreds of years ago.
>
>Yes the were called
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
>The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial
>system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy. It
>started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in
>particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were
>investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Husites
>(followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s,
>inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order,
>to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2]
>The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th
>century.
OK. Now you know.
You can stop asking stupid questions.
>The current RCC has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a
>hate filled BS group.
Do they?
Tell me more.
Do they have a bowling league on Thursday nights?
>>> and why
>>>were there orders from the Popes?
>>
>>What orders?
>>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
>The first medieval inquisition, the episcopal inquisition, was
>established in the year 1184 by a papal bull of Pope Lucius III
>entitled Ad abolendam, "For the purpose of doing away with." It was a
>response to the growing Catharist movement in southern France. It was
>called "episcopal" because it was administered by local bishops, which
>in Latin is episcopus, and obliged bishops to visit their diocese
>twice a year in search of heretics.[1]
From your ref:
Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
sent to the stake.
>>>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
>>
>>Really?
>>Tell me more.....
>>I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
>>Maybe he was an injun.
>
>No not a Ijun. Though he might have learned his techniques
He might?
He might?
Well then, he might not....
>from
>reading Catholic History and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
>Faith. His repressive techniques are very much like Catholics except
>maybe without the burnings I hope.
From your ref:
Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
sent to the stake.
>>>They will lie and use threats also.
>>
>>Who? Injuns?
>>We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
>>Look at yourself.
>
>No firewater today.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>>>also?
>>
>>Could you be a little more specific?
>>Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
>>So was John Glenn.
>
>Well you do believe in the fake saints and worship the mother goddess
>and call her Mary. Strange group you belong to.
What fake saints?
What mother goddess?
Have been dreaming about Pocahontis again?
>>>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>>>officers like the Pope.
>>
>>The pope is not an officer.
>
>He is a freak and idiot that support genocide.
Are you jealous?
>>Would you like to discuss this?
>
>Sure if you can provide actual provable evidence. Catholic tradition
>is not evidence or scripture.
provable evidence that the pope is not a freak?
I can provide evidence that your father is a Tier 2 Sexual Offender
and lives just a few miles from you.
They make the laws.
And who knows if the pope approves of such laws?
>>>Who were the judges
>>
>>I don't know their names.
>>This was hundreds of years ago.
>
>Yes the were called
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
>The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial
>system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy. It
>started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in
>particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were
>investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Husites
>(followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s,
>inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order,
>to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2]
>The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th
>century.
You can stop asking stupid questions.
>The current RCC has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a
>hate filled BS group.
Tell me more.
Do they have a bowling league on Thursday nights?
>>> and why
>>>were there orders from the Popes?
>>
>>What orders?
>>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
>The first medieval inquisition, the episcopal inquisition, was
>established in the year 1184 by a papal bull of Pope Lucius III
>entitled Ad abolendam, "For the purpose of doing away with." It was a
>response to the growing Catharist movement in southern France. It was
>called "episcopal" because it was administered by local bishops, which
>in Latin is episcopus, and obliged bishops to visit their diocese
>twice a year in search of heretics.[1]
Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
sent to the stake.
>>>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
>>
>>Really?
>>Tell me more.....
>>I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
>>Maybe he was an injun.
>
>No not a Ijun. Though he might have learned his techniques
He might?
Well then, he might not....
>from
>reading Catholic History and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
>Faith. His repressive techniques are very much like Catholics except
>maybe without the burnings I hope.
Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
sent to the stake.
>>>They will lie and use threats also.
>>
>>Who? Injuns?
>>We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
>>Look at yourself.
>
>No firewater today.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>>>also?
>>
>>Could you be a little more specific?
>>Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
>>So was John Glenn.
>
>Well you do believe in the fake saints and worship the mother goddess
>and call her Mary. Strange group you belong to.
What mother goddess?
Have been dreaming about Pocahontis again?
>>>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>>>officers like the Pope.
>>
>>The pope is not an officer.
>
>He is a freak and idiot that support genocide.
>>Would you like to discuss this?
>
>Sure if you can provide actual provable evidence. Catholic tradition
>is not evidence or scripture.
I can provide evidence that your father is a Tier 2 Sexual Offender
and lives just a few miles from you.
PATRICK
Dec 19, 2015, 7:09:51 PM12/19/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 12:39:10 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Is it important?
It sounds like a department made up 500 years ago.
Does it bother you?
>>>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>>>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>>>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>>
>>Do you mean "THEIR" ways?
>>You just keep on wondering.
>>Did I mention you are an idiot?
>
>Deflection noted
>>
>>
>>>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>>>
>>>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>>>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
>>
>>Julia.
>
>Keep trying only a few more hundred to go.
I don't need to guess.
Would you like to see her facebook page again?
From your ref:
Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
sent to the stake.
Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
sent to the stake.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
>
>What is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
I am not sure.
>
>What is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
Is it important?
It sounds like a department made up 500 years ago.
Does it bother you?
>>>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>>>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>>>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>>
>>Do you mean "THEIR" ways?
>>You just keep on wondering.
>>Did I mention you are an idiot?
>
>Deflection noted
>>
>>
>>>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>>>
>>>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>>>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
>>
>>Julia.
>
>Keep trying only a few more hundred to go.
Would you like to see her facebook page again?
PATRICK
Dec 20, 2015, 7:40:45 AM12/20/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 16:06:47 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Why should I waste my time?
You might be a pedo, just like your old man.
Prove that you are not.
You might be a pedo, just like your old man.
Prove that you are not.
MattB
Dec 20, 2015, 3:20:48 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 07:40:50 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
So the answer is NO. Just what I thought.
>You might be a pedo, just like your old man.
>Prove that you are not.
No need I could prove my father is dead. Yet that would require
giving you what you want. Keep fishing.
Still waiting for you to give me a working phone number for my father.
That would be something.
>You might be a pedo, just like your old man.
>Prove that you are not.
giving you what you want. Keep fishing.
Still waiting for you to give me a working phone number for my father.
That would be something.
MattB
Dec 20, 2015, 3:32:03 PM12/20/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 19:07:05 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
This from a Pope.
Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts
with church dogma must be burned without pity.
Pope Innocent III
Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil; for
no one may judge the Pope.
Pope Innocent III
By heart we believe and by mouth confess the one Church, not of
heretics but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside
which we believe that no one is saved.
Pope Innocent III
If it shall be necessary, through sentences of excommunication against
their persons and of interdict against their lands, all backsliding
being put an end to, they compel them to fulfil their vows.
Pope Innocent III
>
>
>>>>Who were the judges
>>>
>>>I don't know their names.
>>>This was hundreds of years ago.
>>
>>Yes the were called
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
>>The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial
>>system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy. It
>>started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in
>>particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were
>>investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Husites
>>(followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s,
>>inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order,
>>to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2]
>>The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th
>>century.
>
>OK. Now you know.
>You can stop asking stupid questions.
Sorry your popes actions are part of history yo need more cut and
paste.
>
>
>
>
>>The current RCC has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a
>>hate filled BS group.
>
>Do they?
>Tell me more.
>Do they have a bowling league on Thursday nights?
Don't know it is a group in the Vatican.
accomplishment for the RCC. Maybe they just stole land or
imprisoned.
modernized them.
>
>
>>from
>>reading Catholic History and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
>>Faith. His repressive techniques are very much like Catholics except
>>maybe without the burnings I hope.
>
>From your ref:
>Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
>proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
>people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
>penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
>sent to the stake.
Repeat.
>What mother goddess?
The one whose Stone you still have in the Vatican.
>Have been dreaming about Pocahontis again?
She was pretty.
>
>
>>>>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>>>>officers like the Pope.
>>>
>>>The pope is not an officer.
>>
>>He is a freak and idiot that support genocide.
>
>Are you jealous?
Hell no I don't want to ever be like that asshole pope. Now you have
insulted me.
found on the Internet isn't it.
Yet you in the RCC are good at making lies appear as truth.
This should be interesting go for it Prove it.
Here.
BTW still waiting for that phone number to my father. My dead father.
Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts
with church dogma must be burned without pity.
Pope Innocent III
no one may judge the Pope.
Pope Innocent III
By heart we believe and by mouth confess the one Church, not of
heretics but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside
which we believe that no one is saved.
Pope Innocent III
If it shall be necessary, through sentences of excommunication against
their persons and of interdict against their lands, all backsliding
being put an end to, they compel them to fulfil their vows.
Pope Innocent III
>
>
>>>>Who were the judges
>>>
>>>I don't know their names.
>>>This was hundreds of years ago.
>>
>>Yes the were called
>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisition
>>The Inquisition is[1] a group of institutions within the judicial
>>system of the Roman Catholic Church whose aim was to combat heresy. It
>>started in 12th-century France to combat religious sectarianism, in
>>particular the Cathars and the Waldensians. Other groups which were
>>investigated later include the Spiritual Franciscans, the Husites
>>(followers of Jan Hus) and Beguines. Beginning in the 1250s,
>>inquisitors were generally chosen from members of the Dominican Order,
>>to replace the earlier practice of using local clergy as judges.[2]
>>The term Medieval Inquisition covers these courts up through the 14th
>>century.
>
>OK. Now you know.
>You can stop asking stupid questions.
paste.
>
>
>
>
>>The current RCC has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a
>>hate filled BS group.
>
>Do they?
>Tell me more.
>Do they have a bowling league on Thursday nights?
>
>
>
>>>> and why
>>>>were there orders from the Popes?
>>>
>>>What orders?
>>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
>
>>The first medieval inquisition, the episcopal inquisition, was
>>established in the year 1184 by a papal bull of Pope Lucius III
>>entitled Ad abolendam, "For the purpose of doing away with." It was a
>>response to the growing Catharist movement in southern France. It was
>>called "episcopal" because it was administered by local bishops, which
>>in Latin is episcopus, and obliged bishops to visit their diocese
>>twice a year in search of heretics.[1]
>
>From your ref:
>Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
>proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
>people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
>penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
>sent to the stake.
So for one year they did not burn anyone yes that was quite a
>
>
>>>> and why
>>>>were there orders from the Popes?
>>>
>>>What orders?
>>>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
>
>>The first medieval inquisition, the episcopal inquisition, was
>>established in the year 1184 by a papal bull of Pope Lucius III
>>entitled Ad abolendam, "For the purpose of doing away with." It was a
>>response to the growing Catharist movement in southern France. It was
>>called "episcopal" because it was administered by local bishops, which
>>in Latin is episcopus, and obliged bishops to visit their diocese
>>twice a year in search of heretics.[1]
>
>From your ref:
>Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
>proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
>people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
>penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
>sent to the stake.
accomplishment for the RCC. Maybe they just stole land or
imprisoned.
>
>
>
>>>>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
>>>
>>>Really?
>>>Tell me more.....
>>>I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
>>>Maybe he was an injun.
>>
>>No not a Ijun. Though he might have learned his techniques
>
>He might?
>He might?
>Well then, he might not....
Sorry it appears he did they are so much a part of RCC history he just
>
>
>>>>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
>>>
>>>Really?
>>>Tell me more.....
>>>I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
>>>Maybe he was an injun.
>>
>>No not a Ijun. Though he might have learned his techniques
>
>He might?
>He might?
>Well then, he might not....
modernized them.
>
>
>>from
>>reading Catholic History and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
>>Faith. His repressive techniques are very much like Catholics except
>>maybe without the burnings I hope.
>
>From your ref:
>Punishment: The most extreme penalty available in antiheretical
>proceedings was reserved for relapsed or stubborn heretics. Of 5,400
>people interrogated in Toulouse between 1245-1246, 184 received
>penitential yellow crosses, 23 were imprisoned for life, and none were
>sent to the stake.
>
>
>
>>>>They will lie and use threats also.
>>>
>>>Who? Injuns?
>>>We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
>>>Look at yourself.
>>
>>No firewater today.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>>>>also?
>>>
>>>Could you be a little more specific?
>>>Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
>>>So was John Glenn.
>>
>>Well you do believe in the fake saints and worship the mother goddess
>>and call her Mary. Strange group you belong to.
>
>What fake saints?
They are all fake.
>
>
>>>>They will lie and use threats also.
>>>
>>>Who? Injuns?
>>>We all know injuns on firewater will lie all day long.
>>>Look at yourself.
>>
>>No firewater today.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Earl and Patrick Barker you believe in spacemen
>>>>also?
>>>
>>>Could you be a little more specific?
>>>Alan Sheppard was a spaceman.
>>>So was John Glenn.
>>
>>Well you do believe in the fake saints and worship the mother goddess
>>and call her Mary. Strange group you belong to.
>
>What fake saints?
>What mother goddess?
The one whose Stone you still have in the Vatican.
>Have been dreaming about Pocahontis again?
>
>
>>>>You got the lying part down it is OK to lie to protect the RCC and it
>>>>officers like the Pope.
>>>
>>>The pope is not an officer.
>>
>>He is a freak and idiot that support genocide.
>
>Are you jealous?
insulted me.
>
>
>
>>>Would you like to discuss this?
>>
>>Sure if you can provide actual provable evidence. Catholic tradition
>>is not evidence or scripture.
>
>provable evidence that the pope is not a freak?
>I can provide evidence that your father is a Tier 2 Sexual Offender
>and lives just a few miles from you.
The do so. Actual evidence. Real evidence. Posting some as you
>
>
>>>Would you like to discuss this?
>>
>>Sure if you can provide actual provable evidence. Catholic tradition
>>is not evidence or scripture.
>
>provable evidence that the pope is not a freak?
>I can provide evidence that your father is a Tier 2 Sexual Offender
>and lives just a few miles from you.
found on the Internet isn't it.
Yet you in the RCC are good at making lies appear as truth.
This should be interesting go for it Prove it.
Here.
BTW still waiting for that phone number to my father. My dead father.
MattB
Dec 20, 2015, 3:33:20 PM12/20/15
to
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 19:09:54 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Didn't do it for one year? Well that was a start.
>
>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
>>
>>What is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
>
>I am not sure.
>Is it important?
>It sounds like a department made up 500 years ago.
>Does it bother you?
>
>
>
>>>>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>>>>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>>>>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>>>
>>>Do you mean "THEIR" ways?
>>>You just keep on wondering.
>>>Did I mention you are an idiot?
>>
>>Deflection noted
>>>
>>>
>>>>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>>>>
>>>>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>>>>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
>>>
>>>Julia.
>>
>>Keep trying only a few more hundred to go.
>
>I don't need to guess.
>Would you like to see her facebook page again?
Yes that would be good. Hers only.
>
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Inquisition
>>
>>What is the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
>
>I am not sure.
>Is it important?
>It sounds like a department made up 500 years ago.
>Does it bother you?
>
>
>
>>>>I'm sure we might agree on some thing not so much on others. That is
>>>>the way of things. Well for those not brainwashed. I'm wondering did
>>>>scientology get there ways from the RCC?
>>>
>>>Do you mean "THEIR" ways?
>>>You just keep on wondering.
>>>Did I mention you are an idiot?
>>
>>Deflection noted
>>>
>>>
>>>>>You claim your Tier 2 Sex offender Larry Brooks is not your dad.
>>>>
>>>>Nope not my Dad. So far you have been wrong on 99% of your claims.
>>>>Couple hundred more guesses and you might get my wife name right. LOL
>>>
>>>Julia.
>>
>>Keep trying only a few more hundred to go.
>
>I don't need to guess.
>Would you like to see her facebook page again?
PATRICK
Dec 20, 2015, 5:13:08 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 12:20:50 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Are you really going to make me look it up?
Maybe tomorrow.
Maybe tomorrow.
PATRICK
Dec 20, 2015, 5:23:17 PM12/20/15
to
MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>This from a Pope.
>Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts
>with church dogma must be burned without pity.
>Pope Innocent III
When was this guy a pope?
>This from a Pope.
>Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts
>with church dogma must be burned without pity.
>Pope Innocent III
Oh yes, about 900 (NINE HUNDRED) years ago.
Good thing you are keeping us informed.
Innocent III was believed to be in purgatory on the very day he died.
He is said to have appeared to St. Lutgarda in her monastery at
Aywieres in Brabant. Engulfed in flames, he declared to her, “I am
Pope Innocent”. He continued to explain that he was in purgatory for
three faults which had caused him to arrive in this state. Innocent
asked St. Lutgarda to come to his assistance, saying, “Alas! It is
terrible; and will last for centuries if you do not come to my
assistance. In the name of Mary, who has obtained for me the favour of
appealing to you, help me!” At that moment he disappeared and St.
Lutgarda informed her sisters of what she had seen.
>Sorry your popes actions are part of history yo need more cut and
>paste.
Innocent III was one powerful dude.
Power breeds corruption.
Look at obammy.
>>>The current RCC has the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a
>>>hate filled BS group.
>>
>>Do they?
>>Tell me more.
>>Do they have a bowling league on Thursday nights?
>
>Don't know it is a group in the Vatican.
Don't know any more, huh?
Except you claim they are a hate filled group.
How do you know this?
>So for one year they did not burn anyone yes that was quite a
>accomplishment for the RCC. Maybe they just stole land or
>imprisoned.
Maybe not.
It is your fable.
>>>>>Scientology must be part Roman Catholic also.
>>>>
>>>>Really?
>>>>Tell me more.....
>>>>I don't believe hubbard wsa a catholic.
>>>>Maybe he was an injun.
Are you feeling kinda weak?
>>I can provide evidence that your father is a Tier 2 Sexual Offender
>>and lives just a few miles from you.
>
>The do so. Actual evidence. Real evidence. Posting some as you
>found on the Internet isn't it.
>This should be interesting go for it Prove it.
>Here.
BROOKS, LARRY JAMES
>Here.
Age: 77
Race: W
Sex: M
Height: 5'09"
Weight: 230
Hair: GRY
Eyes: HAZ
Address:
141xx BEAVER MARSH RD, MOUNT VERNON
LEVEL II SEX OFFENDER
RAPE OF A CHILD 1ST-2 COUNTS BROOKS was convicted of Rape of a Child
1st-2 counts on 8/24/11. He was given a special sentence with credit
for time served. He was released directly after conviction. His victim
was a 6 year old male who was known to him.
Possible Relatives
J J Brooks
Annie Elizabeth Brooks
Julia E Brooks
Matthu Brooks
Todd William Brooks
Emma Top
PATRICK
Dec 20, 2015, 5:24:26 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 12:33:22 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
None were sent to the stake..... EVER.
MattB
Dec 20, 2015, 5:56:10 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 17:13:13 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
This I have to see and you said you would call it. Go for it.
MattB
Dec 20, 2015, 5:59:25 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 17:23:22 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:
Possible Relatives?
Sorry my name isn't Matthu. Sounds Irish or Scottish.
Still waiting for that Phone number to my dad and for you to call it.
You get a in direct contact with my Dad and I will believe in the RCC.
wrote:
Sorry my name isn't Matthu. Sounds Irish or Scottish.
Still waiting for that Phone number to my dad and for you to call it.
You get a in direct contact with my Dad and I will believe in the RCC.
MattB
Dec 20, 2015, 6:02:03 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 17:24:31 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
You are a liar or why would you make such a big deal or it even be
mentioned for having one year where they didn't.
Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts
with church dogma must be burned without pity.
Pope Innocent III
Was it you or Duke that wanted me burnt? Wait Duke/Earl was to be
burnt you were going to visit me with a gun and a throw down weapon.
mentioned for having one year where they didn't.
Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts
with church dogma must be burned without pity.
Pope Innocent III
burnt you were going to visit me with a gun and a throw down weapon.
PATRICK
Dec 20, 2015, 7:28:23 PM12/20/15
to
PATRICK
Dec 20, 2015, 7:30:33 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 15:02:05 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
You are starting to confuse me.
Is Duke also coming to visit the NorthWest?
We could have a big party out in the barn.
Maybe burn some heretics or something.
Is Duke also coming to visit the NorthWest?
We could have a big party out in the barn.
Maybe burn some heretics or something.
Mattb.
Dec 20, 2015, 7:35:23 PM12/20/15
to
Mattb.
Dec 20, 2015, 7:37:59 PM12/20/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 19:30:38 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Lets be clear you are not welcome on my property.
PATRICK
Dec 21, 2015, 7:55:30 AM12/21/15
to
PATRICK
Dec 21, 2015, 7:57:05 AM12/21/15
to
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:41:43 -0800, Mattb. <trdel...@outlook.com>
You do not own the property that you live on.
Check with Julia before you make any decisions.
Check with Julia before you make any decisions.
duke
Dec 21, 2015, 1:24:41 PM12/21/15
to
>On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 06:52:45 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:38:20 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:29 -0800, "a425couple"
>>><a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>> church they were raised in?
>>>>
>>>>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>>>>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>>>>
>>>>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>>>>they way they were.
>>>>
>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
>>>>"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
>>>>confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
>>>>therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
>>>>Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
>>>>heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
>>>>Luther's defeat.
>>>
>>>Patrick and Duke claim the RCC never had anyone burned at the Stake.
>>
>
>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 11:38:20 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:29 -0800, "a425couple"
>>><a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>>> Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>> church they were raised in?
>>>>
>>>>Well, Martin Luther thought questions were fine.
>>>>And, they pointed the way to changes.
>>>>
>>>>But,,,,,, Pope Leo X was not impressed. He liked things
>>>>they way they were.
>>>>
>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
>>>>"Luther's boldest assertion in the debate was that Matthew 16:18 does not
>>>>confer on popes the exclusive right to interpret scripture, and that
>>>>therefore neither popes nor church councils were infallible.[61] For this,
>>>>Eck branded Luther a new Jan Hus, referring to the Czech reformer and
>>>>heretic burned at the stake in 1415. From that moment, he devoted himself to
>>>>Luther's defeat.
>>>
>>>Patrick and Duke claim the RCC never had anyone burned at the Stake.
>>
>>The sheriff did it for civil crimes.
>
>So there was a civilian crime for Heresy? Who were the judges and why
>
>were there orders from the Popes?
Because the Pope was also the Emperor.
the dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
MattB
Dec 21, 2015, 2:12:54 PM12/21/15
to
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 07:55:37 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Nope. Keep digging. Why do you think I'm having fun with this. My
name has been on here before as where I live. You are not just making
a fool of yourself but also showing the true morality of the RCC.
name has been on here before as where I live. You are not just making
a fool of yourself but also showing the true morality of the RCC.
MattB
Dec 21, 2015, 2:14:08 PM12/21/15
to
the Popes authority. Like I said the RCC burned people alive.
MattB
Dec 21, 2015, 2:45:50 PM12/21/15
to
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 07:57:12 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
That would be telling lets just say Inheritance for my wife and I
passing has been taken into account. Though name is still on the
Title.
Keep fishing.
passing has been taken into account. Though name is still on the
Title.
Keep fishing.
No Pet
Dec 21, 2015, 3:19:49 PM12/21/15
to
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 11:12:56 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Plus given the nature of his posts on this subject he is breaking the
Law.
Law.
MattB
Dec 21, 2015, 3:24:59 PM12/21/15
to
I'd love to have a working phone number to my Dad he say he has. That
would be something.
No Pet
Dec 21, 2015, 4:44:59 PM12/21/15
to
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 12:25:01 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Yeah, then I could use that for passing on messages to my Dad, too.
VBG
VBG
PATRICK
Dec 21, 2015, 5:38:16 PM12/21/15
to
The truth prevails.
PATRICK
Dec 21, 2015, 5:44:17 PM12/21/15
to
Look him up yourself.
Matthu Brooks,
24561 River Rd Sedro Woolley, WA 98284-8347
Phone number: 360-424-4550
Relatives
J J Brooks
Annie Elizabeth Brooks
Julia E Brooks
Larry J Brooks
J J Brooks
Annie Elizabeth Brooks
Julia E Brooks
Todd William Brooks
Emma Top
LEVEL II SEX OFFENDER NOTIFICATION
Emma Top
The Skagit County Sheriff is releasing the following information
pursuant to RCW 4.24.550 and the Washington State Supreme Court
decision in State v. Ward, which authorizes law enforcement agencies
to inform the public of a sex or kidnap offenders presence when; in
the discretion of the agency, the release of information will enhance
public safety and protection. (more)
The subject listed below is NOT WANTED by the police at this time.
Citizen abuse of this information to threaten, intimidate, or harass
registered sex or kidnap offenders will not be tolerated.
BROOKS, LARRY JAMES
Age: 77
Race: W
Sex: M
Height: 5'09"
Weight: 230
Hair: GRY
Eyes: HAZ
Address:
141xx BEAVER MARSH RD, MOUNT VERNON
LEVEL II SEX OFFENDER
RAPE OF A CHILD 1ST-2 COUNTS BROOKS was convicted of Rape of a Child
1st-2 counts on 8/24/11. He was given a special sentence with credit
for time served. He was released directly after conviction. His victim
was a 6 year old male who was known to him.
++ ALL PUBLIC RECORDS ++
Age: 77
Race: W
Sex: M
Height: 5'09"
Weight: 230
Hair: GRY
Eyes: HAZ
Address:
141xx BEAVER MARSH RD, MOUNT VERNON
LEVEL II SEX OFFENDER
RAPE OF A CHILD 1ST-2 COUNTS BROOKS was convicted of Rape of a Child
1st-2 counts on 8/24/11. He was given a special sentence with credit
for time served. He was released directly after conviction. His victim
was a 6 year old male who was known to him.
By Mail: Mail requests to:
Skagit County Sheriff's Office Records
600 South Third
Mount Vernon, WA 98273
By Fax:
360-336-9455
MATTHU BROOKS JULIA TOP
SKAGIT COUNTY, WASHINGTON, MARRIAGE RECORD INDEX, 1980-2010
Bride First Name Julia
Bride Last Name Top
Groom First Name Matthu
Groom Last Name Brooks
License Number 54646
Record ID 19941
P40406
TOP FAMILY TRUST 24561 RIVER ROAD, Skagit County
# Name Age Cities Relatives Access Report
9 Julia E Brooks
" Also Seen As
" - E Brooks Julia
" - J Brooks
" - Julia E Top 39 " Sedro Woolley, WA
" Mount Vernon, WA " Larry J Brooks
" Matthu J Brooks
" Todd William Brooks
" David J Top
PATRICK
Dec 21, 2015, 5:44:44 PM12/21/15
to
MattB
Dec 21, 2015, 5:53:22 PM12/21/15
to
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 17:44:24 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Sorry none of those people are related to me. The Pix you posted show
they aren't even Native American more Irish.
Now come on you can do better still waiting for those Pix of my
property and that phone number to my dad. MY DAD come on that would
be good.
Did you call him yet? Come on call my Dad and give me the number.
they aren't even Native American more Irish.
Now come on you can do better still waiting for those Pix of my
property and that phone number to my dad. MY DAD come on that would
be good.
Did you call him yet? Come on call my Dad and give me the number.
MattB
Dec 21, 2015, 5:53:59 PM12/21/15
to
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 17:44:52 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Duke said so you saying he is a liar?
duke
Dec 22, 2015, 7:20:32 AM12/22/15
to
MattB
Dec 22, 2015, 3:11:49 PM12/22/15
to
duke
Dec 23, 2015, 7:33:29 AM12/23/15
to
MattB
Dec 23, 2015, 3:08:31 PM12/23/15
to
duke
Dec 24, 2015, 7:18:17 AM12/24/15
to
MattB
Dec 24, 2015, 2:23:29 PM12/24/15
to
duke
Dec 25, 2015, 8:46:35 AM12/25/15
to
You really must operate on half a brain with some of your comments.
MattB
Dec 25, 2015, 2:43:52 PM12/25/15
to
>
>You really must operate on half a brain with some of your comments.
deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
This you do often. False accusation is not just a sin it is also a
lie. You do that often.
duke
Dec 26, 2015, 9:23:23 AM12/26/15
to
MattB
Dec 26, 2015, 4:22:50 PM12/26/15
to
duke
Dec 27, 2015, 10:19:11 AM12/27/15
to
James
Feb 2, 2016, 1:29:50 PM2/2/16
to
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>church they were raised in?
They should do so no matter what religion they are in. They should
follow the example of the ancient Bereans: Ac 17:11,
"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians,
for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (NIV)
Yes, if you are taught a religious doctrine, you had better be able to
find it in the Bible. Ancient oral traditions doesn't cut it. Why not?
1 Cor 4:6,
"I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit,
brothers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is
written,..." (NAB)
James, John 17:17, www.jw.org
>
>If yes is it a unforgivable sin?
wrote:
>
>
>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>church they were raised in?
follow the example of the ancient Bereans: Ac 17:11,
"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians,
for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (NIV)
Yes, if you are taught a religious doctrine, you had better be able to
find it in the Bible. Ancient oral traditions doesn't cut it. Why not?
1 Cor 4:6,
"I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit,
brothers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is
written,..." (NAB)
James, John 17:17, www.jw.org
>
>If yes is it a unforgivable sin?
MattB
Feb 2, 2016, 3:08:18 PM2/2/16
to
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:29:44 -0500, James <vojav...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Well I have found no religion that follows Jesus teaching completely.
wrote:
PATRICK
Feb 2, 2016, 3:16:42 PM2/2/16
to
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:09:02 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Why not start your own.
Just like the other 5,000 denominations in the USA.
wrote:
Just like the other 5,000 denominations in the USA.
MattB
Feb 2, 2016, 3:51:45 PM2/2/16
to
James
Feb 3, 2016, 2:31:52 AM2/3/16
to
James
Feb 3, 2016, 2:35:09 AM2/3/16
to
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 15:16:47 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
4:5,
"one Lord, one faith, one baptism;" (NAB)
PATRICK
Feb 3, 2016, 7:34:10 AM2/3/16
to
On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:52:28 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Of course not.
You are not a doer.
You are a whiner.
You are not a doer.
You are a whiner.
duke
Feb 3, 2016, 1:44:04 PM2/3/16
to
>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>church they were raised in?
>They should do so no matter what religion they are in. They should
>follow the example of the ancient Bereans: Ac 17:11,
And on what basis or expert knowledge would you use to determine truth if not
>wrote:
>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>church they were raised in?
>They should do so no matter what religion they are in. They should
>follow the example of the ancient Bereans: Ac 17:11,
what comes from the Church founded by Jesus?
>"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians,
>for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
>Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (NIV)
>
>Yes, if you are taught a religious doctrine, you had better be able to
>find it in the Bible. Ancient oral traditions doesn't cut it. Why not?
>1 Cor 4:6,
contact with Jesus comes in.
>>If yes is it a unforgivable sin?
duke
Feb 3, 2016, 1:45:04 PM2/3/16
to
duke
Feb 3, 2016, 1:46:45 PM2/3/16
to
MASS:
Do this in memory of me - Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
SACRAMENTS:
1. Baptism - John 3:5-6, Mat 28:19, Hebrew 2:14-15
2. Holy Eucharist -Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
3. Confession - John 20:22-23, 2 Cor 5:18-19, Mat 9:2-8
4. Matrimony - Mat 19:4-6, Mark 10:5-9, Ephesians 5:31
5. Confirmation - Ephesians 1:13-14, Acts 8:14-17, Acts 19:5-6,
6. Holy Orders - Acts 13:3 & 14:23, John 20:22, 1 & 2 Tim
7. Anointing of the Sick - Mark 6:12-13, John 5:14
PAPACY:
Mat 16:13-19 (Pope), Mat 28:16-20 (Teaching), Eph 2:19-20 (Base)
PURGATORY:
1 Cor 3:10-15
FAITH (without deeds is dead faith):
Mat 25:31-46, James 2:26
Feed the hungry.
Clothe the naked.
Give drink to the thirsty.
Visit the imprisoned.
Heal the sick.
Cast out demons.
MattB
Feb 3, 2016, 2:10:15 PM2/3/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 07:34:17 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Whatever. Thing is not qualified to do such.
Thing is no Church I have seen follows Jesus words completely. RCC
least of all.
Thing is no Church I have seen follows Jesus words completely. RCC
least of all.
MattB
Feb 3, 2016, 2:11:56 PM2/3/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 02:31:46 -0500, James <vojav...@gmail.com>
kids to die if they need a transfusion. Also some of them fear a
statue of a dragon.
wrote:
>On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:09:02 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:29:44 -0500, James <vojav...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>
>>>They should do so no matter what religion they are in. They should
>>>follow the example of the ancient Bereans: Ac 17:11,
>>>
>>>"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians,
>>>for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
>>>Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (NIV)
>>>
>>>Yes, if you are taught a religious doctrine, you had better be able to
>>>find it in the Bible. Ancient oral traditions doesn't cut it. Why not?
>>>1 Cor 4:6,
>>>
>>>"I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit,
>>>brothers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is
>>>written,..." (NAB)
>>>
>>>James, John 17:17, www.jw.org
>>
>>Well I have found no religion that follows Jesus teaching completely.
>>
>
>I know of only one: JW's
Don't know enough about the JW's to say much. Do know they will allow
>On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:09:02 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 13:29:44 -0500, James <vojav...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 14:26:39 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Do Christians consider it a sin to question the teachings of the
>>>>church they were raised in?
>>>
>>>They should do so no matter what religion they are in. They should
>>>follow the example of the ancient Bereans: Ac 17:11,
>>>
>>>"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians,
>>>for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the
>>>Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (NIV)
>>>
>>>Yes, if you are taught a religious doctrine, you had better be able to
>>>find it in the Bible. Ancient oral traditions doesn't cut it. Why not?
>>>1 Cor 4:6,
>>>
>>>"I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit,
>>>brothers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is
>>>written,..." (NAB)
>>>
>>>James, John 17:17, www.jw.org
>>
>>Well I have found no religion that follows Jesus teaching completely.
>>
>
>I know of only one: JW's
kids to die if they need a transfusion. Also some of them fear a
statue of a dragon.
PATRICK
Feb 3, 2016, 5:55:07 PM2/3/16
to
PATRICK
Feb 3, 2016, 5:55:50 PM2/3/16
to
Then STFU.
MattB
Feb 3, 2016, 6:47:39 PM2/3/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 17:55:14 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
Nope just will continue telling people of the falsehood and Pagan
practices of the RCC. Better just get used to it.
Now you need a new line for the week. Make something up good and
Juicy.
practices of the RCC. Better just get used to it.
Now you need a new line for the week. Make something up good and
Juicy.
MattB
Feb 3, 2016, 6:48:14 PM2/3/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 17:55:55 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:
Shove it Patrick R Barker pedophile supporter.
wrote:
Shove it Patrick R Barker pedophile supporter.
James
Feb 3, 2016, 6:51:09 PM2/3/16
to
>
>MASS:
>Do this in memory of me - Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
>1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
Passover in the Bible so it is held once a year accordingly.
I answered each one of these once before. Just review the past
postings. I'll put some brief comments:
>
>SACRAMENTS:
>1. Baptism - John 3:5-6, Mat 28:19, Hebrew 2:14-15
>2. Holy Eucharist -Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
> 1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
>3. Confession - John 20:22-23, 2 Cor 5:18-19, Mat 9:2-8
>4. Matrimony - Mat 19:4-6, Mark 10:5-9, Ephesians 5:31
>5. Confirmation - Ephesians 1:13-14, Acts 8:14-17, Acts 19:5-6,
>6. Holy Orders - Acts 13:3 & 14:23, John 20:22, 1 & 2 Tim
first century phenomena. All those kinds of things were to go away. 1
Co 13:8,
"Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be
done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is
knowledge, it will be done away." (NASB)
>7. Anointing of the Sick - Mark 6:12-13, John 5:14
special powers went away when the apostles all died off. See 1 Cor
13:8
>
>PAPACY:
>Mat 16:13-19 (Pope), Mat 28:16-20 (Teaching), Eph 2:19-20 (Base)
>
>PURGATORY:
>1 Cor 3:10-15
>
>FAITH (without deeds is dead faith):
>Mat 25:31-46, James 2:26
>Feed the hungry.
>Clothe the naked.
>Give drink to the thirsty.
>Visit the imprisoned.
>
>Heal the sick.
Those special powers ended when the apostles all died. But they do
help out medically when appropriate.
>Cast out demons.
Yes
>
Do you know what those things were used for in the first century? They
were to prove that God no longer was supporting the Jewish system, but
was now supporting the Christian system. See Jer 31:31-33.
Also you refer to many Scriptures that have no bearing on the subject
at hand. Just because you list a Scripture at the end, doesn't mean
that Scripture supports it. Your Church is finagling.
James
Feb 3, 2016, 7:06:28 PM2/3/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:12:40 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
Based on the phrasing of your question, I know what your response will
be to my answer. So first I would like to preface my answer with a
question to you. When citizens support their country during wartime,
and bombs fall on innocent civilians, including children, do they
protest vehemently? Or do they not accept such situations as the
'fortunes of war'. If so, that would mean that they have PRINCIPLES
which permits the killing of children under cirtain circumstanes. It
doesn't mean they are happy with that occurrence, but they are willing
to let it happen for whatever their reasons.
\
There are similar strong principles which Jehovah's Witnesses have,
but they are not based on the words of politicians, but on our
Creator, Almighty God. Since JW's believe fully that the Bible is from
God (2 Ti 3:16), they obey all of its commands to Christians, which
includes the prohibition on taking in blood into the body. (Ac 15:29)
I would hope that I would have the strength to continually obey all
the Bible commands, including that of blood for myself and my children
(which are now grown up).
Just for the record, most all medical needs for a blood transfusion
are not as terminal as the one you listed. When loss of blood occurs,
there are now many blood substitutes that can be administered that
will prevent death to a patient.
Of course, all you usually hear concerning blood transfusions and the
JW's, are the WORST case situations. Rarely are there press releases
about the benefits from REFUSING a blood transfusion such as the
avoidance of AIDS, hepatitis, and many other diseases or complications
directly as a result of blood transfusions.
However, don't misunderstand me, the primary issue of avoidance of
blood for the Jehovah's Witnesses is a religious one, not a medical
one.
>Also some of them fear a
>statue of a dragon.
Never heard of that one. Yes, individuals fear many things. But it
doesn't have anything to do with the Bible or the JW organization.
I have a fear of high places. And I used to fear riding in elevators.
But not anymore.
be to my answer. So first I would like to preface my answer with a
question to you. When citizens support their country during wartime,
and bombs fall on innocent civilians, including children, do they
protest vehemently? Or do they not accept such situations as the
'fortunes of war'. If so, that would mean that they have PRINCIPLES
which permits the killing of children under cirtain circumstanes. It
doesn't mean they are happy with that occurrence, but they are willing
to let it happen for whatever their reasons.
\
There are similar strong principles which Jehovah's Witnesses have,
but they are not based on the words of politicians, but on our
Creator, Almighty God. Since JW's believe fully that the Bible is from
God (2 Ti 3:16), they obey all of its commands to Christians, which
includes the prohibition on taking in blood into the body. (Ac 15:29)
I would hope that I would have the strength to continually obey all
the Bible commands, including that of blood for myself and my children
(which are now grown up).
Just for the record, most all medical needs for a blood transfusion
are not as terminal as the one you listed. When loss of blood occurs,
there are now many blood substitutes that can be administered that
will prevent death to a patient.
Of course, all you usually hear concerning blood transfusions and the
JW's, are the WORST case situations. Rarely are there press releases
about the benefits from REFUSING a blood transfusion such as the
avoidance of AIDS, hepatitis, and many other diseases or complications
directly as a result of blood transfusions.
However, don't misunderstand me, the primary issue of avoidance of
blood for the Jehovah's Witnesses is a religious one, not a medical
one.
>Also some of them fear a
>statue of a dragon.
doesn't have anything to do with the Bible or the JW organization.
I have a fear of high places. And I used to fear riding in elevators.
But not anymore.
MattB
Feb 3, 2016, 8:29:38 PM2/3/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 19:06:26 -0500, James <vojav...@gmail.com>
Like I said don't know enough and this was from when I lived in
Florida back in the Vera days.
by it just liked them and no one else had them. They never stopped by
again. No don't think it had anything to do directly with the JW's
belief system. Except to the RCC a statue is just a statue. Don't
think any other church worships idols like them but could be wrong.
Florida back in the Vera days.
>
>
>
>>Also some of them fear a
>>statue of a dragon.
>
>Never heard of that one. Yes, individuals fear many things. But it
>doesn't have anything to do with the Bible or the JW organization.
>
>I have a fear of high places. And I used to fear riding in elevators.
>But not anymore.
No I put 2 dragon statues on my gate. Didn't mean anything religious
>
>
>>Also some of them fear a
>>statue of a dragon.
>
>Never heard of that one. Yes, individuals fear many things. But it
>doesn't have anything to do with the Bible or the JW organization.
>
>I have a fear of high places. And I used to fear riding in elevators.
>But not anymore.
by it just liked them and no one else had them. They never stopped by
again. No don't think it had anything to do directly with the JW's
belief system. Except to the RCC a statue is just a statue. Don't
think any other church worships idols like them but could be wrong.
PATRICK
Feb 3, 2016, 8:51:59 PM2/3/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 15:48:23 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
I'll work on that later.
I've got a life and stuff to do.
I've got a life and stuff to do.
PATRICK
Feb 3, 2016, 8:54:41 PM2/3/16
to
James <vojav...@gmail.com> wrote:
> MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>Based on the phrasing of your question, I know what your response will
>be to my answer. So first I would like to preface my answer with a
>question to you. When citizens support their country during wartime,
>and bombs fall on innocent civilians, including children, do they
>protest vehemently? Or do they not accept such situations as the
>'fortunes of war'. If so, that would mean that they have PRINCIPLES
>which permits the killing of children under cirtain circumstanes. It
>doesn't mean they are happy with that occurrence, but they are willing
>to let it happen for whatever their reasons.
Good question for matty.
He claims to have spent time in the US Navy.
Ask him how many people he helped to murder?
> MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>Based on the phrasing of your question, I know what your response will
>be to my answer. So first I would like to preface my answer with a
>question to you. When citizens support their country during wartime,
>and bombs fall on innocent civilians, including children, do they
>protest vehemently? Or do they not accept such situations as the
>'fortunes of war'. If so, that would mean that they have PRINCIPLES
>which permits the killing of children under cirtain circumstanes. It
>doesn't mean they are happy with that occurrence, but they are willing
>to let it happen for whatever their reasons.
He claims to have spent time in the US Navy.
Ask him how many people he helped to murder?
PATRICK
Feb 3, 2016, 8:56:41 PM2/3/16
to
MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Like I said don't know enough and this was from when I lived in
>Florida back in the Vera days.
What are "Vera days?
>Like I said don't know enough and this was from when I lived in
>Florida back in the Vera days.
duke
Feb 4, 2016, 7:14:18 AM2/4/16
to
>>MASS:
>>Do this in memory of me - Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
>>1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
>
>This is the celebration of the Lords Evening Meal. It was held on
>Passover in the Bible so it is held once a year accordingly.
>I answered each one of these once before. Just review the past
>postings. I'll put some brief comments:
>>SACRAMENTS:
>>1. Baptism - John 3:5-6, Mat 28:19, Hebrew 2:14-15
>JW's baptize full emersion as was done in the Bible.
>
>>2. Holy Eucharist -Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
>> 1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
>Yes. Done once per year at the Lord's Evening meal.
>>3. Confession - John 20:22-23, 2 Cor 5:18-19, Mat 9:2-8
>
>Only a church doctrine. All confessions are made to God through Jesus.
>
>>4. Matrimony - Mat 19:4-6, Mark 10:5-9, Ephesians 5:31
>
>Of course.
>
>>5. Confirmation - Ephesians 1:13-14, Acts 8:14-17, Acts 19:5-6,
>
>Not a Bible doctrine.
Then why the verse references?
>>4. Matrimony - Mat 19:4-6, Mark 10:5-9, Ephesians 5:31
>
>Of course.
>
>>5. Confirmation - Ephesians 1:13-14, Acts 8:14-17, Acts 19:5-6,
>
>Not a Bible doctrine.
>>6. Holy Orders - Acts 13:3 & 14:23, John 20:22, 1 & 2 Tim
>Not a Bible doctrine. Laying on of hands, a breathing on them, was a
>first century phenomena. All those kinds of things were to go away. 1
>Co 13:8,
>
>"Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be
>done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is
>knowledge, it will be done away." (NASB)
>>7. Anointing of the Sick - Mark 6:12-13, John 5:14
>
>Do most all get healed like they did in the first century? Such
>special powers went away when the apostles all died off. See 1 Cor
>13:8
Bible verses.
>"Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be
>done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is
>knowledge, it will be done away." (NASB)
>>7. Anointing of the Sick - Mark 6:12-13, John 5:14
>
>Do most all get healed like they did in the first century? Such
>special powers went away when the apostles all died off. See 1 Cor
>13:8
>>PAPACY:
>>Mat 16:13-19 (Pope), Mat 28:16-20 (Teaching), Eph 2:19-20 (Base)
>
>Church doctrine only. There are no literal successors of Jesus.
>>PURGATORY:
>>1 Cor 3:10-15
>
>The RCC admits that that is from tradition, and not from the Bible.
>>FAITH (without deeds is dead faith):
>>Mat 25:31-46, James 2:26
>
>Yes, JW's do that all the time.
>
>>Feed the hungry.
>>Clothe the naked.
>>Give drink to the thirsty.
>>Visit the imprisoned.
>
>Yes to all.
>>Heal the sick.
>
>Those special powers ended when the apostles all died. But they do
>help out medically when appropriate.
>
>>Cast out demons.
>
>Yes
>Do you know what those things were used for in the first century?
> They
>were to prove that God no longer was supporting the Jewish system, but
>was now supporting the Christian system. See Jer 31:31-33.
>Also you refer to many Scriptures that have no bearing on the subject
>at hand. Just because you list a Scripture at the end, doesn't mean
>that Scripture supports it. Your Church is finagling.
Come back to Christianity.
duke
Feb 4, 2016, 7:16:43 AM2/4/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 19:06:26 -0500, James <vojav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:12:40 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:12:40 -0800, MattB <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>Don't know enough about the JW's to say much. Do know they will allow
>>kids to die if they need a transfusion.
>
>Based on the phrasing of your question, I know what your response will
>be to my answer.
Ok, you do.
>>kids to die if they need a transfusion.
>
>Based on the phrasing of your question, I know what your response will
>be to my answer.
duke
Feb 4, 2016, 1:42:30 PM2/4/16
to
>Now you need a new line for the week. Make something up good and
>Juicy.
>
MattB
Feb 4, 2016, 3:29:58 PM2/4/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 20:52:06 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
OK. Need something good for your next lie.
MattB
Feb 4, 2016, 3:31:19 PM2/4/16
to
MattB
Feb 4, 2016, 3:32:18 PM2/4/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 20:56:48 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:
Ask Duke. Does show you haven't been around as long as you claim.
Another Patrick Barker lie?
wrote:
Another Patrick Barker lie?
MattB
Feb 4, 2016, 3:36:06 PM2/4/16
to
On Wed, 03 Feb 2016 20:54:49 -0500, PATRICK <pbark...@woh.rr.com>
wrote:
Why do you think US military murderers?
wrote:
MattB
Feb 4, 2016, 3:36:11 PM2/4/16
to
bunch of murderers?
PATRICK
Feb 4, 2016, 6:28:00 PM2/4/16
to
PATRICK
Feb 4, 2016, 6:36:36 PM2/4/16
to
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages