Re: Saints and sinners.

[duke]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:09:19 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/24/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:45:58 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> One thing for sure my name was not JUDAS, one of the original
>>> apostles, or is it Peter that Jesus told to get behind ME Satan.
>>> God is with me, and promised never to leave me, that is good enough.
>>
>> Right. You left him.
>>
>> Hebrews...
>
>...is spurious.

Canonized NT scripture.

The dukester, American - American

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

[duke]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:04:26 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/24/2013 3:49 PM, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:51:42 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/22/2013 8:27 AM, duke wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:28:59 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/21/2013 5:30 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:54:39 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 20, 11:30 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> And the insertion of "not made" WAS A MISTAKE.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not a chance. There was no sperm and no egg involved. That's makes it
>>>>>>>> incarnate, not made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who told you that? If there was no sperm or egg, then how can you
>>>>>>> call Mary the Mother of God.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also the bible shows Jesus was fully
>>>>>>> man, which with out such as the sperm and or egg, He could not be a
>>>>>>> man.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And here we have a supposed Christian pastor that doesn't even understand that
>>>>>> Jesus was incarnate - begotten not made.
>>>>
>>>>> That's religious bullshit invented in the 4th Century because the
>>>>> goofballs of the time were incapable of thinking in terms of
>>>>> three-dimensional paradoxes.
>>>>
>>>> Poor ike
>>
>>> Poor blind "religious" one.
>>
>> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
>
>No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."

And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.

[duke]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:03:35 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/24/2013 3:49 PM, duke wrote:

>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:50:52 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/22/2013 8:24 AM, duke wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:27:18 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/21/2013 5:19 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 03:28:50 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:15:36 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Father is not the Son is not the Holy Spirit is not the Father.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go back and read what Isaiah said, moron, 'cause he wrote that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FATHER AND THE SON ARE ONE AND THE SAME.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jesus was an unknown man until he started his 3 year ministry.
>>>>>>>>>>> Bullshit.
>>>>>>>>>> Just a carpenter man who caught some eyes 18 years before in a temple.
>>>>>>>>> Blasphemer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jesus was "known" by the prophets via their writings hundreds, and even
>>>>>>>>>>> thousands of years before He showed up.
>>>>>>>>>> Then why did Peter deny him 3 times if he knew he had God on his hands?
>>>>>>>>> Fear, moron, in SPIRIT OF THE FACT that Peter knew EXACTLY who and what
>>>>>>>>> Jesus is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He would never have denied him is he did.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He DID deny Him as he did, and He DID know PRECISELY WHO JESUS WAS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the
>>>>>>> Son of the living God.
>>>>>>> That shoots your idiotic argument all to hell.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you be any dumber?
>>>>
>>>> I could be at your knowledge level, so yes, I could be.
>>>
>>> I guess he is that dumb.
>>
>> Yes, we both are, aren't we.
>>
>>>> Christ = anointed one = messiah = warrior king to come to deliver the Jews back
>>>> to the prosperity they had before the Babylonian exile.
>>> Nope.
>>
>> Absolutely biblical.
>
>Cite it.
>
>>> There were many "messiahs" in the Old Testament, as a "messiah" was
>>> someone appointed and "anointed" by God to a accomplish particular task.
>>> All of these were prototypes, figuratively preceding THE Messiah, Jesus
>>> Christ.
>>
>> Nope. Warrior king.
>
>...asserted the fool, without proof.

Cry little baby ike. Your goose is cooked, carved and consumed on this one.

[duke]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:54:24 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/24/2013 3:42 PM, duke wrote:
>
>[snippeth]
>
>> Forgiving sins AGAINST GOD is the directive of Jesus.
>>
>
>Now there's a blatant lie.
>
>Mt 18:
>21 � Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother
>sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
>22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but,
>Until seventy times seven.

Yep, brother to brother.

John 20:21-23 (New International Version)
21 Again Jesus said, �Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am
sending you.� 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, �Receive the Holy
Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone�s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not
forgive them, they are not forgiven.�

Now that's trespasses against God. As Jessu handed them the Holy Spirit to do
their job of confessor.

Heeheehee.


>Ike

[Up from the Abyss]

"Ike" wrote:
> duke wrote:
> >
> > His divinity was not demonstrated.
>
> Bullshit. It was demonstrated in His miracles, His
> transfiguration, His prophecies, etc, etc.

You just defined Mosheh and Eliyah as well.


> In fact, Jesus said that He was IN HEAVEN
> at the same time He was here.

Cite?

[Up from the Abyss]

"duke" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> >"duke" wrote:
> >> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> >> >"duke" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> You're so lost, ike. I gather you don't understand that the
> >> >> Apostles, by definition, the 12 who learned from him, sat
> >> >> at the last supper with him and were sent forward to teach
> >> >> what he taught.
> >> >
> >> >So all 12 were sent forth?
<snip>
>
> Matthias was #13 who replaced Judas. Paul was #14 based on
> his meeting with the risen Lord on the road to Damascus.

Doesn't matter. That is not what you stated above.

[Up from the Abyss]

"Terry Cross" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> >

> > 10 Let them also *first be tested;* then let
> > them serve if they are blameless.
>
> Tested? By whom?

By those of the ekklesia, the brethren / peers.
Those who are "elders" in the faith.


> Paul has his opinions, but Jesus said otherwise:
>
> Matthew 23:8
> But be not ye called, Rabbi: for one is your doctor
> (i.e., teacher, master), to wit, Christ, and all ye are
> brethren.

Which, is why I never accepted such a title, nor such
a postition.


> Matthew 23:9
> And call no man your father upon the earth: for one
> is your Father, which is in heaven.
>
> John 10:16
> And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them
> also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there
> shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Indeed. For which, there is to be equality for all.


> We have but one Father and one Shepherd, and we shall
> call no man "rabbi."
>
> So what do the churches? The Catholics appoint men and
> require us to call them "Father."

The Catholics, have attempted to upsurp for themselves the
role of the levitical priesthood. But, in the way they set up
the structure, it has been *very* beneficial to them over the
years, in many ways.


> And the Protestants appoint men and require us to call
> them "Pastor," which means shepherd. And whether
> they are called pastor or rabbi or shepherd or teacher
> or father or reverend, they are all of them in violation of
> the commandments of Jesus who forbade there should
> be any such among us.

It is about service. Being willing to be of service to one
another. The Protestants have left some of the RCC
behind, but in large part, they still cling to teachings from
the RCC.

An "elder" in the faith, as an overseer / episcopal / bishop,
in that they ensure that those new to the faith are trained
up accordingly, is a necessary thing. But, they are to be
an example to the others.

[Up from the Abyss]

"Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> Terry Cross wrote:
> >
> > do not have the sense to recognize the danger my
> > ideas represent to them.

LOL. That ain't no lie.


> just because you do not like the American flag is your
> problem.

It is not a matter of liking or disliking the flag. Nor is it
a matter of patriotism. But, what business does the flag
of one nation, have in the house of He whose kingdom
is not from hence.


> > TCross
>
> What the 'T' for? Trash the Cross?

Dr. Knapp, I am an atheist, I have no problem harassing
Christians. Yet, I have left you alone. In the above, is
an example of something that should be beneath you.

Have Duke and Ike so effected you, that your character
has now been reduced to such a level?

1Ti 3:2 The *overseer* therefore must be **without reproach,**
... *good at teaching;* ... **gentle,**
***not quarrelsome,*** ... 7 Moreover he *must* have good
testimony from those who are outside ...

[Up from the Abyss]

"Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> >

> > I agree with Terry to some extent. I have been offered
> > many positions as Pastor. However, I have refused them,
> > as I would not allow myself to be bridled. To be told what
> > I could or could not preach. And, I have known many
> > Pastor's, of whom if some idiot in the congregation became
> > disgruntled and they were not towing the party line, they
> > have been put out.

<snip>

> If some gets disgruntled the Pastor has a meeting with them
> and with the church elders to cut that off before it gets started.
> I have told people to shape up or leave, the church is the
> House of God, and the Pastor is the selected leader, not a
> member or some one that does not want to be told what God
> wants. The party line would be what the Pastor wants and said.

In the above, I was referring to Pastors of certain denominations,
whom have strayed from denominational "doctrine". In some
cases, I applauded them, for standing and speaking the truth
despite the consequences.

However, the "denomination" has let them go from their position
for not maintaining the "party line", or "denominational doctrine".

<snip>

> > 1Ti 3:2 The overseer therefore must be without reproach,
> > the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, modest,
> > hospitable, good at teaching; 3 not a drinker, not violent,
> > not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not
> > covetous; ... 6 **not a new convert,** ... 7 Moreover he
> > must have good testimony from those who are outside, to
> > avoid falling into reproach and the snare of the devil.
> > 8 Servants, in the same way, must be reverent, not
> > double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy
> > for money; 9 holding the mystery of the faith in a pure
> > conscience. 10 Let them also *first be tested;* then let

> > them serve if they are blameless.
>

> If people would select its leaders by the bible rules like this,
> things would go better and the church could grow.

Indeed. The overseer leading by example.

[Rod]

On 4/25/2013 10:46 AM, Ike wrote:
> On 4/24/2013 1:00 PM, Rod wrote:
>> On 4/24/2013 11:48 AM, Ike wrote:
>>> On 4/24/2013 12:38 PM, Rod wrote:
>>>> On 4/24/2013 11:11 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>> On 4/23/2013 10:27 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/22/2013 12:10 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/21/2013 8:58 AM, Asku-inu-nachak wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 3:01 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:47 PM, Asku-inu-nachak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2013 3:28 AM, Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 17, 4:40 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/16/2013 7:30 AM, Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You must be happy your address is not known, I have some family
>>>>>>>>>>> members that would love to wipe the ground with you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Raymond...Ike just made a printed threat of extreme bodily
>>>>>>>>>> harm,
>>>>>>>>>> even death. Here it is below...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "The day someone shows up at my door looking for a fight
>>>>>>>>>> will be
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> last day of their miserable existence."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LOL
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You people are quite stupid, aren't you? As if warning someone of
>>>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>>>> right to self-defense is the same as trying to find someone's
>>>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>>> and threatening to come do him harm.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ike
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's amazing what a little deception will bring about.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You would know, ye who hides behind the false name.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ike
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It isn't a false name, it is the name my tribe gave me, you
>>>>>> wretched
>>>>>> cruel spirited fool..
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL
>>>>>
>>>>> The moron keeps coming in on the side of a con artist,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, we are well aware that you side with yourself. No big surprise
>>>> their..
>>>
>>> Yo.
>>>
>>> Moron.
>>>
>>> Have you ever checked out this guy's spurious credentials? Or his
>>> illegal business structures? Or his fake "sermons" delivered to no one?
>>
>> If you have proof then provide it.
>
> I already did--about 40 posts back and along the way.
>
> As to the rest, we'll see what the authorities of make of it.
>
>>> Of course not--you're a Babylonian whore who simply jumps in on
>>> whosoever's side is against THE TRUTH.
>>
>>
>> I've seen no evidence come from you...
>
> [snip the pointless yadi, yadi, yadi]
>
> I don't have to prove anything to you, moron.



And I don't have to take your word for anything.

[Rod]

On 4/25/2013 11:08 AM, Ike wrote:
> On 4/24/2013 5:39 PM, Rod wrote:
>> On 4/16/2013 4:00 PM, Ike wrote:
>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>>> On Apr 15, 9:55 pm, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/15/2013 11:38 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 15, 3:11 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 9:14 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> [snippeth]
>>>>>
>>
>> Question: Did Jesus EVER put a limit on sins or forgiveness?
>>
>> Answer: YES; in fact, HE SAID Until seventy times seven
>
> What a moron.
>
> "Seven" represents that which is complete.
>
> In other words, it means "always."
>
> Seventy amplifies it to "always and forever."
>
> Stop trying to play theologian, moron--you suck at it.
>
> Ike
>


As you told me in another post...you don't have to provide proof
that what you are saying has truth in it...well Eikenboob..neither am
I required to take your word at face value, and besides...w all know
that you have no proof and would have to manufacture it to provide it.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 25, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:05:32 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 4/24/2013 3:53 PM, duke wrote:
> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:05:27 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On 4/22/2013 4:18 PM, duke wrote:
>
> >>>> You guys left the Church founded by Jesus, turned away from many of his
> >>>> teachings, and now you're in deep trouble.
>
> >>> Here we have demonstrated the arrogance of the opinionated Catholic, as
> >>> the RCC was never the first, the one, or the only church.
>
> >> The ONLY Church...
>
> >Once again for the moron: The RCC was never the first, the one, or the only.
>
> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> offers those characteristics.

Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
washed and with bad water. The Catholic Church was part of a group of
Churches of which even John pointed out God spoke to SEVEN Churches
and none were named Roman no not one. There was believers in Rome as
in many areas of that known world in the days after Jesus rose from
the dead, Only no church was named or shown. So you Duke were told a
false story and believed it. Read it John the beloved oldest Apostle
wrote what God showed him as the last book of the New Testament. You
want call Him a liar, then you also have to call Jesus a liar as a lot
of that book says Jesus spoke and told the future.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 25, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:05:32 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 4/24/2013 3:53 PM, duke wrote:
> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:05:27 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On 4/22/2013 4:18 PM, duke wrote:
>
> >>>> You guys left the Church founded by Jesus, turned away from many of his
> >>>> teachings, and now you're in deep trouble.
>
> >>> Here we have demonstrated the arrogance of the opinionated Catholic, as
> >>> the RCC was never the first, the one, or the only church.
>
> >> The ONLY Church...
>
> >Once again for the moron: The RCC was never the first, the one, or the only.
>
> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> offers those characteristics.

What molesting children? Keeping Bishops from obeying the Bible by
telling them they can not marry, when the rules for a bishop is having
a wife and children. So what characteristics does that church do as
they sure were not found in the 4 Gospel or the New Testament, which
you seem not wanting to accept as Gods spoken word. Also JESSU is not
JESUS.


>

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 25, 12:14 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:09:19 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 4/24/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:

> >> On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:45:58 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> >> wrote:
>
> >>> One thing for sure my name was not JUDAS, one of the original
> >>> apostles, or is it Peter that Jesus told to get behind ME Satan.
> >>> God is with me, and promised never to leave me, that is good enough.
>
> >> Right.  You left him.
>
> >> Hebrews...
>
> >...is spurious.
>
> Canonized NT scripture.
>
> The dukester, American - American
>
> ********************************************
> Repeal Obama
> You simply can't fix stupid.
> ********************************************

So what is you point, did you canonized it, if your church did they
sure dismissed it as they do not follow what they canonized. I am
glad so many others that were not limited to what the RCC had at that
time. They have checked out the Hebrew, Greek, and other parts that
were not in those tongues to put together the New Testament that was
no limited to, only the approved doctrine of the rcc. Which were put
in to the NT canonized NT so it fit their word, no matter what the
truth said in the complete NT.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 25, 12:17 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:04:26 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 4/24/2013 3:49 PM, duke wrote:

> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:51:42 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On 4/22/2013 8:27 AM, duke wrote:

> >>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:28:59 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>> On 4/21/2013 5:30 PM, duke wrote:

> >>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:54:39 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> >>>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On Apr 20, 11:30 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> And the insertion of "not made" WAS A MISTAKE.
>
> >>>>>>>> Not a chance.  There was no sperm and no egg involved.  That's makes it
> >>>>>>>> incarnate, not made.
>
> >>>>>>> Who told you that?  If there was no sperm or egg, then how can you
> >>>>>>> call Mary the Mother of God.
>
> >>>>>>>     Also the bible shows Jesus was fully
> >>>>>>> man, which with out such as the sperm and or egg, He could not be a
> >>>>>>> man.
>
> >>>>>> And here we have a supposed Christian pastor that doesn't even understand that
> >>>>>> Jesus was incarnate - begotten not made.
>
> >>>>> That's religious bullshit invented in the 4th Century because the
> >>>>> goofballs of the time were incapable of thinking in terms of
> >>>>> three-dimensional paradoxes.
>
> >>>> Poor ike
>
> >>> Poor blind "religious" one.
>
> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
>
> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
>
> And Jesus gave characteristics.  We have them, you don't.

Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
man and woman. Some may try to do good, but the church does no follow
the characteristics that Jesus gave. SIN by the Priest and Bishops if
not others is not what God wants or will overlook as the wages of sin
is death.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 25, 11:45 pm, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
> "Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> > Terry Cross wrote:
>
> > > do not have the sense to recognize the danger my
> > > ideas represent to them.
>
> LOL.  That ain't no lie.
>
> > just because you do not like the American flag is your
> > problem.
>
> It is not a matter of liking or disliking the flag.  Nor is it
> a matter of patriotism.  But, what business does the flag
> of one nation, have in the house of He whose kingdom
> is not from hence.

The writers of the Bible had no problem with saying names of other
nations. The business of the House of God to have a flag is that it
is telling the membership that the USA accepts the church and the
Church is accepted as a place of worship in that nation.

What is your problem you do not want anyone to tell you what to do and
disobedience is your thing. The bible say to have elders, teachers,
Pastors and you say ha, no one be it the Bible or God is going to tell
me to call a minister, or elder a PASTOR etc. Your so self center and
embellish nothing is going to make you happy. As if that is important
to anyone but you, no fellowship with the members as that would
beneneth you. So sorry you just want to portray what you thing makes
you right as Hell is and you remarks could put into it.

>
> > > TCross
>
> > What the 'T' for?  Trash the Cross?
>
> Dr. Knapp, I am an atheist, I have no problem harassing
> Christians.  Yet, I have left you alone.  In the above, is
> an example of something that should be beneath you.

Oh go away, you no more a atheist then I am the Pope. Your are not a
decent person, because you do such, has nothing to do with being a
atheist. I have problems with doing that kind of action against
anyone one. The Atheist I have known and some are important in this
world would never degrade themselves to be so low and unkind. I know
many companies would fire you in a moment for such actions no matter
what excuse you try to use.

One thing for sure, you are not giving atheism a good name or
yourself.

> Have Duke and Ike so effected you, that your character
> has now been reduced to such a level?

I have no idea what you think you see here or how not mocking or
insulting people by foul terms and such could reduce my character in
the way you are implying here.

>
> 1Ti 3:2 The *overseer* therefore must be **without reproach,**
> ... *good at teaching;* ... **gentle,**
> ***not quarrelsome,*** ...  7 Moreover he *must* have good
> testimony from those who are outside ...

How do you read that verse in your thinking and your views one has to
be without reproach that is impossible as such a atheist view the
Bible says is the view of a fool. I wonder if you think gentle is
what? If someone is beating up a woman or weak person am I just to
say, Do not do that, it is wrong? I will be as gentle as I can not to
Kill the person or beat him so hard he would be in the hospital. I
sure the woman would see me as the good guy that was so gentle to her,
that I could of saved her life. Each of those terms come from the
rule books of two groups of people the Believe will do his best to
help while that Atheist may just turn there back and say a few choice
foul words and careless. Which one would be you?

I have a very good testimony from those outside and can be depended on
to help them no matter their faith is or lack there of. I was a
fighter at one time, and in the Military etc. I know how to be cool
and nice and how to made a bad person become gentle real fast. I can
be trusted as one that will do his best to help anyone in need. Even
you, if the time arose and you need help.

One reason is because I was like you once and someone was gentle to
me, and I followed them to church where the Holy Spirit did meet me,
and that feeling was something you can only know if you meet God one
on one. Then I sure like I was, you laugh that off and dismiss all
of this, only till you try it and find God, nothing I say may matter.
Then giving ones life to God and then finding God answering my
prayers, proves there is a God and I feel so sorry for them that think
because they say there is no GOD that would mean it is true. Then
gods there are millions of them, one just has to seek till they find,
God on the other hand, is trying to help you, even here, what you mock
and say, just reminds me there is still hope for you.


Pastor R Knapp
www.pioneers-for-jesus.org

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 25, 11:45 pm, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:

>o

> Indeed.  The overseer leading by example.

Thanks for the words here, then following Christ in all things, did
bring trouble and problems to that person as well as blessings.

I have a hard time finding churches that want an overseer or anyone to
tell them NO that is not acceptable. It is a shame many just give up
and leave, later the church is in forecloser or just shut their
doors. I know that where I been as the overseer the churches are
growing I am loved be the membership. I am now in China and with some
of the churches I have helped the leaders grow, and it is a great joy
to see them being faithful to their local church and the body of
Christ international.

[duke]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 25, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:05:32 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On 4/24/2013 3:53 PM, duke wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:05:27 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> On 4/22/2013 4:18 PM, duke wrote:
>>
>> >>>> You guys left the Church founded by Jesus, turned away from many of his
>> >>>> teachings, and now you're in deep trouble.
>>
>> >>> Here we have demonstrated the arrogance of the opinionated Catholic, as
>> >>> the RCC was never the first, the one, or the only church.
>>
>> >> The ONLY Church...
>>
>> >Once again for the moron: The RCC was never the first, the one, or the only.
>>
>> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> offers those characteristics.
>
>Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
>washed and with bad water.

You should try Christianity.

> The Catholic Church was part of a group of
>Churches of which even John pointed out God spoke to SEVEN Churches
>and none were named Roman no not one.

But all 7 were built on the plans given by Jesus, and the travels in the Acts
was an effort to correct the backsliding is each one.

> There was believers in Rome as
>in many areas of that known world in the days after Jesus rose from
>the dead,

Of course. Peter eventually made it to Rome and established the future Vatican
in the middle of Rome.

>Only no church was named or shown.

See, you don't know any history, and only a small understanding of scripture.

[duke]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:20:20 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 25, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:05:32 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On 4/24/2013 3:53 PM, duke wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:05:27 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> On 4/22/2013 4:18 PM, duke wrote:
>>
>> >>>> You guys left the Church founded by Jesus, turned away from many of his
>> >>>> teachings, and now you're in deep trouble.
>>
>> >>> Here we have demonstrated the arrogance of the opinionated Catholic, as
>> >>> the RCC was never the first, the one, or the only church.
>>
>> >> The ONLY Church...
>>
>> >Once again for the moron: The RCC was never the first, the one, or the only.
>>
>> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> offers those characteristics.

>What molesting children?

Have you been caught?

[duke]

Of course it is. Why, I would have thought you could substantiate that claim,
but I guess not.

[duke]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>

>> >> Hebrews...
>> >...is spurious.
>> Canonized NT scripture.

>So what is you point, did you canonized it, if your church did they
>sure dismissed it as they do not follow what they canonized.

Canonized scripture is selected because it is fully in accordance with the
teachings of Jesus Christ.

[duke]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
>> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
>> And Jesus gave characteristics. �We have them, you don't.

>Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
>man and woman.

Yes, there are a few. But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.
Hence that means that the Church is a group of sinners.

Welcome to your history, rk.

[duke]

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:11:14 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> The bible say to have elders, teachers,
>Pastors and you say ha, no one be it the Bible or God is going to tell
>me to call a minister, or elder a PASTOR etc.

I was pretty sure you are no Pastor_urer to your flock. Jesus told Peter to
tend his flock. Thank God I'm a Roman Catholic.

>> Dr. Knapp, I am an atheist, I have no problem harassing
>> Christians.  Yet, I have left you alone.  In the above, is
>> an example of something that should be beneath you.

>Oh go away, you no more a atheist then I am the Pope.

You tell him, rk.

>Your are not a
>decent person, because you do such, has nothing to do with being a
>atheist. I have problems with doing that kind of action against
>anyone one. The Atheist I have known and some are important in this
>world would never degrade themselves to be so low and unkind. I know
>many companies would fire you in a moment for such actions no matter
>what excuse you try to use.

>One thing for sure, you are not giving atheism a good name or
>yourself.

Now rk is one disturbed pasturer. What's worst is that he doesn't know what the
bible says so that makes him a bad elder to boot.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 26, 10:47 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:

> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> >> offers those characteristics.
>
> >Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
> >washed and with bad water.
>
> You should try Christianity.

If I was not a Christian already, I sure would not be one if being one
would be like you. Then you are not a Christian your a Catholic.

> > The Catholic Church was part of a group of
> >Churches of which even John pointed out God spoke to SEVEN Churches
> >and none were named Roman no not one.
>
> But all 7 were built on the plans given by Jesus, and the travels in the Acts
> was an effort to correct the backsliding is each one.

Oh go hide yourself, you proven wrong and your statement about the
Roman Catholic church was not what you said it was. History and
records proved that and you have the nerve to play this silly lying
game here. All of them is not you ONE of them, foolish one. The
information found in the book of ACTS was history and had nothing to
do with your backsliding lying ungodly statements.

> > There was believers in Rome as
> >in many areas of that known world in the days after Jesus rose from
> >the dead,
>
> Of course.  Peter eventually made it to Rome and established the future Vatican
> in the middle of Rome.

Oh you really are a fake, Peter was not a pope was not a member of the
Catholic Church and the history that church says is true has been
always been in question. There is nothing to prove Peter died in
Rome. The step brother of Jesus, James was heading the church and
that is even in the Bible. He also told Peter to sit down and shut
up, also found in the bible. Nothing made Peter a leader of the RCC
that later was formed.

> See, you don't know any history, and only a small understanding of scripture.

Now that is a joke, you silly man, History was part of study to earn
the degree in Theology, and you sure have no education in history and
it is clear you been brainwashed into accepting the teachings of the
RCC that was made for people to yield to it and not ask questions, and
if they did, they would be told that they were hypocrites and called
reprobates, and such. It is all made up to make people not question
the teachings of the rcc and not to ask questions. They even made a
law that one could not read the Bible and only a priest could and so
on, till the Protestants church, members numbered in the millions and
made the Bible so all could read it. That is history and that is
fact.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 26, 10:48 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:20:20 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 25, 12:13 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:05:32 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On 4/24/2013 3:53 PM, duke wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:05:27 -0400, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >>> On 4/22/2013 4:18 PM, duke wrote:
>
> >> >>>> You guys left the Church founded by Jesus, turned away from many of his
> >> >>>> teachings, and now you're in deep trouble.
>
> >> >>> Here we have demonstrated the arrogance of the opinionated Catholic, as
> >> >>> the RCC was never the first, the one, or the only church.
>
> >> >> The ONLY Church...
>
> >> >Once again for the moron: The RCC was never the first, the one, or the only.
>
> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> >> offers those characteristics.
> >What molesting children?
>
> Have you been caught?

NO, YOUR CHURCH WAS! R.C.CHURCH HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PAYING
EX-CATHOLICS FOR ALL THE SINS OF THE PRIEST.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 26, 10:50 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

>
> >> >> Hebrews...
> >> >...is spurious.
> >> Canonized NT scripture.
> >So what is you point, did you canonized it, if your church did they
> >sure dismissed it as they do not follow what they canonized.
>
> Canonized scripture is selected because it is fully in accordance with the
> teachings of Jesus Christ.

That is a LIE of the ones that did the canonizing, so it would fit the
teachings of the Papacy, no matter what Jesus did say. One church one
group of that church did for their church. To make it look like it
was authorized by God in Jesus. When all it is, is just a false
teaching made to look like the real word of God, but it is not. One
of the reasons that the Protestant churches today have as many members
as the Roman Catholic church has today. Today 1600 year later which
means if the RCC would of been correct I has lost over fifty percent
of members that could of been in it. And the non-roman Catholics out
number all the RCC that could of been.

It is clear you never look at the arguments that show the false
teaching that the RCC added to the teachings of Jesus, it is all
documented, and your pope forbids you to read them or look at them, or
you be cast out and if you died could not get into heaven. It their
way or no way, God has no right to question the teachings of the RCC
then with all the money and gold and such the poor stay poor and the
church, makes more gold images which the Bible says are just Idols.
They have eyes but can not see, hands but can not touch, feet but can
not walk, mouth but can not speak and so one. Names like Mary, Peter
and such calling idols by the name of saints, a sin that can not be
overlooked.
Ps 115:4-8
4 Their idols are silver and gold, The work of men's hands.
5 They have mouths, but they do not speak; Eyes they have, but they do
not see;
6 They have ears, but they do not hear; Noses they have, but they do
not smell;
7 They have hands, but they do not handle; Feet they have, but they do
not walk; Nor do they mutter through their throat.
8 Those who make them are like them; So is everyone who trusts in
them. NKJV

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 26, 10:51 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
> >> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
> >> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.
> >Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
> >man and woman.
>
> Yes, there are a few.  But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.

A FEW? HUNDREDS AND THE COURT CASES PROVE THAT, You are with them to
try to hide such a large number and call it a few. I would never be a
Catholic if you are the one that is suppose to represent them. I
wonder if your brother or sister was one of them FEW you pointed to
here. if you would say the same then.

The wages of sin is death. Jesus did not sin but them that claim to
be followers of sin by the hundreds have and the police and the money
paid by the RCC shows that is fact, Sinner of the worse kind,

> Hence that means that the Church is a group of sinners.

Yeah your church, and you being in it is. Pray to the dead and are
dead.

> Welcome to your history, rk.

Which shows you are condemned and know it and do not care, what a poor
soul you are.

NOT MY history foolish one, I just did my homework and studied church
history, not only one side of it as you do.

Pastor R Knapp

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 26, 1:42 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:11:14 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >  The bible say to have elders, teachers,
> >Pastors and you say ha, no one be it the Bible or God is going to tell
> >me to call a minister, or elder a PASTOR etc.
>
> I was pretty sure you are no Pastor_urer to your flock.  Jesus told Peter to
> tend his flock.  Thank God I'm a Roman Catholic.

Your lying to yourself and believing your own lies here duke. You are
not in the flock of Peter, you did not even get baptized as Peter said
one had to be baptized. Acts 2:38 You did not take the NAME OF the
Lord Jesus Christ. As Matt 28:19 pointed to the NAME. JESUS is that
name. I did follow what Peter and Jesus said to do, You did not. I
thank God I belong to JESUS and am a Bible believing Christian, in the
Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, world wide.

>
> >> Dr. Knapp, I am an atheist, I have no problem harassing
> >> Christians.  Yet, I have left you alone.  In the above, is
> >> an example of something that should be beneath you.
> >Oh go away, you no more a atheist then I am the Pope.
>
> You tell him, rk.
>
> >Your are not a
> >decent person, because you do such, has nothing to do with being a
> >atheist.  I have problems with doing that kind of action against
> >anyone one.   The Atheist I have known and some are important in this
> >world would never degrade themselves to be so low and unkind.  I know
> >many companies would fire you in a moment for such actions no matter
> >what excuse you try to use.
> >One thing for sure, you are not giving atheism a good name or
> >yourself.
>
> Now rk is one disturbed pasturer.  What's worst is that he doesn't know what the
> bible says so that makes him a bad elder to boot.

Duke is more like a acting atheist as what he believes really is not
promoting God but a church made by man for itself, then an atheist
does not try to hide that.

I would be a really bad atheist elder to boot, if I ever was a
catholic. I think Duke is just jealous that God is on my side and all
he has is the papacy.

[duke]

On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:15:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 26, 10:47 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> >> offers those characteristics.
>>
>> >Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
>> >washed and with bad water.

>> You should try Christianity.
>If I was not a Christian already, I sure would not be one if being one
>would be like you. Then you are not a Christian your a Catholic.

Jesus gave the world the Christian "Catholic Church".

>> > The Catholic Church was part of a group of
>> >Churches of which even John pointed out God spoke to SEVEN Churches
>> >and none were named Roman no not one.

>> But all 7 were built on the plans given by Jesus, and the travels in the Acts
>> was an effort to correct the backsliding is each one.

>Oh go hide yourself, you proven wrong and your statement about the
>Roman Catholic church was not what you said it was.

That's fact.

>> > There was believers in Rome as
>> >in many areas of that known world in the days after Jesus rose from
>> >the dead,

NOt for a while.

>> Of course.  Peter eventually made it to Rome and established the future Vatican
>> in the middle of Rome.

>Oh you really are a fake, Peter was not a pope

He was given the commission by none other than Jesus himself. Mat 16:13-19,

[duke]

On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:19:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> >> offers those characteristics.

>> >What molesting children?
>> Have you been caught?

>NO, YOUR CHURCH WAS! R.C.CHURCH HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PAYING
>EX-CATHOLICS FOR ALL THE SINS OF THE PRIEST.

You are of mankind. YOU are a sinner.

[duke]

On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:49:51 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 26, 10:50�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>>
>> >> >> Hebrews...
>> >> >...is spurious.
>> >> Canonized NT scripture.
>> >So what is you point, did you canonized it, if your church did they
>> >sure dismissed it as they do not follow what they canonized.
>>
>> Canonized scripture is selected because it is fully in accordance with the
>> teachings of Jesus Christ.
>
>That is a LIE of the ones that did the canonizing

Your buddies weren't around for 1600 years.

[duke]

On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:57:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 26, 10:51 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
>> >> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
>> >> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.
>> >Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
>> >man and woman.
>>
>> Yes, there are a few.  But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.

>A FEW? HUNDREDS AND THE COURT CASES PROVE THAT,

6% of the US priesthood accused, many not guilty.

>The wages of sin is death. Jesus did not sin but them that claim to
>be followers of sin by the hundreds have and the police and the money
>paid by the RCC shows that is fact, Sinner of the worse kind,

Exactly. He gave us the sacrament of reconciliation (John 20:22-23) to bring us
back to God. How long as it been since you last went to confession, sinner?
Ever since then, you are typically possessing a soul with sin dripping from it.

[duke]

On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 05:09:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>> I was pretty sure you are no Pastor_urer to your flock.  Jesus told Peter to
>> tend his flock.  Thank God I'm a Roman Catholic.

>Your lying to yourself and believing your own lies here duke.

You just got thru announcing that you would NEVER call yourself a pastor_urer.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:15:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 26, 10:47 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> >> >> offers those characteristics.
>
> >> >Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
> >> >washed and with bad water.
> >> You should try Christianity.
> >If I was not a Christian already, I sure would not be one if being one
> >would be like you.  Then you are not a Christian your a Catholic.


> Jesus gave the world the Christian "Catholic Church".

Well if that be the way you want it, God gave the world the Christian
"Protestant churches: to lead people back to the true church.

>
> >> > The Catholic Church was part of a group of
> >> >Churches of which even John pointed out God spoke to SEVEN Churches
> >> >and none were named Roman no not one.
> >> But all 7 were built on the plans given by Jesus, and the travels in the Acts
> >> was an effort to correct the backsliding is each one.
> >Oh go hide yourself, you proven wrong and your statement about the
> >Roman Catholic church was not what you said it was.
>
> That's fact.
>
> >> > There was believers in Rome as
> >> >in many areas of that known world in the days after Jesus rose from
> >> >the dead,
>
> NOt for a while.
>
> >> Of course.  Peter eventually made it to Rome and established the future Vatican
> >> in the middle of Rome.
> >Oh you really are a fake, Peter was not a pope
>
> He was given the commission by none other than Jesus himself.  Mat 16:13-19,

He was not given any such thing. what you got maybe the Jesuit
priesthood told you that as the New Pope is one of them also.
The catholic church has so many groups it sounds like a group of
independent churches getting together for a meeting.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:15:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
> wrote:
>
> Jesus gave the world the Christian "Catholic Church".

Not according to the WORD of GOD, the Holy Bible He sure did not as
there never was one to start with in the Days Jesus was on this
earth. Stop Lying Duke that could get you a one way fare to Hell, if
you do not have one already.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 27, 12:25 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:49:51 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 26, 10:50 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>
> >> >> >> Hebrews...
> >> >> >...is spurious.
> >> >> Canonized NT scripture.
> >> >So what is you point, did you canonized it, if your church did they
> >> >sure dismissed it as they do not follow what they canonized.
>
> >> Canonized scripture is selected because it is fully in accordance with the
> >> teachings of Jesus Christ.
>
> >That is a LIE of the ones that did the canonizing
>
> Your buddies weren't around for 1600 years.

They been around since the birth of Jesus if not before.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 27, 12:58 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:57:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 26, 10:51 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
> >> >> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
> >> >> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.
> >> >Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
> >> >man and woman.
>
> >> Yes, there are a few.  But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.
> >A FEW?  HUNDREDS AND THE COURT CASES PROVE THAT,
>
> 6% of the US priesthood accused, many not guilty.

How many thousands of priest are there world wide, not only in the
USA. 6% would number into many hundreds and you think that is ok only
a few? Tell that to all the fathers and mothers that that 6 percent
raped and molested in the Church buildings and church schools, tell
them how little the number is, and you may be lucky to get away with
only a broken noise or a good kick .

>
> >The wages of sin is death.  Jesus did not sin but them that claim to
> >be followers of sin by the hundreds have and the police and the money
> >paid by the RCC shows that is fact,  Sinner of the worse kind,
>
> Exactly.  He gave us the sacrament of reconciliation (John 20:22-23) to bring us

I tell you one thing if my daughter was molested by you catholic
priest it would take more then some sacrament of reconciliation1 I
have him in jail and the church that let him do such would need to be
in reconciliation with their Bank book, as they would pay more then
they would ever like.

You hide behind a sacrament when a child been molested, I would think
the whole church should be outlawed and the members that did such
punished with life in jail or the death sentence for hurting that
child. Another reason for not being a Roman Catholic, they think they
can do anything they want and God can not stop them. They even think
God is so weak that God has to take that sacrament of reconciliation
that never was a bible sacrament. Lock the whole group up and tross
the keys away in the center of the ocean.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:15:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> >> >> offers those characteristics.
>
> >> >Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
> >> >washed and with bad water.
> >> You should try Christianity.
> >If I was not a Christian already, I sure would not be one if being one
> >would be like you.  Then you are not a Christian your a Catholic.
>
> Jesus gave the world the Christian "Catholic Church".

NO HE DID NOT!! MORE LIES OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, NEVER HAPPEN
NEVER WAS SUCH A CHURCH IN JESUS LIFE ON EARTH.

Jesus gave the world a chance to be born again believers by His Cross
and His blood, had nothing at all to do with your RCC. NOTHING. you
can lie about it all you like, it just is that ANOTHER LIE!

> He was given the commission by none other than Jesus himself.  Mat 16:13-19,

Which had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ANY WAY.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:19:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> >> >> offers those characteristics.
> >> >What molesting children?
> >> Have you been caught?
> >NO, YOUR CHURCH WAS!  R.C.CHURCH HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PAYING
> >EX-CATHOLICS FOR ALL THE SINS OF THE PRIEST.
>
> You are of mankind.  YOU are a sinner.

You are just sick, I did not sin like your Catholic Priest did and was
hidden from the members of the RCC that their children was being used
in such sinful ways.

You follow the man made sickness of that priesthood and such, and you
claim that is Gods church. If it was once it sure is not now. Just
for the record "Jessu" is not Jesus as you pointed out your Jessu
started your church, could be, then such a name means you do not
follow JESUS.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 27, 12:59 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 05:09:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
> >> I was pretty sure you are no Pastor_urer to your flock.  Jesus told Peter to
> >> tend his flock.  Thank God I'm a Roman Catholic.

> >Your lying to yourself and believing your own lies here duke.
>
> You just got thru announcing that you would NEVER call yourself a pastor_urer.

You lie and then point to that lie and say I called myself such, there
is no such person as your "a pastor_urer" no such word and no such
person. Lie and prove it again if you wish you are getting close to
lke now.

Looks like you having problems with your mind duke, better get a check
up soon, that is mentally.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 25, 11:09 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:45:58 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >> One thing for sure my name was not JUDAS, one of the original
> >> apostles, or is it Peter that Jesus told to get behind ME Satan.
> >> God is with me, and promised never to leave me, that is good enough.
>
> > Right.  You left him.

That would be impossible as God does not lie, and once He said "I am
with you always" there is no way to leave Him, and I and God get along
fine. I love God and God loves me and that is fine with both of us.
Then it seems you went to church but did not let God into your life,
so God has no promise for you, except the wages of Sin is death, you
rejected the Gift and promises of God, so you are as you are, a
miserable old man, younger then I am, then I am glad I and God are on
the same path.

> ...is spurious.
NOPE you are the only one with the false statements here.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 24, 11:40 pm, Terry Cross <tcros...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 24, 5:17 pm, "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 24, 5:59 am, "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com> wrote:
> > > > > Tested?  By whom?  Paul has his opinions, but Jesus said otherwise:
>
> > NO Paul write to follow Jesus and His teachings, silly one.
>
> > > > > So what do the churches?  The Catholics appoint men and require us to
> > > > > call them "Father."  And the Protestants appoint men and require us to
> > > > > call them "Pastor," which means shepherd.  And whether they are called
> > > > > pastor or rabbi or shepherd or teacher or father or reverend, they are
> > > > > all of them in violation of the commandments of Jesus who forbade
> > > > > there should be any such among us.
>
> > Half of what you said was true then you lie and make the rest you own
> > lie, not smart at all. A title is used to show the order of
> > leadership, no matter what name is used.  Only in you mind did Jesus
> > forbade such and your story is myth and since lying is sin you crossed
> > that line.  The Bible uses titles such as Teacher, Pastor etc. and the
> > Rabbi is only a title of a Jewish leader, no violation at all, even
> > Jesus was called by the title Rabbi, is He also in violation of some
> > code you made up in your mind?
>
> Do you have so much trouble reading as that?
>
> Matthew 23:8
> But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and
> all ye are brethren.
>
> Those who permit themselves to be called by these titles are in
> violation of Jesus' words.  Those who call their Christian brother,
> "Father" are also in violation.

No my problem, no one ever called me "Rabbi" as everyone that knows,
understand I am not Jewish, Jesus was so he was called Rabbi. Then it
seems if you read this the way it is written, you would not be calling
oneself Rabbi, but others are. How can I be blamed for what others
call me. Then I would presume if that person was a Jewish Rabbi,
calling him such is not a problem and this verse would no apply.

> If you cannot understand that, you are a servant of the crowd's
> opinions, but not a servant of Jesus.

What is strange here is it is you that is showing you do not
understand that. Then if one is a servant of Jesus one would be seen
as a servant of the Lord to the Crowd and a light unto their path to
Christ Jesus. As Jesus said to preach the Gospel to all the world,
crowds are what Jesus did good at, he fed thousand of them in one
meeting along. I am sure the crowd was happy to eat what gave them to
eat. Jesus was their servant in that case.

[Up from the Abyss]

"Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:

> > "Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> >>
> >> If people would select its leaders by the bible rules like
> >> this, things would go better and the church could grow.
> >
> > Indeed. The overseer leading by example.
>
> Thanks for the words here, then following Christ in all things,
> did bring trouble and problems to that person as well as
> blessings.
>
> I have a hard time finding churches that want an overseer or
> anyone to tell them NO that is not acceptable.

2 Tim 4:3.


> It is a shame many just give up and leave, later the church is
> in forecloser or just shut their doors.

When I was a "believer", such used to sadden me.

<snip>

[Up from the Abyss]

"Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> > "Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> >>

> >> just because you do not like the American flag is your
> >> problem.
> >
> > It is not a matter of liking or disliking the flag. Nor is it
> > a matter of patriotism. But, what business does the flag
> > of one nation, have in the house of He whose kingdom
> > is not from hence.
>
> The writers of the Bible had no problem with saying names
> of other nations. The business of the House of God to have
> a flag is that it is telling the membership that the USA accepts
> the church and the Church is accepted as a place of worship
> in that nation.

I have no problem saying the names of other nations. But, I
wouldn't fly the flag of any of those nations within the "House
of God".


> What is your problem you do not want anyone to tell you what
> to do and disobedience is your thing.

LMAO! There was a time ...

> The bible say to have elders, teachers, Pastors and you say ha,

Show me "Pastors". Yes, there are elders, to feed the flock,
but there is only one shepherd [cf 1 Peter 5:2-4].

> no one be it the Bible or God is going to tell me to call a minister,

> or elder a PASTOR etc. Your so self center and embellish
> nothing is going to make you happy.

LMAO! I am actually very happy. I was accused of being too
happy just yesterday.


> As if that is important to anyone but you, no fellowship with
> the members as that would beneneth you.

LMAO! I delivered a sermon some 12 or so years ago.
Afterward, the people commented about how spirit
filled and all that.

Til at the luncheon, when I admitted that I did not accept
the trinity. Then I was suddenly damned, and could not
possibly be saved.

So I asked: "Just an hour ago, you were all commenting
about how wonderful and spirit filled I was, yet now I am
damned, can you explain that? No one dared answer.

<snip>

> >> What the 'T' for? Trash the Cross?

> >
> > Dr. Knapp, I am an atheist, I have no problem harassing
> > Christians. Yet, I have left you alone. In the above, is
> > an example of something that should be beneath you.
>
> Oh go away, you no more a atheist then I am the Pope.

So, you are condoning the above as the proper standard
and manner for those of the "House of God" to act. Yet,
in another post, you commented with regard to people
not wanting to be told what was appropriate. Perhaps they
are merely following the example that you set above.

> Your are not a decent person, because you do such,
> has nothing to do with being a atheist.

No, I am not a decent person. Just another lowly
atheist nudnik.

> I have problems with doing that kind of action against
> anyone one.

Yet, how did you respond to Terry in the above?
Do you only have problems with others acting in
that manner while you currently excuse yourself?

> The Atheist I have known and some are important in this
> world would never degrade themselves to be so low and
> unkind.

Like I have seen some of your replies to Ike and Duke, and
the above with regard to Terry.

> I know many companies would fire you in a moment for
> such actions no matter what excuse you try to use.

Yet, I rose to the position of COO.

> One thing for sure, you are not giving atheism a good name
> or yourself.

I could say that same of you with regard to "Christainity"
in light of some of your more recent responses.


> > Have Duke and Ike so effected you, that your character
> > has now been reduced to such a level?
>
> I have no idea what you think you see here or how not
> mocking or insulting people by foul terms and such could
> reduce my character in the way you are implying here.

What's the "R" for, Ravage the Cross?

Do you do that before or after you "Trash the Cross"?

In my former reply, did I mock or insult you?


> > 1Ti 3:2 The *overseer* therefore must be
> > **without reproach,** ... *good at teaching;*
> > ... **gentle,** ... ***not quarrelsome,*** ...
> > 7 Moreover he *must* have good testimony
> > from those who are outside ...
>
> How do you read that verse in your thinking and your views
> one has to be without reproach that is impossible as such a
> atheist view the Bible says is the view of a fool.

Hey, it's your choice if you desire to "Trash the Cross".


> I wonder if you think gentle is what?

It was my former reply to you.


> If someone is beating up a woman or weak person am I
> just to say, Do not do that, it is wrong?

No, it's much better to ask what the 'T' is for and
insinuate that it's for "Trash the Cross".

But hey, if that's the way you wish to represent "Christianity",
by all means, go ahead. I shall simply consider you as on par
with Ike and Duke.


> I will be as gentle as I can not to Kill the person or beat him
> so hard he would be in the hospital. I sure the woman would
> see me as the good guy that was so gentle to her, that I could
> of saved her life.

Yeah, much better to say to the woman, "Trash the Cross".


> Each of those terms come from the rule books of two groups
> of people the Believe will do his best to help while that Atheist
> may just turn there back and say a few choice foul words and
> careless. Which one would be you?

The one that jumped over the counter to confront and step in
between the man assaulting a woman. The one who has had
to wait around numerous times for the authorities to arrive, for
stepping into the middle of such things.


> I have a very good testimony from those outside and can be
> depended on to help them no matter their faith is or lack there
> of.

So, you help them by "Trash[ing] the Cross"?


> I was a fighter at one time, and in the Military etc. I know how
> to be cool and nice and how to made a bad person become
> gentle real fast.

Been there done that.


> I can be trusted as one that will do his best to help anyone
> in need. Even you, if the time arose and you need help.

What, by asking me what the 'T' stands for? "Trash the Cross".

No thanks, I don't need that kind of help. That's the kind
of help that Duke has to offer.


> One reason is because I was like you once and someone was
> gentle to me

So, did they say to you: "Come, let us 'Trash the Cross' together".


> and I followed them to church where the Holy Spirit did meet
> me, and that feeling was something you can only know if you
> meet God one on one. Then I sure like I was, you laugh that
> off and dismiss all of this, only till you try it and find God,
> nothing I say may matter.

You clearly do not know to whom you speak. Yet, I
suppose that is to be expected since I am simply a
lowly atheist nudnik unto you.


> Then giving ones life to God and then finding God answering
> my prayers, proves there is a God and I feel so sorry for them
> that think because they say there is no GOD that would mean
> it is true. Then gods there are millions of them, one just has
> to seek till they find, God on the other hand, is trying to help
> you, even here, what you mock and say, just reminds me
> there is still hope for you.

If that were true, you would have to say that the book of
Hebrews is incorrect.

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 00:50:07 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 27, 12:24�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:15:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Apr 26, 10:47�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles. �The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> >> >> offers those characteristics.
>>
>> >> >Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
>> >> >washed and with bad water.
>> >> You should try Christianity.
>> >If I was not a Christian already, I sure would not be one if being one
>> >would be like you. �Then you are not a Christian your a Catholic.
>
>
>> Jesus gave the world the Christian "Catholic Church".
>Well if that be the way you want it, God gave the world the Christian
>"Protestant churches: to lead people back to the true church.

Well, if you read your bible, you'll see that God gave us the Holy Mass, 7
sacraments and the Papacy. I think satan gave you the protest_ant church to
lead you away form God.

>> He was given the commission by none other than Jesus himself. �Mat 16:13-19,
>He was not given any such thing.

Hmmm, you can't even read.

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 00:55:13 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 27, 12:24�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:15:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Jesus gave the world the Christian "Catholic Church".

>Not according to the WORD of GOD, the Holy Bible He sure did not as
>there never was one to start with in the Days Jesus was on this
>earth. Stop Lying Duke that could get you a one way fare to Hell, if
>you do not have one already.

So you're saying that the Jews didn't have the "old covenant" before Jesus?

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:34:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:15:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> >> >> offers those characteristics.
>>
>> >> >Ha you are making a joke here, if you believe that you been brained
>> >> >washed and with bad water.
>> >> You should try Christianity.
>> >If I was not a Christian already, I sure would not be one if being one
>> >would be like you.  Then you are not a Christian your a Catholic.
>>
>> Jesus gave the world the Christian "Catholic Church".

>NO HE DID NOT!! MORE LIES OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, NEVER HAPPEN
>NEVER WAS SUCH A CHURCH IN JESUS LIFE ON EARTH.

Everything Jesus said and did is recorded truth in the NT. Why do you turn from
it? Does satan have you tied down that much?.

>Jesus gave the world a chance to be born again believers by His Cross
>and His blood, had nothing at all to do with your RCC. NOTHING. you
>can lie about it all you like, it just is that ANOTHER LIE!

We Catholics became Christians in baptism. How did you do it?

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:19:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> >> >> offers those characteristics.
>> >> >What molesting children?
>> >> Have you been caught?
>> >NO, YOUR CHURCH WAS!  R.C.CHURCH HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PAYING
>> >EX-CATHOLICS FOR ALL THE SINS OF THE PRIEST.
>>
>> You are of mankind.  YOU are a sinner.

>You are just sick, I did not sin like your Catholic Priest did

Jesus said that you make a liar of him if you claim to be without sin.

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 00:57:18 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

Nope, the protest_er faith started in 1600AD. The Catholic Church started in
33AD when founded by Jesus Christ.

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 06:32:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 25, 11:09 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/24/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:45:58 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> One thing for sure my name was not JUDAS, one of the original
>> >> apostles, or is it Peter that Jesus told to get behind ME Satan.
>> >> God is with me, and promised never to leave me, that is good enough.
>>
>> > Right.  You left him.
>
>That would be impossible as God does not lie, and once He said "I am
>with you always" there is no way to leave Him

Wrong. He's with us always, but it is we who will turn away from him. You
reject many of his teachings in your own admissions..

, and I and God get along
>fine. I love God and God loves me and that is fine with both of us.
>Then it seems you went to church but did not let God into your life,
>so God has no promise for you, except the wages of Sin is death, you
>rejected the Gift and promises of God, so you are as you are, a
>miserable old man, younger then I am, then I am glad I and God are on
>the same path.
>
>> ...is spurious.
>NOPE you are the only one with the false statements here.
>

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:44:25 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 27, 12:59�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 05:09:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> I was pretty sure you are no Pastor_urer to your flock. �Jesus told Peter to
>> >> tend his flock. �Thank God I'm a Roman Catholic.
>
>> >Your lying to yourself and believing your own lies here duke.
>>
>> You just got thru announcing that you would NEVER call yourself a pastor_urer.
>
>You lie and then point to that lie and say I called myself such

You just got thru saying it.

> there
>is no such person as your "a pastor_urer" no such word and no such
>person. Lie and prove it again if you wish you are getting close to
>lke now.

RK, just what do you think is the root of the word "pastor" other than the
shepherd that "pastures his sheep"?

Are you telling me that your education is so poor that you didn't even know
that???? Well, in your case, maybe you really aren't a pastor.

[Up from the Abyss]

"duke" wrote:
> Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
> >

<snip>

>
> The Catholic Church started in 33AD when
> founded by Jesus Christ.

Which, as I have already demonstrated from the
Panarion and the Catalogus Liberian, that 29 CE
is the more likely year of the crucifixion.

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:10:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 27, 12:58 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:57:48 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Apr 26, 10:51 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
>> >> >> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
>> >> >> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.
>> >> >Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
>> >> >man and woman.
>>
>> >> Yes, there are a few.  But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.
>> >A FEW?  HUNDREDS AND THE COURT CASES PROVE THAT,
>>
>> 6% of the US priesthood accused, many not guilty.

>How many thousands of priest are there world wide, not only in the
>USA. 6% would number into many hundreds and you think that is ok only
>a few?

I never said ok. I said 6% accused in the US. In some places, that could be
low, and in some places, extremely high.

> Tell that to all the fathers and mothers that that 6 percent
>raped and molested in the Church buildings and church schools, tell
>them how little the number is, and you may be lucky to get away with
>only a broken noise or a good kick .

I deal in fact. You deal in your fabricated truth.

>> Exactly.  He gave us the sacrament of reconciliation (John 20:22-23) to bring us

>I tell you one thing if my daughter was molested by you catholic
>priest

Big dummy, the issue is pedophilia. Man on boy.

> it would take more then some sacrament of reconciliation1 I
>have him in jail

And in contrite and repentant confession, God forgives him.

>. and the church that let him do such would need to be

>in reconciliation with their Bank book, as they would pay more then
>they would ever like.

You would in many cases be suing an employer for something his employee did away
from the office.

>You hide behind a sacrament when a child been molested, I would think
>the whole church should be outlawed

Well, it's fact that the pedo issue is no worst in the RCC than in any other
group of mankind. As a protest_ant, you could be part of your own 6%.

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 10:28:36 -0700, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:

>
>"Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
>> Up from the Abyss wrote:
>> > "Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> just because you do not like the American flag is your
>> >> problem.
>> >
>> > It is not a matter of liking or disliking the flag. Nor is it
>> > a matter of patriotism. But, what business does the flag
>> > of one nation, have in the house of He whose kingdom
>> > is not from hence.
>>
>> The writers of the Bible had no problem with saying names
>> of other nations. The business of the House of God to have
>> a flag is that it is telling the membership that the USA accepts
>> the church and the Church is accepted as a place of worship
>> in that nation.
>
>I have no problem saying the names of other nations. But, I
>wouldn't fly the flag of any of those nations within the "House
>of God".

Why not? God is the God of all peoples of all nations. We only fly the
American Flag in my Catholic Church except for Pentecost Sunday, which is the
day that the Holy Spirit descended on ALL humankind. Then we present the flags
of many nations including Israel, etc.

>> The bible say to have elders, teachers, Pastors and you say ha,

>Show me "Pastors".

Jesus said it in John 21 amongst many place. He specifically called for Peter
to tend and feed (pasture) his sheep.

>Yes, there are elders, to feed the flock,
>but there is only one shepherd [cf 1 Peter 5:2-4].

And he put man in charge of man and sent the Holy Spirit for guidance UNTIL HE
RETURNS AGAIN. You do know, of course, that he ascended to the Father on the
40th day after the cross, don't you.

[duke]

There's actually a float of 10 years in the birth of Jesus, from 4BC when Herod
died to 6AD when Herod, his son, was king. 0-33 is a good age.

[Up from the Abyss]

"duke" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> >
> > I have no problem saying the names of other nations. But, I
> > wouldn't fly the flag of any of those nations within the "House
> > of God".
>
> Why not? God is the God of all peoples of all nations. We
> only fly the American Flag in my Catholic Church except for
> Pentecost Sunday, which is the day that the Holy Spirit
> descended on ALL humankind. Then we present the flags
> of many nations including Israel, etc.

Do you also fly the flag of Japan on December 7?

> >> The bible say to have elders, teachers, Pastors and you say ha,
> >
> > Show me "Pastors".
>
> Jesus said it in John 21 amongst many place. He specifically
> called for Peter to tend and feed (pasture) his sheep.

1 Peter 5:2-4.

> > Yes, there are elders, to feed the flock,
> > but there is only one shepherd [cf 1 Peter 5:2-4].
>
> And he put man in charge of man and sent the Holy Spirit
> for guidance UNTIL HE RETURNS AGAIN.

Matthew 20:25-28

<snip>

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 28, 1:23 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:19:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> >> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> >> >> >> offers those characteristics.
> >> >> >What molesting children?
> >> >> Have you been caught?
> >> >NO, YOUR CHURCH WAS!  R.C.CHURCH HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PAYING
> >> >EX-CATHOLICS FOR ALL THE SINS OF THE PRIEST.
>
> >> You are of mankind.  YOU are a sinner.
> >You are just sick, I did not sin like your Catholic Priest did
>
> Jesus said that you make a liar of him if you claim to be without sin.

I tell the truth as I never molested any child, that is what the RCC
priest did. I claim I am with out such sins. Now I can not talk for
you.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 28, 1:23 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 27, 12:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:19:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
> >> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles.  The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
> >> >> >> offers those characteristics.
> >> >> >What molesting children?
> >> >> Have you been caught?
> >> >NO, YOUR CHURCH WAS!  R.C.CHURCH HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PAYING
> >> >EX-CATHOLICS FOR ALL THE SINS OF THE PRIEST.
>
> >> You are of mankind.  YOU are a sinner.
> >You are just sick, I did not sin like your Catholic Priest did
>
> Jesus said that you make a liar of him if you claim to be without sin.

The Bible says the blood of Jesus cleanse from ALL SIN, so how can one
be free of ALL SIN and be without sin. One thing here is that all
have sinned, so we are all under sin and none is without sin. Only
people that did not accept the blood of Jesus still has all the sins
they ever did. While them that does have Jesus is free from all the
sins they did. We also find some of them evil priest said they did
not sin, so they are liars and we all know it. They should all be in
Jail.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

So what, such has nothing to do with the catholic church or 33 AD or
28 CE as that never happen and that is only a claim of the Catholic
church to get people to believe they are the Church when they are only
their own church, maybe at 130 CE or any date.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 28, 1:34 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:10:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
> > >> >On Apr 26, 10:51 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
> >> >> >> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
> >> >> >> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.
> >> >> >Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
> >> >> >man and woman.
>
> >> >> Yes, there are a few.  But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.
> >> >A FEW?  HUNDREDS AND THE COURT CASES PROVE THAT,
>
> >> 6% of the US priesthood accused, many not guilty.
> >How many thousands of priest are there world wide, not only in the
> >USA.  6% would number into many hundreds and you think that is ok only
> >a few?
>
> I never said ok.  I said 6% accused in the US.  In some places, that could be
> low, and in some places, extremely high.

You did not say until I showed you lied by trying to limit it to only
6% now you confess that lie and still hide what that Extremely HIGH
number is.

> >  Tell that to all the fathers and mothers that that 6 percent
> >raped and molested in the Church buildings and church schools, tell
> >them how little the number is, and you may be lucky to get away with
> >only a broken noise or a good kick .
>
> I deal in fact.  You deal in your fabricated truth.

I deal in what, you lying church and your evil molested priest was not
fabricated and is in all the news reports, and even the Catholic
church and the Pope has ask for forgiveness because of such evil, and
you see it as fabricated, would make us think maybe you do the same
kind of evil and try now to justify you own sins.

>
> >> Exactly.  He gave us the sacrament of reconciliation (John 20:22-23) to bring us
> >I tell you one thing if my daughter was molested by you catholic
> >priest
>
> Big dummy, the issue is pedophilia.  Man on boy.

So now I am a dummy because you church have many pedophilia that love
boys you are very sick indeed. Then sex with children mostly does not
say boys or girls, and since you church has both, time may now open
that girls were also molested.

>
> > it would take more then some sacrament of reconciliation1  I
> >have him in jail
> > And in contrite and repentant confession, God forgives him.

God may forgive these sinful priest only they did not confess to such
sins they hid them and only the police got them to confess up, so in
all eyes they are never forgiven for such sins by God, as God also
says one will pay for such sins in Hell and at the judgment. Just
because some priest try to get their brother sins forgiven so they
don't have to worry about going to HELL, just does not do it. The
only reason they have been found out was not because they asked
forgiveness but they were caught many in the acts. Some for many
years, that kind of confession is not one for any contrite and
repentance.

You seem to share these evil priest, do you have some you know as
buddy's.

>
> >. and the church that let him do such would need to be
> >in reconciliation with their Bank book, as they would pay more then
> >they would ever like.
>
> You would in many cases be suing an employer for something his employee did away
> from the office.

Which in this matter is the Papacy and the Roman Catholic Church as
they are the one that employed those priest. Then we all knew that, so
what is your point,

> >You hide behind a sacrament when a child been molested, I would think
> >the whole church should be outlawed
>
> Well, it's fact that the pedo issue is no worst in the RCC than in any other
> group of mankind.  As a protest_ant, you could be part of your own 6%.

Oh you made the Catholic Church innocent children look like it is all
because they were just little boys and evil men had a right to molests
them. Shame on you and your church. There is no such person or group
by that name, fool. No such people are from any church I belong to,
only you and your church fit that group and it does not matter. One
is too many and any church that let such people Pastor, teach or what
ever as part of that church, should be closed and such to be jailed
for a long time and fined so much that they would not let such happen
again. You duke try to ok such sins so I am sure you are not
forgiven by the church or God for such promoting of such sin on
children.

[Ike]

On 4/24/2013 5:34 PM, Rod wrote:
> On 4/15/2013 8:55 PM, Ike wrote:
>> On 4/15/2013 11:38 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>> On Apr 15, 3:11 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/14/2013 9:14 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snippeth]
>>>>
>>>>> Duke puts his faith in being a member of the RCC, rather than in
>>>>> Christ. But the RCC doesn't even teach what Duke believes. Before I
>>>>> read the Scriptures I used to believe a version of what Duke believes
>>>>> (that people who do good to others will be saved without looking to
>>>>> Christ as their Saviour, even if they hate and reject Christ), but
>>>>> once I read the Scriptures, I could no longer believe that. (I took it
>>>>> even farther, believing God would eventually forgive and save everyone
>>>>> except Satan who has already been condemned.) Now I believe what
>>>>> Christ said in the Scriptures, that only those who turn to Christ as
>>>>> their Saviour can be saved (John 8:24, John 3:14-18, ) and because of
>>>>> that, "few" will be saved and "many" are on the path to destruction
>>>>> (Matt. 7:13-14).
>>>>
>>>> And yet you STILL can't avoid the temptation of adding the law to the
>>>> Gospel, which brings you into Satan's snare all over again.
>>>>
>>>> Ike
>>>
>>>
>>> You're a damned liar; I do NOT say salvation is dependent on keeping
>>> the law of Moses. But what you want to ignore is that Christ said that
>>> those who habitually commit iniquities against their fellow man will
>>> be rejected by him as false believers whom he _never_ knew.
>>
>> Christ said no such thing.
>>
>> In fact, HE SAID THE OPPOSITE!
>>
>> 21 ś Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother
>> sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
>> 22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but,
>> Until seventy times seven.
>>
>> Jesus put no numerical limitation on sinning and forgiveness.
>
> The verse above reads differently; 7 x 70 = 490.

What a moron.

"Seven" is a figure for "completeness," you blithering idiot.

It means ALWAYS.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/24/2013 12:56 PM, Rod wrote:
> On 4/24/2013 11:48 AM, Ike wrote:
>> On 4/24/2013 12:38 PM, Rod wrote:
>>> On 4/24/2013 11:12 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>> On 4/23/2013 10:33 AM, Rod wrote:
>>>>> On 4/22/2013 12:32 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/21/2013 6:30 PM, Asku-inu-nachak wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/20/2013 2:54 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:44 PM, Asku-inu-nachak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 4:30 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 4:06 AM, Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 19, 1:22 am, xyxyxtatwevak <xuxuxy...@excell.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2013 3:28 AM, Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 17, 4:40 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/16/2013 7:30 AM, Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You must be happy your address is not known, I have some
>>>>>>>>>>>>> family
>>>>>>>>>>>>> members that would love to wipe the ground with you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Real name:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Herman Eugene Eickleberry Jr
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Address:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1206 Beulah Vista Blvd
>>>>>>>>>>>> Valparaiso, IN 46383-3404
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> with my compliments!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you I have a hard copy now and will check this out later
>>>>>>>>>>> tonight
>>>>>>>>>>> as I have a Hospital call to make and it will take a few
>>>>>>>>>>> hours by
>>>>>>>>>>> Train and bus, round trip.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> LOL
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1) That information is 2 years out of date, as I moved down
>>>>>>>>>> south 2
>>>>>>>>>> years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2) Rod--who was a hair smarter than you--knew it was ILLEGAL to
>>>>>>>>>> post
>>>>>>>>>> unpublished personal information on the internet (which is one of
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> things that got Mark T kicked off), so he didn't do it. Then you,
>>>>>>>>>> being
>>>>>>>>>> a moron, did it anyway.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> More fuel for the fire.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 3) The day someone shows up at my door looking for a fight
>>>>>>>>>> will be
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> last day of their miserable existence.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh Ike...I believe you just made a threat by wire of extreme
>>>>>>>>> bodily
>>>>>>>>> harm, and it too is illegal...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You really are that stupid, aren't you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ike
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A little deception goes a long way Eikenboob. Keep talking.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, I'll keep talking...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...'cause I haven't said a single actionable thing, you little twit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Keep talking...
>>>>
>>>> ???
>>>>
>>>> Haven't stopped yet.
>>>>
>>>> And I repeat, I haven't said a single actionable thing, you little
>>>> twit.
>>>>
>>>> Ike
>>>>
>>>
>>> Keep talking...
>>
>> I intend to, dickhead.
>>
>> Ike
>
> Thank you.

Fuck you.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/25/2013 1:14 PM, duke wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:09:19 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/24/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:

>>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:45:58 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>

>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One thing for sure my name was not JUDAS, one of the original
>>>> apostles, or is it Peter that Jesus told to get behind ME Satan.
>>>> God is with me, and promised never to leave me, that is good enough.
>>>
>>> Right. You left him.
>>>

>>> Hebrews...
>>
>> ...is spurious.
>
> Canonized NT scripture.

By fools three centuries after Christianity started; before that, it was
rejected.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/26/2013 12:44 AM, Up from the Abyss wrote:
> "Ike" wrote:
>> duke wrote:
>>>
>>> His divinity was not demonstrated.
>>
>> Bullshit. It was demonstrated in His miracles, His
>> transfiguration, His prophecies, etc, etc.
>
> You just defined Mosheh and Eliyah as well.

Yep. There were many prototypes to Jesus--but not all rolled into one.

Ike

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 28, 12:28 pm, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
> "Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> > Up from the Abyss wrote:
> > > "Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:

Since most of this post is just a lot of nothings, you make a
statement, then try to say I did something like you point to, which I
did not and so on, to waste more space here, so will try to be short.

You ask what the R is in my name, it is for "Raymond" as for the R and
applying it to the T in TCross, the question was what was his first
name was it for trash and that is why he uses Tcross? It shows me you
did not read what this was about but jump at some fool notion in you
head without looking at the statements. No Rcross from me silly one.

> > The bible say to have elders, teachers, Pastors and you say ha,
>
> Show me "Pastors".  Yes, there are elders, to feed the flock,
> but there is only one shepherd [cf 1 Peter 5:2-4].

One God and many apostles or followers.

> LMAO!  I am actually very happy.  I was accused of being too
> happy just yesterday.

Is that because of drugs?

>
> > As if that is important to anyone but you, no fellowship with
> > the members as that would beneneth you.
>
> LMAO!  I delivered a sermon some 12 or so years ago.
> Afterward, the people commented about how spirit
> filled and all that.
>
> Til at the luncheon, when I admitted that I did not accept
> the trinity.  Then I was suddenly damned, and could not
> possibly be saved.
>
> So I asked:  "Just an hour ago, you were all commenting
> about how wonderful and spirit filled I was, yet now I am
> damned, can you explain that?  No one dared answer.

> > >> What the 'T' for? Trash the Cross?
>
> > > Dr. Knapp, I am an atheist, I have no problem harassing
> > > Christians. Yet, I have left you alone. In the above, is
> > > an example of something that should be beneath you.
>
> > Oh go away, you no more a atheist then I am the Pope.
>
> So, you are condoning the above as the proper standard
> and manner for those of the "House of God" to act.  Yet,
> in another post, you commented with regard to people
> not wanting to be told what was appropriate.  Perhaps they
> are merely following the example that you set above.

Now silly one, there was no House of God that I made a standard for,
that was you fake story and such, not a word of mine. I do not
remember the last time I used the word "House of God" in my messages
here, but I sure did not have anything to do with the lie you just
posted here.

>
> > Your are not a decent person, because you do such,
> > has nothing to do with being a atheist.
>
> No, I am not a decent person.  Just another lowly
> atheist nudnik.

All you did here "nudnik" is support what I said, dah!!

> > I have problems with doing that kind of action against
> > anyone one.
>
> Yet, how did you respond to Terry in the above?
> Do you only have problems with others acting in
> that manner while you currently excuse yourself?

So now you call Tcross by the name TERRY that was not a reply from me
to any one named TERRy but was to the TCross for was it TRASH Christ
the name he was trying to sign his post with. I have no problems
here, it seems you sure do and that is you manner.
>
> Yet, I rose to the position of COO. Beside this, "The sound made by a pigeon."

And that is suppose to mean something? More like you can not even
spell a word correctly.

> > I have no idea what you think you see here or how not
> > mocking or insulting people by foul terms and such could
> > reduce my character in the way you are implying here.
>
> What's the "R" for, Ravage the Cross?

Nothing as I never used such Rcross, but Tcross could not mean that
either.

>
> Do you do that before or after you "Trash the Cross"?

Neither I never trash the Cross, I honor the one that died on the
Cross and rose from the dead a few days after.

>
> In my former reply, did I mock or insult you?

Which one and when why try to say a former reply, I reading your NOW
reply and since you wrote it before I read it, it would be Yes you did
and do as in this reply both MOCK and INSULT.

> Hey, it's your choice if you desire to "Trash the Cross".

I would not make such a choice or ever have such a desire, then maybe
your Tcross person that now you say is Terry, a name he did not even
use in his post as Tcross.

>
> > I wonder if you think gentle is what?
>
> It was my former reply to you.
>
> > If someone is beating up a woman or weak person am I
> > just to say, Do not do that, it is wrong?
>
> No, it's much better to ask what the 'T' is for and
> insinuate that it's for "Trash the Cross".

I DID COO that is why you are able to write about the Tcross to start
with, I can ask what I like to find what I want to a question or
statement.

> But hey, if that's the way you wish to represent "Christianity",
> by all means, go ahead.  I shall simply consider you as on par
> with Ike and Duke.

I really do not care in any way what YOU THINK or What you will
CONSIDER you mean nothing to me but a foolish lost soul with out
enough sense to see he is lost and do something about it.

> Yeah, much better to say to the woman, "Trash the Cross".

Why because you want to beat that woman up and also trash the cross,
that could be hanging around her neck?

> The one that jumped over the counter to confront and step in
> between the man assaulting a woman.  The one who has had
> to wait around numerous times for the authorities to arrive, for
> stepping into the middle of such things.

That is what you would do? More like the act of a coward.

> > I can be trusted as one that will do his best to help anyone
> > in need.  Even you, if the time arose and you need help.
>
> What, by asking me what the 'T' stands for?  "Trash the Cross".

Yeah to ask you name or are you so ashamed of it that you post the
Tcross, then think people can not ask you why, shows your not in this
world or in lalalal land.

>
> No thanks, I don't need that kind of help.  That's the kind
> of help that Duke has to offer.

I would not give that kind of help as that is now what I do, but by
your reply it sure seems you would do that, then you offer Help, I
think not.

>
> So, did they say to you:  "Come, let us 'Trash the Cross' together".

Nope that is your title not mine.

> You clearly do not know to whom you speak.  Yet, I
> suppose that is to be expected since I am simply a
> lowly atheist nudnik unto you.

How could anyone know whom they speak to when they hide their name
behind a "Tcross," that is not your name, so why would I care who I am
speaking to, as you are ashamed of your name and call your self
"Tcross". If this is even him or his reply, or just another kid
joking around here.

Dr. Raymond Knapp
which anyone would of found out the first time the went to my website
as posted in many of these messages. Dah!!!

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 28, 1:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 00:57:18 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>

> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 27, 12:25 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:49:51 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Apr 26, 10:50 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>
> >> >> >> >> Hebrews...
> >> >> >> >...is spurious.
> >> >> >> Canonized NT scripture.
> >> >> >So what is you point, did you canonized it, if your church did they
> >> >> >sure dismissed it as they do not follow what they canonized.
>
> >> >> Canonized scripture is selected because it is fully in accordance with the
> >> >> teachings of Jesus Christ.
>
> >> >That is a LIE of the ones that did the canonizing
>
> >> Your buddies weren't around for 1600 years.
> >They been around since the birth of Jesus if not before.
>
> Nope, the protest_er faith started in 1600AD.  The Catholic Church started in
> 33AD when founded by Jesus Christ.

No it started with Jesus when He told his followers to preach the
Gospel to all the world. The Church was not roman catholic and it did
not start with Jesus. The protestant church was part of the original
churches and when the Catholic Church got so deep into sin. It came
out of that evil church and has been with the truth since the day
Jesus was born. It showed the sins of the Roman Catholic church in
1600AD. Than left that church to continual in the Church Jesus
stated. Which has no one building but has One God and One Savior.
Without praying to idol images and stopping Priest from raising
families as the bible shows. The Catholic Church did not and was not
in 33AD.

My buddies were the Apostles which doctrines in Christ we still follow
and obey, because of the Lord Jesus Christ and His blood and HIs Holy
Spirit in the name of the ONE GOD. No popes, no papacy, no images,
no idols called images, etc.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 28, 1:26 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 06:32:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >That would be impossible as God does not lie, and once He said "I am
> >with you always" there is no way to leave Him
>
> Wrong.  He's with us always, but it is we who will turn away from him.   You
> reject many of his teachings in your own admissions..

You speak for yourself you accept many of the false teachings of the
Papacy and by doing so reject the teaching of Jesus. I follow all the
teachings of Jesus but deny and will not accept lies and false
teachings of your church popes or papacy. Just is denying God and His
Son and the Holy Ghost. Amen and amen.

>
> >fine.  I love God and God loves me and that is fine with both of us.
> >Then it seems you went to church but did not let God into your life,
> >so God has no promise for you, except the wages of Sin is death, you
> >rejected the Gift and promises of God, so you are as you are, a
> >miserable old man, younger then I am, then I am glad I and God are on
> >the same path.

1 Cor 8:6-7
6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and
we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things,
and through whom we live.
7 However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with
consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an
idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.

The Catholic church is only one group of thousands as ALL believers
come from Christ and that dates back to His birth and established in
26-34 AD the Holy Word shows nothing about the RCC.
Eph 4:4-7
4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one
hope of your calling;
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in
you all.
Spiritual Gifts 7 But to each one of us grace was given according to
the measure of Christ's gift.

NOTE A WORD ABOUT PETER OR YOUR ROMAN CHURCH.

1 Tim 2:5-6
5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man
Christ Jesus,
6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,
NKJV

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 28, 1:26 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 06:32:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:

Eph 4:4-7
4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one
hope of your calling;
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in
you all.
Spiritual Gifts 7 But to each one of us grace was given according to
the measure of Christ's gift.

NKJV

NOTHING ABOUT YOUR ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

1 Tim 2:5-6
5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man
Christ Jesus,
6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,

ALSO NOTHING ABOUT MARY OR PRAYING TO SAINTS OR OTHERS TO GET TO
JESUS.
ONLY JESUS IS THE ONE AND ONLY MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND US. NO
catholic priest, no popes, no papacy. Your church deny the teachings
of the Gospel and replaced them with its own translations and made up
lies to get people to accept that church and by doing so deny what
JESUS did say was the rules for His church. Not your church.

[duke]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:20:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[duke]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:20:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Very, very few priests did.

>, that is what the RCC
>priest did. I claim I am with out such sins. Now I can not talk for
>you.

Thank God for giving us the sacrament of confession, which I exercised recently.
My soul is cleansed of actual sin as of then. When was your last confession?

[duke]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:29:45 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 28, 1:23�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Apr 27, 12:24�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:19:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> Jessu Christ started his Church on earth with the characteristics as revealed in
>> >> >> >> the 4 gospels and epistles. �The Catholic Church, Roman is the one that fully
>> >> >> >> offers those characteristics.
>> >> >> >What molesting children?
>> >> >> Have you been caught?
>> >> >NO, YOUR CHURCH WAS! �R.C.CHURCH HAS SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PAYING
>> >> >EX-CATHOLICS FOR ALL THE SINS OF THE PRIEST.
>>
>> >> You are of mankind. �YOU are a sinner.
>> >You are just sick, I did not sin like your Catholic Priest did
>>
>> Jesus said that you make a liar of him if you claim to be without sin.

>The Bible says the blood of Jesus cleanse from ALL SIN, so how can one
>be free of ALL SIN and be without sin.

Bad statement you are making. Scripture says that baptism cleanses of us of
sins committed under the old covenant; ie, before baptism. After baptism, John
20:22-23 kicks in. And Heb 10:26-27 expresses the future of those that die with
a mortal sin on their soul.

Thank God for the Sacrament of Confession.

[duke]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:34:01 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Your protest_ant version didn't start for 1600 years and with rejection of much
of what Jesus taught.

[duke]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:36:52 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 28, 1:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 00:57:18 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Apr 27, 12:25 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 04:49:51 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >On Apr 26, 10:50 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:28:00 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Hebrews...
>> >> >> >> >...is spurious.
>> >> >> >> Canonized NT scripture.
>> >> >> >So what is you point, did you canonized it, if your church did they
>> >> >> >sure dismissed it as they do not follow what they canonized.
>>
>> >> >> Canonized scripture is selected because it is fully in accordance with the
>> >> >> teachings of Jesus Christ.
>>
>> >> >That is a LIE of the ones that did the canonizing
>>
>> >> Your buddies weren't around for 1600 years.
>> >They been around since the birth of Jesus if not before.
>>
>> Nope, the protest_er faith started in 1600AD.  The Catholic Church started in
>> 33AD when founded by Jesus Christ.
>
>No it started with Jesus when He told his followers to preach the
>Gospel to all the world.

Yep, in 33AD, foolish man.

> The Church was not roman catholic and it did
>not start with Jesus.

Oh yes it was THE Catholic Church, later to be renamed Roman Catholic.

> The protestant church was part of the original
>churches and when the Catholic Church got so deep into sin.

You people didn't get started until lut, and that was in 1600AD.

[duke]

Oh, noooooooo. The Gospels (4) and the follow-on letters to the expanding
Chruch were declared canon by the Catholic Church. Other books such as the
gospel of Mary and gospel of Peter, gospel of James, etc either contained some
errors, some fabrications not in line with what Jesus taught, OR presented no
new information and hence were not canonized. But they remain historical.

You protest_ers are clueless to truth.

[duke]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:51:16 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 28, 1:26 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 06:32:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >That would be impossible as God does not lie, and once He said "I am
>> >with you always" there is no way to leave Him
>>
>> Wrong.  He's with us always, but it is we who will turn away from him.   You
>> reject many of his teachings in your own admissions..
>
>You speak for yourself you accept many of the false teachings of the
>Papacy

Correction. Your protest_ers accept many false teachings. We of the RCC are
the Apostolic Church meaning we teach what the Apostles taught who learned from
Jesus.

>The Catholic church is only one group of thousands as ALL believers
>come from Christ

But we are the Apostolic Church.

[duke]

On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 17:20:45 -0700, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:

>
>"duke" wrote:
>> Up from the Abyss wrote:
>> >
>> > I have no problem saying the names of other nations. But, I
>> > wouldn't fly the flag of any of those nations within the "House
>> > of God".
>>
>> Why not? God is the God of all peoples of all nations. We
>> only fly the American Flag in my Catholic Church except for
>> Pentecost Sunday, which is the day that the Holy Spirit
>> descended on ALL humankind. Then we present the flags
>> of many nations including Israel, etc.
>
>Do you also fly the flag of Japan on December 7?

No, we show the flags of other nations on Pentecost Sunday.

>> >> The bible say to have elders, teachers, Pastors and you say ha,
>> > Show me "Pastors".

>> Jesus said it in John 21 amongst many place. He specifically
>> called for Peter to tend and feed (pasture) his sheep.

[duke]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 05:01:32 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 28, 1:34�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:10:53 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >> >On Apr 26, 10:51�am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 06:31:28 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
>> >> >> >> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
>> >> >> >> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.
>> >> >> >Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
>> >> >> >man and woman.
>>
>> >> >> Yes, there are a few. �But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.
>> >> >A FEW? �HUNDREDS AND THE COURT CASES PROVE THAT,
>>
>> >> 6% of the US priesthood accused, many not guilty.
>> >How many thousands of priest are there world wide, not only in the
>> >USA. �6% would number into many hundreds and you think that is ok only
>> >a few?
>>
>> I never said ok. �I said 6% accused in the US. �In some places, that could be
>> low, and in some places, extremely high.

>You did not say until I showed you lied by trying to limit it to only
>6% now you confess that lie and still hide what that Extremely HIGH
>number is.

6% of US priests accused. Most not guilty.

>> I deal in fact. �You deal in your fabricated truth.

>I deal in what, you lying church and your evil molested priest was not
>fabricated

Jesus well said that, unless you eat his body and drink his blood, you have no
life in you. Guess where you stand, rk.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 30, 8:38 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:20:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:>
> >> >> You are of mankind.  YOU are a sinner.
> >> >You are just sick, I did not sin like your Catholic Priest did
>
> >> Jesus said that you make a liar of him if you claim to be without sin.
> >I tell the truth as I never molested any child
>
> Very, very few priests did.

Then you need to check with the newspapers and the law. unless you
think hundreds are a few you are so mistaken. Then ONE is two many
and more is much, and they are suppose to be holy men of God not of
the devil and the sins they did was hidden till the last few years,
now even the Pope is trying to get forgiveness from the membership,
instead of being held fully responsible for them molesting the
children. Then many did that sin and the bishop only moved them to
another location and they did it again. Once should of been enough to
dismiss such from the church and such sins is suppose to be reported
to the Police, not to hide it till some told the police and now the
Catholic church is losing members, as well as paying millions to the
families that trusted it. No very very few but many, many priest did
such. Take a look on the Internet and you can get the news and court
cases and the cost to the RCC for letting such a sin, stay hidden and
not putting those evil priest in Jail. Maybe because of the
doctrines of the church showing they believe they are God church so we
know God would not approve, and if it got out people would leave the
RCC for the Protestant churches that Luther started because of the
sins of the priest 1600 years ago.

>
> Thank God for giving us the sacrament of confession, which I exercised recently.
> My soul is cleansed of actual sin as of then.  When was your last confession?

God never gave you or your church such a sacrament to forgive people
that molested innocent children from their evil sin. You soul may be,
but the soul of them demon priest is not. The wages of sin is death,
no sacrament of confession is going to change that. To prove my point
that such people will not be forgiven no matter what sacrament they do
or say, is seen in Heaven and who is and who is not let into heaven.
Rev 22:14-15
14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the
right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the
city.
15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and
murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie. NKJV

You can say what you want does not matter, the Bible says those that
are "sexually immoral" etc. are not going to heaven no matter what
pope or priest they pay to pray for them, when it is strange that you
ask a priest to pray to forgive the priest who did not care if they
got in trouble or not, as they knew they had a way out, which never is
and will not be. Such fit verse 15. no matter what you say duke and
why would any person that says they love God want to attend a church,
Catholic or not that had such people in leadership roles, is beyond
understanding.

Rev. R Knapp
www.pioneers-for-JESUS.org

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 30, 8:41 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:29:45 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:

> >> Jesus said that you make a liar of him if you claim to be without sin.

> >The Bible says the blood of Jesus cleanse from ALL SIN, so how can one
> >be free of ALL SIN and be without sin.
>
> Bad statement you are making.  Scripture says that baptism cleanses of us of
> sins committed under the old covenant; ie, before baptism.  After baptism, John
> 20:22-23 kicks in.  And Heb 10:26-27 expresses the future of those that die with
> a mortal sin on their soul.

Oh get real the old covenant was not in such a statement. Where did
you get this Mortal sin, from? Sin is sin not one kind is better then
another kind as the RCC teach. If you did with sin you go to hell,
and end up not in heaven no matter how many times you go to
confessional or was baptized. I washed my hands to day and will later
today, and since I took a bath once does not mean I never need another
one. Baptism may clean you from sin under any covenant but if you do
it again what was would be voided. The Bible shows where such people
will go learn and read what the bible does say on this. Rev 22:14-15

14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the
right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the
city.
15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and
murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
NKJV

>

> Thank God for the Sacrament of Confession.

It is not a game that you get a pass go free card. Then confession as
only a way to except the judgment is not accepted by God, no matter
what you church wants it just does not work. When one sins and does
it over and over again that confession is seen as just another lie and
such will not enter heaven. John 5:14
Afterward Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, "See, you
have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon you."

John 8:11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said to her, "Neither do
I condemn you; go and sin no more."

So SIN NO MORE is what Jesus said, do such sin and there is no more
forgiveness for such a sin, so duke, accept them priest as you buddy
if you like, and the wages of their sins will be on you also. John
5:14 Afterward Jesus found him in the temple, and said to him, "See,
you have been made well. Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon
you." NKJV

Sin confessed or not, if you do it again willfully then a worse thing
will come, not forgiveness or a free pass to glory while the children
molested are suffering because the RCC did nothing to protect the
innocent. Even the law of the land sees such as evil and those that
do such will be punished for hurting innocent children. I see no
reason for anyone now to look the other way, while the most innocent
of children going to church trying to please God are attacked by the
one that is suppose to be holy man and the church does nothing till it
gets a court case and the sinner priest are hidden or moved to another
area, and do the same to un-expecting moms and dads, also members of
that church. Sick is to kind of a word for such churches and
ministers.

>
> The dukester, American - American
>
> ********************************************
> Repeal Obama
> You simply can't fix stupid.

> ********************************************- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 30, 11:46 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:34:01 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Apr 28, 1:33 pm, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
> >> "duke" wrote:
> >> > Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
>
> >> <snip>
>
> >> > The Catholic Church started in 33AD when
> >> > founded by Jesus Christ.
>
> >> Which, as I have already demonstrated from the
> >> Panarion and the Catalogus Liberian, that 29 CE
> >> is the more likely year of the crucifixion.
>
> >So what, such has nothing to do with the catholic church or 33 AD or
> >28 CE as that never happen and that is only a claim of the Catholic
> >church to get people to believe they are the Church when they are only
> >their own church, maybe at 130 CE or any date.
>
> Your protest_ant version didn't start for 1600 years and with rejection of much
> of what Jesus taught.

Your Catholic version never started and sin was with them till 1600
years later when the Protestants did go back to the real teachings of
Jesus, away from the ones the RCC taught.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 30, 11:48 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:36:52 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:> >> Nope, the protest_er faith started in 1600AD.  The Catholic Church started in

> >> 33AD when founded by Jesus Christ.
>
> >No it started with Jesus when He told his followers to preach the
> >Gospel to all the world.
>
> Yep, in 33AD, foolish man.

Year stupider man, the gospel that the RCC never did accept and it
took 1600 years for a monk to tell the church such and prove it by the
world and the Protestant church rejected the RCC for the truth that
was given to believers in 33AD you foolish man.

>
> > The Church was not roman catholic and it did
> >not start with Jesus.
>
> Oh yes it was THE Catholic Church, later to be renamed Roman Catholic.

NO it was not and such never was a name found at that time in any
history book, except maybe by the rcc that needs to get people to
believe it was, what it was not. Show us the verse that says
"CATHOLIC in the Bible anyway, Duke, you said it now prove it or stop
lying about it.

> >  The protestant church was part of the original
> >churches and when the Catholic Church got so deep into sin.
>
> You people didn't get started until lut, and that was in 1600AD.

That is what I said till such sin was shown to the public of the deep
in sin that RCC was in, that a Catholic monk showed such sins to the
world that the real Church Jesus did set up and the doctrines Jesus
did approve of was returned to the church by the Protestant church in
the life time of Luther.

[duke]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 30, 11:46�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:34:01 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Apr 28, 1:33�pm, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
>> >> "duke" wrote:
>> >> > Dr. R. Knapp wrote:
>>
>> >> <snip>
>>
>> >> > The Catholic Church started in 33AD when
>> >> > founded by Jesus Christ.
>>
>> >> Which, as I have already demonstrated from the
>> >> Panarion and the Catalogus Liberian, that 29 CE
>> >> is the more likely year of the crucifixion.
>>
>> >So what, such has nothing to do with the catholic church or 33 AD or
>> >28 CE as that never happen and that is only a claim of the Catholic
>> >church to get people to believe they are the Church when they are only
>> >their own church, maybe at 130 CE or any date.
>>
>> Your protest_ant version didn't start for 1600 years and with rejection of much
>> of what Jesus taught.

>Your Catholic version never started

Only in 33AD with the characteristics of the New Way - the Holy Mass, 7
sacraments, the Papacy

> and sin was with them till 1600
>years later when the Protestants did go back to the real teachings of
>Jesus, away from the ones the RCC taught.

According to the bible, we are the New Way, not you.

[duke]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:26:33 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 30, 11:48�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:36:52 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:> >> Nope, the protest_er faith started in 1600AD. �The Catholic Church started in
>> >> 33AD when founded by Jesus Christ.
>>
>> >No it started with Jesus when He told his followers to preach the
>> >Gospel to all the world.
>>
>> Yep, in 33AD, foolish man.
>
>Year stupider man, the gospel that the RCC never did accept and it
>took 1600 years for a monk to tell the church such

A single, solitary priest told the RCC he knew better than they?? Haahaahaa.
You just proved my case.


>> > �The protestant church was part of the original

>> >churches and when the Catholic Church got so deep into sin.

>> You people didn't get started until lut, and that was in 1600AD.

>That is what I said till such sin was shown to the public of the deep
>in sin that RCC was in

Name one sin.

[duke]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:56:30 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 28, 1:26�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 06:32:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>Eph 4:4-7
>4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one
>hope of your calling;
>5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
>6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in
>you all.
>Spiritual Gifts 7 But to each one of us grace was given according to
>the measure of Christ's gift.
>NKJV
>
>NOTHING ABOUT YOUR ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

SACRAMENTS:
Baptism - John 3:5-6, Mat 28:19, Hebrew 2:14-15
Holy Eucharist -Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
Confession - John 20:22-23, Mat 9:2-8
Matrimony - Mat 19:4-6, Mark 10:5-9, Ephesians 5:31
Confirmation - Ephesians 1:13, Acts 8:14-17, 19:5-6,
Holy Orders - Acts 13:3 & 14:23, John 20:22, 1 & 2 Tim
Anointing of the Sick - Mark 6:12-13, John 5:14

[duke]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:44:13 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
wrote:

>On Apr 30, 8:38�pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 04:20:03 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:>
>> >> >> You are of mankind. �YOU are a sinner.
>> >> >You are just sick, I did not sin like your Catholic Priest did
>>
>> >> Jesus said that you make a liar of him if you claim to be without sin.
>> >I tell the truth as I never molested any child
>>
>> Very, very few priests did.

>Then you need to check with the newspapers and the law.

Already did. While you were playing hide and seek in China, the whole thing
came to light.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 30, 11:58 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 05:01:32 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

> wrote:

> >> >> >> >> >> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
> >> >> >> >> >No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
> >> >> >> >> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.
> >> >> >> >Tell that to the hundreds of molested children that are now of age and
> >> >> >> >man and woman.
>
> >> >> >> Yes, there are a few. But scripture well says that Jesus alone never sinned.
> >> >> >A FEW? HUNDREDS AND THE COURT CASES PROVE THAT,
>
> >> >> 6% of the US priesthood accused, many not guilty.
> >> >How many thousands of priest are there world wide, not only in the
> >> >USA. 6% would number into many hundreds and you think that is ok only
> >> >a few?
>
> >> I never said ok. I said 6% accused in the US. In some places, that could be
> >> low, and in some places, extremely high.
> >You did not say until I showed you lied by trying to limit it to only
> >6% now you confess that lie and still hide what that Extremely HIGH
> >number is.
>
> 6% of US priests accused.  Most not guilty.

It is so nice of you to say this, now give us the references that
support that, or is that just another off your head number that is
nothing but a wish by you. Supply the facts that we can check out and
then you can say such. Also is that six percent of what a thousand a
million or a hundred? Six percent of a thousand priest would be a
very high number, then even one is too much. What I heard was not
most not guilty but hundreds were and are guilty.

> >> I deal in fact. You deal in your fabricated truth.

> >I deal in what, your lying church and your evil molested priest was not

> >fabricated
>
> Jesus well said that, unless you eat his body and drink his blood, you have no
> life in you.  Guess where you stand, rk.

What is this to do with anything? Taking the communion wine and bread
is stealing if you are not honest and your life is full of sin. What
kind of garbage is this that I have no life in me?? that is about as
stupid and ignorant remark and is like all sinners that want a free
past to heaven no matter what God says. That just will not happen in
the Kingdom of Heaven as God rules not the papacy. Where I stand is
not with such evil priest or people that sin against children and them
that follow evil. I will not be standing with them or you if you do
not accept what God has said, instead of what the Papacy said. I stand
with God that is where I stand.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On May 1, 4:24 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:16:26 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
> wrote:
> >
> Only in 33AD with the characteristics of the New Way - the Holy Mass, 7
> sacraments, the Papacy

Never happen just another lie of your church. In fact it is sick and
shows a evil mind/
The more you claim that is getting dumber and dumber. You post like a
machine without and ability to think for yourself.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On May 1, 4:29 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:56:30 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >On Apr 28, 1:26 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 06:32:23 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >Eph 4:4-7
> >4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one
> >hope of your calling;
> >5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
> >6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in
> >you all.
> >Spiritual Gifts 7 But to each one of us grace was given according to
> >the measure of Christ's gift.
> >NKJV
>
> >NOTHING ABOUT YOUR ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.
>
> SACRAMENTS:
> Baptism - John 3:5-6, Mat 28:19, Hebrew 2:14-15
> Holy Eucharist -Mat 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-26, Luke 22:14-20,
>                      1Cor 11:23-25 (11-34).
> Confession - John 20:22-23, Mat 9:2-8
> Matrimony - Mat 19:4-6, Mark 10:5-9, Ephesians 5:31
> Confirmation - Ephesians 1:13, Acts 8:14-17, 19:5-6,
> Holy Orders - Acts 13:3 & 14:23, John 20:22, 1 & 2 Tim
> Anointing of the Sick - Mark 6:12-13, John 5:14

For one thing they are not called SACRAMENTS that is made up name by
the RCC.
Baptism, Communion, confession, Matrimony, anointing of the sick are
all what the Protestant churches do. You Holy Orders by the Papacy is
only for your Catholic church that ratter follow a Pope then the
teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ, and beside that tell you own
church what to do if you a catholic, all those is a regular part of
the Churches that follow Jesus as the Head of the Church and His
teachings full time.

You have only shown that you RCC does follow what most if not all the
Protestant churches do and follow.

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On May 1, 4:30 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:44:13 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com>
> wrote:

> >> Very, very few priests did.
> >Then you need to check with the newspapers and the law.
>
> Already did.  While you were playing hide and seek in China, the whole thing
> came to light.

If you did give us the reference that supports your lies here. Are
you nuts, in China we have the best world wide communication and well
make most of the computer parts you use. Hong Kong is the leader of
such information. You play games, hide and seek when you try to hide
the facts, we go and seek them, thanks to China. Then where duke is
that report of this so called "the whole thing" Here we also get news
of such evil priest in the UK and other nations that your RCC has
churches in and Worldwide molesting of children is what is found, not
limited to just the USA and you few what few hundred or few thousand
priest?

[Dr. R. Knapp]

More disturbing stories of priests' molestations of children -- and
questionable actions by church leaders -- emerged in 12,000 pages of
once-confidential personnel files.

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles posted the documents on
its website Thursday night, an hour after a Los Angeles judge ended
5-1/2 years of legal wrangling over the release of the files with an
order compelling the church to make the documents public within three
weeks.

Victims, their lawyers, reporters and other members of the public
spent hours Friday poring through records that stretched back to the
1940s and provided details about the scope of abuse in church ranks
never before seen.

The archdiocese of Los Angeles learned in the late 1970s that one of
its priests had sexually assaulted a 16-year-old boy so violently that
he was left bleeding and "in a state of shock." The priest said he was
too drunk to remember what happened and officials took no further
action.

But two decades later, word reached Cardinal Roger M. Mahony that the
same priest was molesting again and improperly performing the
sacrament of confession on his victim. The archdiocese sprang to
action: It dispatched investigators, interviewed a raft of witnesses
and discussed the harshest of all church penalties — not for the abuse
but for the violation of church law.

"Given the seriousness of this abuse of the sacrament of penance … it
is your responsibility to formally declare the existence of the
excommunication and then refer the matter to Rome," one cleric told
Mahony in a memo.

Full coverage: Priest Abuse Scandal

The case of Father Jose Ugarte is one of several instances detailed in
newly released records in which archdiocese officials displayed
outrage over a priest's ecclesiastical missteps while doing little for
the victims of his sexual abuse.

The files also suggested that the attempts to protect abusers from law
enforcement extended beyond the L.A. archdiocese to a Catholic order
tasked with rehabilitating abusers.


"Once more, we ask you to PLEASE DESTROY THESE PAGES AND ANY OTHER
MATERIAL YOU HAVE RECEIVED FROM US," the acting director of the
order's treatment program wrote to Mahony in 1988 in a letter
detailing therapists' reports about a prolific molester. "This is
stated for your own and our legal protection."

The order, the Servants of the Paraclete, closed the New Mexico
facility where many Los Angeles priests were sent amid a flood of
lawsuits in the mid-1990s. A lawyer for the order declined to comment,
but indicated in a 2011 civil court filing that all treatment records
were destroyed.

Mahony disregarded the order's advice, and therapy memos are among the
most detailed records in the files.

One evaluation recounts how Father Joseph Pina, an East L.A. parish
priest, said he was attracted to a victim, an eighth-grade girl, when
he saw her in a costume.

"She dressed as Snow White … I had a crush on Snow White, so I started
to open myself up to her," he told the psychologist. In a report sent
to a top Mahony aide, the psychologist expressed concern the abuse was
never reported to authorities.

"All so very sad," Mahony wrote years later after Pina was placed on
leave. He was defrocked in 2006.

The limitations of the treatment at the Servants' center are evident
in the file. After months of therapy in 1994, Father John Dawson was
allowed to leave the facility for a weekend. Among the first things
Dawson, who had been accused of plying altar boy victims with pot and
beer, did was apply for a job at the Arizona Boys School in Phoenix.

Treatment center staff found out only after the school phoned Dawson
to arrange an interview. "Had they not called the Villa, it is
doubtful that Fr. Dawson would have informed us of that job
application and interview," according to a 1994 letter to Mahony's
vicar for clergy, Msgr. Timothy Dyer.

Responding to a public rebuke by his successor, Mahony insisted Friday
that he tried his best to deal with the priest molestation scandal but
fell short because not enough was known about the problem early in his
career.

In an extraordinary open letter to Archbishop Jose Gomez, Mahony
insisted Friday that he ultimately instituted state-of-the-art
protections against child sexual abuse within the Roman Catholic
Archdiocese of Los Angeles. He seemed to suggest that Gomez had acted
unfairly by publicly announcing that he was stripping the cardinal of
any public role in the local church.

"Not once over these past years did you ever raise any questions
about our policies, practices or procedures in dealing with the
problem of clergy sexual misconduct involving minors," he wrote.

PHOTOS: Cardinal Roger Mahony over the years

"Unfortunately, I cannot return now to the 1980s and reverse actions
and decisions made then," he added. "But when I retired as the active
archbishop, I handed over to you an archdiocese that was second to
none in protecting children and youth."

Mahony posted the letter on his blog Friday afternoon, hours after he
said he had sent it to Gomez.

In a letter Thursday to parishioners, Gomez announced that "effective
immediately, I have informed Cardinal Mahony that he will no longer
have any administrative or public duties." The move came a week after
the release of church records showing Mahony worked to conceal abusers
from police in the 1980s.

-- Harriet Ryan, Victoria Kim, Ashley Powers, Mitchell Landsberg and
Teresa Watanabe

Photo: At a news conference Friday at the Cathedral of Our Lady of
the Angels, Esther Miller, 54, holding photos of other victims, breaks
down while talking about being abused by a Catholic priest when she
was a young girl. Credit: Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On Apr 30, 11:58 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 05:01:32 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@gmail.com>

[Barry OGrady]

That's good information.
You will appreciate this.
Penn and Teller - The Vatican (Full Episode)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuSHRdm5Oq0

[Ike]

On 4/26/2013 9:10 AM, Rod wrote:
> On 4/25/2013 11:08 AM, Ike wrote:
>> On 4/24/2013 5:39 PM, Rod wrote:
>>> On 4/16/2013 4:00 PM, Ike wrote:
>>>> On 4/16/2013 4:48 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 15, 9:55 pm, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/15/2013 11:38 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 15, 3:11 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/14/2013 9:14 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [snippeth]
>>>>>>
>>>
>>> Question: Did Jesus EVER put a limit on sins or forgiveness?
>>>
>>> Answer: YES; in fact, HE SAID Until seventy times seven
>>
>> What a moron.
>>
>> "Seven" represents that which is complete.
>>
>> In other words, it means "always."
>>
>> Seventy amplifies it to "always and forever."
>>
>> Stop trying to play theologian, moron--you suck at it.
>>
>> Ike
>>
>
>
> As you told me in another post...you don't have to provide proof
> that what you are saying has truth in it...

???

I've never written any such thing.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/23/2013 1:15 PM, Rod wrote:
> On 4/22/2013 12:25 AM, Ike wrote:
>> On 4/21/2013 4:30 PM, Asku-inu-nachak wrote:
>>> On 4/21/2013 7:50 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>> On 4/19/2013 7:41 PM, Asku-inu-nachak wrote:
>>>>> On 4/19/2013 5:09 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/18/2013 1:33 PM, Rod wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/17/2013 4:11 AM, Ike wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/17/2013 4:28 AM, Mrs R. Knapp wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 17, 4:40 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/16/2013 7:30 AM, Mrs R. Knapp wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You must be happy your address is not known, I have some family
>>>>>>>>> members that would love to wipe the ground with you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I got the last person who made a threat like that (feeble as it is)
>>>>>>>> off
>>>>>>>> the internet, and I believe he lost his job to boot.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Care to try your luck and test the law yet again? Think your cult
>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>> let you keep your "ordination?" Think the state of Indiana might
>>>>>>>> want to
>>>>>>>> investigate your activities a little further?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I believe that's how your cult's indoctrination center got shut
>>>>>>>> down by
>>>>>>>> the State of Texas, as a little "concerned examination" goes a long
>>>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>> towards running you frauds out on a rail.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ike
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No...you got him TOS'ed from usenet only. He is still on the
>>>>>>> internet
>>>>>>> and his webpage is still up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What? His old blog?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, not his old blog. He has a new one.
>>>>
>>>> What's the address.
>>>
>>> So you can use the same law to bring him down before the truth is
>>> known about you ?
>>
>> ???
>>
>> What "truth" is there to be known about me?
>>
>>> Are you such an ignoramus that you think I would
>>> help you ? I want to see you stop abusing others or gone, either will
>>> work for us.
>>
>> Asshole, this is a free country with free religion and free speech.
>
> So you admit that your version of Christianity permits evil actions

Never said any such thing.

[snip the rhetorical bullshit]


>> If you don't like what I say, which is THE TRUTH, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
>
>
> Were you a wise and knowledgeable man

Right.

'nuff said.

[snip]

>>> I'll send the address out by email to those that request it, but I'm
>>> not about to make it easier for you to survive here while other are
>>> abused.
>>
>> Oh, this is rhetorical bullshit.

[and still is]

>> First, you're bragging that Mark T is still online when he hasn't posted
>> to the newsgroups or his blog for years, and now you're trying to
>> bullshit your way through your false claims.
>>
>> You're so full of shit.

Must have been true, 'cause the bullshit artist didn't rebut it.

>>>> (I'm betting he's not playing the same personal games he was playing
>>>> before, in violation of Australian law.)
>>>
>>> Well, we are quite well aware that you are skirting the edge of the
>>> law.
>>
>> I haven't even come close to skirting the edge of the law.
>
> It's far too early to start defending...

Nothing to defend, moron.

[snip some more rhetorical bullshit]


>> I RELY ON IT, just like Paul did, moron.
>
> I read the new testament to. Paul's actions are there for all to see,
> and clearly point to you being a liar.

Quite the opposite, moron.

>>> When the law makes such abuse illegal you will stop to protect
>>> yourself;
>>
>> Yo.
>>
>> Dickhead.
>>
>> It's called "the Bill of Rights."
>
>
> Your preference for the Bill of Rights and fulfilling your own sick
> desire to abuse people does not take precedence over the words of
> Christ:

These are the Words of Christ, too, moron...

Mt 23:
13 � But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut
up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves,
neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour
widows� houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall
receive the greater damnation.
15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea
and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold
more the child of hell than yourselves.
16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by
the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the
temple, he is a debtor!
17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple
that sanctifieth the gold?
18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but
whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar
that sanctifieth the gift?
20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all
things thereon.
21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that
dwelleth therein.
22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God,
and by him that sitteth thereon.
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of
mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the
law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to
leave the other undone.
24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean
the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of
extortion and excess.
26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and
platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like
unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are
within full of dead men�s bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye
are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build
the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not
have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children
of them which killed the prophets.
32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the
damnation of hell?

[Funny how assholes like Rod here only use half the Bible at a time,
then have the audacity to accuse a believer]

>> Get used to it, because unless this country falls, it's not going
>> anywhere, and free speech and free religion will never be "illegal."
>>
>> (Yeesh, where do you anti-American pussies come from?)
>>
>>> and this fact tells a whole story about you as a person,
>>> "Ike the amoral".
>>
>> "Ike the amoral?"
>>
>> List my "immoralities," dickhead.

Still waiting for that list, dickhead.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/25/2013 1:13 PM, duke wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:05:32 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/24/2013 3:53 PM, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:05:27 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/22/2013 4:18 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You guys left the Church founded by Jesus, turned away from many of his
>>>>> teachings, and now you're in deep trouble.
>>>>
>>>> Here we have demonstrated the arrogance of the opinionated Catholic, as
>>>> the RCC was never the first, the one, or the only church.
>>>
>>> The ONLY Church...
>>
>> Once again for the moron: The RCC was never the first, the one, or the only.
>
> Jessu Christ started his Church...

...which has seven permutations, which proves that the RCC was NEVER the
first, the one, or the only, just as I said.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/25/2013 1:14 PM, duke wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:08:55 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/24/2013 6:20 PM, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 12:09:02 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/23/2013 8:27 AM, duke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> According to scripture, baptism removes the stain of original sin and all actual
>>>>> sin, ie, sin committed under the OLD covenant.
>>>>
>>>> A LIE.
>>>
>>>> There are sins of the NEW Covenant which need to be forgiven, too, moron.
>>>
>>> That's correct.
>>
>> Then your statement was bullshit to begin with, as they always are.
>
> Nope...

The moron can't even follow his OWN bullshit "logic."

1) The asshole said that baptism removes the stain of...sin committed
under the OLD covenant.

2) I said, rightly, that was a lie, since there are NEW covenant sins, too.

3) The moron said "correct," which means his first statement was
bullshit, and he knows it.

THEN THE MORON PROCEEDED TO ARGUE AGAINST HIS OWN CONFESSION.

Yeesh, are you ever stupid.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/25/2013 1:17 PM, duke wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:04:26 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/24/2013 3:49 PM, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:51:42 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/22/2013 8:27 AM, duke wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:28:59 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/21/2013 5:30 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:54:39 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Apr 20, 11:30 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> And the insertion of "not made" WAS A MISTAKE.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not a chance. There was no sperm and no egg involved. That's makes it
>>>>>>>>> incarnate, not made.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who told you that? If there was no sperm or egg, then how can you
>>>>>>>> call Mary the Mother of God.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also the bible shows Jesus was fully
>>>>>>>> man, which with out such as the sperm and or egg, He could not be a
>>>>>>>> man.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And here we have a supposed Christian pastor that doesn't even understand that
>>>>>>> Jesus was incarnate - begotten not made.
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's religious bullshit invented in the 4th Century because the
>>>>>> goofballs of the time were incapable of thinking in terms of
>>>>>> three-dimensional paradoxes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Poor ike
>>>
>>>> Poor blind "religious" one.

>>>
>>> I follow Jesus, unlike you.
>>
>> No, you follow a "religion," whereas Jesus started a "grass roots movement."
>
> And Jesus gave characteristics. We have them, you don't.

Not even close.

Jesus CONDEMNED religiosity; you revived it in an even WORSE form than
the Jews were practicing.

Idiot.

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/25/2013 1:21 PM, duke wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:03:35 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/24/2013 3:49 PM, duke wrote:

>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:50:52 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/22/2013 8:24 AM, duke wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:27:18 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/21/2013 5:19 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 03:28:50 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/19/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:15:36 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Father is not the Son is not the Holy Spirit is not the Father.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Go back and read what Isaiah said, moron, 'cause he wrote that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FATHER AND THE SON ARE ONE AND THE SAME.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jesus was an unknown man until he started his 3 year ministry.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bullshit.
>>>>>>>>>>> Just a carpenter man who caught some eyes 18 years before in a temple.
>>>>>>>>>> Blasphemer.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jesus was "known" by the prophets via their writings hundreds, and even
>>>>>>>>>>>> thousands of years before He showed up.
>>>>>>>>>>> Then why did Peter deny him 3 times if he knew he had God on his hands?
>>>>>>>>>> Fear, moron, in SPIRIT OF THE FACT that Peter knew EXACTLY who and what
>>>>>>>>>> Jesus is.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He would never have denied him is he did.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He DID deny Him as he did, and He DID know PRECISELY WHO JESUS WAS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the
>>>>>>>> Son of the living God.
>>>>>>>> That shoots your idiotic argument all to hell.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you be any dumber?
>>>>>
>>>>> I could be at your knowledge level, so yes, I could be.
>>>>
>>>> I guess he is that dumb.
>>>
>>> Yes, we both are, aren't we.
>>>
>>>>> Christ = anointed one = messiah = warrior king to come to deliver the Jews back
>>>>> to the prosperity they had before the Babylonian exile.
>>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> Absolutely biblical.
>>
>> Cite it.
>>
>>>> There were many "messiahs" in the Old Testament, as a "messiah" was
>>>> someone appointed and "anointed" by God to a accomplish particular task.
>>>> All of these were prototypes, figuratively preceding THE Messiah, Jesus
>>>> Christ.
>>>
>>> Nope. Warrior king.
>>
>> ...asserted the fool, without proof.
>
> Cry little baby ike. Your goose is cooked, carved and consumed on this one.

...asserted the fool, without proof.

<and then started acting like the child he is when proven wrong>

Ike

[Ike]

On 4/30/2013 11:51 AM, duke wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:22:08 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 4/25/2013 1:14 PM, duke wrote:
>>> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:09:19 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/24/2013 6:21 PM, duke wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:45:58 -0700 (PDT), "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwk...@aim.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> One thing for sure my name was not JUDAS, one of the original
>>>>>> apostles, or is it Peter that Jesus told to get behind ME Satan.
>>>>>> God is with me, and promised never to leave me, that is good enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right. You left him.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hebrews...
>>>>
>>>> ...is spurious.
>>>
>>> Canonized NT scripture.
>
>> By fools three centuries after Christianity started; before that, it was
>> rejected.
>
> Oh, noooooooo.

Oh, yes.

Go read some history, moron.

Ike

[Dr. R. Knapp]

No thank you these guys only mock stuff and things like this is not to
be taken as a joke.