If you do not believe in the trinity you automaticly go to Hell

[Matt]

It is told that if you do not believe in the trinity you automatically
go to hell. Is this so?

These are Christ words:

Matthew 19 (New International Version)

16 Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing
must I do to get eternal life?"
17 "Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is
only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the
commandments."

18 "Which ones?" the man inquired.

Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not
steal, do not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and
mother,'[d] and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'[e]"

20 "All these I have kept," the young man said. "What do I still
lack?"

21 Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your
possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in
heaven. Then come, follow me."

22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had
great wealth.

23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is
hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell
you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than
for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and
asked, "Who then can be saved?"

26 Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but
with God all things are possible."

27 Peter answered him, "We have left everything to follow you! What
then will there be for us?"

28 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all
things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have
followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes
of Israel. 29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters
or father or mother[f] or children or fields for my sake will receive
a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. 30 But many who
are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.


I have studied this but found no real evidence that trinity is
required for salvation.

Early Christians did not have access to the Bible are they mostly
Damned?

Be well

Matt

[Rod]

Salvation from what, Matt? Every culture has a different viewpoint
on what takes place after death, yours is no exception, and none
of those cultures have solid evidence of anything they claim to take
place after death. They are all taking someone else's word for it.

In short, your own personal beliefs are just as valid as anyone else's
until you die and find out firsthand.

>
> Early Christians did not have access to the Bible are they mostly
> Damned?

No. It is as I said before; their personal beliefs are just as valid
as anyone else's beliefs without solid evidence to the contrary, and no,
the bible is not evidence of anything other than someones beliefs.




>
> Be well
>
> Matt
>

[Rod]

On 9/30/2021 11:37 AM, Robert wrote:
> On Sep 30, 2021, Rod wrote
> (in article <sj4jad$fnn$1...@dont-email.me>):

> Salvation takes place in the here and now, to meet the needs of today,
> everyday. At the point of death final salvation is fully realized and
> accomplished. There is no disease in heaven from which we must or need be
> saved from.

This in no way answers the question asked of Matt. ;<(

>>
>>
>> In short, your own personal beliefs are just as valid as anyone else's
>> until you die and find out firsthand.
>

> And that is why religion fails,

[Rod]

On 9/30/2021 5:47 PM, Robert wrote:
> On Sep 30, 2021, Rod wrote

> (in article <sj5a5q$vql$1...@dont-email.me>):

> It does, more than you realize, however, I chose not to go into any great
> detail lest you were to think that somehow I might persuade Matt.

In your imaginings. A big ball of nothing.

[Rod]

On 10/1/2021 8:17 AM, Robert wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2021, Rod wrote
> (in article <sj712f$io5$1...@dont-email.me>):

> OK, then in the future I won/t hold back, Thanks!
>

I asked the question of Matt, not you. I'm not interested in your
warped opinion.

[tesla sTinker]

On 9/29/2021 8:37 PM, Matt scribbled:

My whole family hates me, because i tell them the truth. So no, I
have lost my sisters my brother etc and all of them. Just as the Bible
says. If i sell anything, i have to keep the money for myself cause i
am to poor. It would be for food yes. I still do fufil what it says.
And no, they do not pay me well when I work. But as a slave.

And most the things i have, no one would want to buy them.
who wants an old truck that gets only 7 miles to the gallon?

And yes, its very true your subject line.
verse 26

The Bible explains the rest about the Holy Spirit. And the Son of God.

its called excommunication. And, God has sent men to hell before, its
all in there. So its not like its the first time He did it.

Nor is Jesus, the first one who was born of a lady handmaid that was
barren like that of Mary. And fore told by an angel yes. Sampson was
also.

Yes, the one who was like Hercules, and pushed down the pillars of the
temple of the philistines, killing all many the Giants with his life.!!!

Did Jesus come to save all sins? NO, He did not. Only those that do as
He did in following to Him. so the next time you see some protestant
wacko church telling you that He did, you can know it is not truth.

Verse 26 is loud and clear. And there are other verses that explain
all this. Yup, someone clouded it over with lies, and the changing of
the text. Why? Why would they do that? $$$$

Its always the evil reason.

have a nice day

[tesla sTinker]

Matt, your only taking one part of the Bible.
You have to accept the whole Bible what it says.
It even says, it can save you. But that does not
mean, it can, if you do not accept all of it.
And then there is even more.

And that means, you must because you know, about the Holy Trinity,
accept the whole thing yes. The Bible is clear on what an angel is,
and why they say it to prophets what God wants.

just the word spirit, comes up 489 times in the 73 books of the
Scriptures. Holy Ghost, comes up almost 100 times in the Holy
Scriptures. So, it is specified, holy, which does not mean
steal someones money or truth.

Its your choice now.

On 9/29/2021 8:37 PM, Matt scribbled:

[tesla sTinker]

First book of Peter

12 To whom it was revealed, that not to themselves, but to you they
ministered those things which are now declared to you by them that have
preached the gospel to you, the Holy Ghost being sent down from heaven,
on whom the angels desire to look.

On 9/29/2021 8:37 PM, Matt scribbled:

[tesla sTinker]

On 10/1/2021 8:40 AM, Rod scribbled:

he is building his own church and has been. That is why,, he is
excommunicated and a heretic. Because he refuses the truth always.
That's why he ignores you. And you can believe one thing,
The Holy Trinity, is not a big ball of nothing.

[Rod]

There isn't anyone here that knows the truth other than me.

> That's why he ignores you.    And you can believe one thing,
> The Holy Trinity, is not a big ball of nothing.

I don't believe it.

[Robert]

On Sat, 2 Oct 2021 20:38:27 -0500, Rod <Tr...@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> wrote:

> There isn't anyone here that knows the truth other than me.

BWAAHAHAHA, Thanks, I needed that. :)
--
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
(Heb 11:6 KJV)

[Rod]

On 10/2/2021 11:26 PM, Robert wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Oct 2021 20:38:27 -0500, Rod <Tr...@NOSPAM.yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> There isn't anyone here that knows the truth other than me.
>
> BWAAHAHAHA, Thanks, I needed that. :)
>

And what I said remains true even now.

[Rod]

On 10/3/2021 11:27 AM, Robert wrote:
> On Oct 3, 2021, Rod wrote
> (in article <sjcbmu$vle$1...@dont-email.me>):

> I hope you have a lot of pillows around you.
>

Fantasize away boy wonder...

[Matt]

OK.....What was the Salvation Jesus offered?

>Every culture has a different viewpoint
> on what takes place after death, yours is no exception, and none
> of those cultures have solid evidence of anything they claim to take
> place after death. They are all taking someone else's word for it.
>
> In short, your own personal beliefs are just as valid as anyone else's
> until you die and find out firsthand.

The Trinity has been used as a weapon of fear by some churches
for such things as claimed 'mortal sin' some churches even went so far
as to ask people to PAY for the removal of these sins.

>
>
>
>
>>
>> Early Christians did not have access to the Bible are they mostly
>> Damned?
>
> No. It is as I said before; their personal beliefs are just as valid
>as anyone else's beliefs without solid evidence to the contrary, and no,
>the bible is not evidence of anything other than someones beliefs.

I do not believe all the Bible says as being accurate and beyond
doubt. To many of the OT stories are predated by Pagan stories by
centuries.

Now to answer my own questions on this, I do not believe that belief
in the trinity or Nicene Creed are required for salvation.


>
>
>
>
>>
>> Be well
>>
>> Matt
>>

[Matt]

On Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:46:59 -0700, Robert <i...@home.gov> wrote:

>On Sep 29, 2021, Matt wrote
>(in article<n4calgd93leheav4i...@4ax.com>):

>Read the Book of the Acts. It shows the early Assemblies of the Believers in
>many places, by various Apostles and lay men. It shows the beginnings. Some
>were taught straight from the OT about Jesus.
>
>They were teachers who received what they taught from God the Father,
>directly. With God the Father confirming His word with signs and wonders
>following. What we have in writing is what they were teaching verbally.
>
>Secondly, Read the first three chapters of the Book of the Revelations,
>wherein Jesus describes what was good and bad about the early seven
>Assemblies of Believers. All these things were testimonies of what literally
>was going on in the various assemblies within the first 100 years of the Born
>Again ones.
>
>You might find this of interest, especially as it seems that many churches of
>today are as ignorant or unknowledgeable as was Apollos in that day. Acts
>18:24-28, and here is the kicker, where it relates to the churches of today,
>read Acts 19:1-7 Because many today are as ill informed as those of Apollos
>and his followers wee of The Way, the current churches as as weak as they
>were.
>
>A Study or the Acts is powerful, for that is the way the Assemblies of
>Believers were meant to be at any given time in history.

That there are three separate entities isn't in dispute it is the
use of theh term in interpreting scripture.

[Matt]

Then do you belief non-belief in the trinity as used in the Nicene
creed sends one to hell?

[zeb...@windstream.net]

On Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:33:19 -0700, tesla sTinker
<seav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

The Trinity is one of the biggest scams in existence. It comes from
4th century doctrines, over 300+ years from the last Bible book
written.

The Bible says God is "one" God. (Deut 6:4)
The Athanasian Creed, one of the earliest complete statements of the
Trinity, explains it this way:

"The Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all
one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. . . . the Father is
almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. . . . So the
Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet
there are not three Gods, but one God. . . . In this Trinity none is
afore or after other; none is greater or less than another. But the
whole three persons are coeternal together, and coequal."

"Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears
in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to
contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord
our God is one Lord' (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed
gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . .
By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took
substantially the form it has maintained ever since." (1976,
Micropędia, Vol. X, p. 126.)


James
Understand the Bible
www.jw.org

Got any Bible questions? Fire away.

[tester]

test

[Rod]

I don't either.Basically..I believe there is an intelligence
guiding the growth of the universe but it isn't anything
that is aggressive and brutal. It's benevolent but not stupid
like mankind. In my opinion the bible is all about mankind trying
to elevate himself to godhood. My argument against the scriptures
is that they put the Creator of the Universe in a bad light
by making him appear human and envious as well as violent,
and what I know of him he isn't. These are the traits of men
and evil beings.

I've been watching people since I was 3 years old at home and on tv
and in nearly every case there are those that would sell their own
family into slavery just to get ahead. So many people are obsessed
with things that are bad for them, and their attitudes are bad.

[zeb...@windstream.net]

Yes, but don't forget that God did JUDGING BACK THEN and then executed
their punishment right away. God is not doing that kind of judging
today. That will come later:

(Acts 17:31) Because he has set a day on which he purposes to judge
the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed,
and he has provided a guarantee to all men by resurrecting him from
the dead.”

>
> I've been watching people since I was 3 years old at home and on tv
> and in nearly every case there are those that would sell their own
> family into slavery just to get ahead. So many people are obsessed
> with things that are bad for them, and their attitudes are bad.

And that is no surprise because Satan is the god of this world. (2 Cor
4:4)

[zeb...@windstream.net]

On Sat, 02 Oct 2021 11:33:19 -0700, tesla sTinker
<seav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Matt, your only taking one part of the Bible.
>You have to accept the whole Bible what it says.
>It even says, it can save you. But that does not
>mean, it can, if you do not accept all of it.
>And then there is even more.
>
>And that means, you must because you know, about the Holy Trinity,
>accept the whole thing yes. The Bible is clear on what an angel is,
>and why they say it to prophets what God wants.
>
>just the word spirit, comes up 489 times in the 73 books of the
>Scriptures. Holy Ghost, comes up almost 100 times in the Holy
>Scriptures. So, it is specified, holy, which does not mean
>steal someones money or truth.
>
>Its your choice now.
>
>On 9/29/2021 8:37 PM, Matt scribbled:
>> It is told that if you do not believe in the trinity you automatically
>> go to hell. Is this so?

You are being decieved by Christendom. The Bible does not teach that
God is a Trinity. Rather it says God is "one":

(Deuteronomy 6:4) “Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.

(Mark 12:29) Jesus answered: “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel, Jehovah
our God is one Jehovah,

(Mark 12:32) The scribe said to him: “Teacher, you spoke well, in line
with truth, ‘He is One, and there is no other besides him’;

(1 Corinthians 8:6) there is actually to us one God, the Father, from
whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus
Christ, through whom all things are and we through him.

Of course not. MOST all the dead will be resurrected. They are all
'sleeping' right now:

(John 11:11-14) After he said these things, he added: “Laz´a·rus our
friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.”
12 The disciples then said to him: “Lord, if he is sleeping, he will
get well.” 13 Jesus, however, had spoken about his death. But they
imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. 14 Then Jesus
said to them plainly: “Laz´a·rus has died,


James
understand the Bible
www.jw.org

>>
>> Be well
>>
4>> Matt

[tesla sTinker]

On 10/3/2021 8:37 PM, Matt scribbled:

as far as the belief in three beings in one God, yes, I do believe it.
I also believe, the devil has a spirit, and is not holy.

see this, near the bottom of the no copy page on my site, It states,
"If you be Christians do the works of Christ"


The last paragraph before the continue states;
"Under certain circumstances, those who disobey the laws of the church
are excommunicated or shut out from the church. "

the review with the Bible this is true, if you review it with the Bible,
the real Bible.

I believe, that one either accepts the true precepts of Almighty God in
the Bible including the fact that the Father and the Son have the same
spirit Holy, which makes them 3 beings in one God.

And, if you look hard enough, you will find out there is also the spirit
of the devil, which has nothing to do with God's voice telling
you to obey him.

http://www.truecarpentry.org/webfolders/web7/webNinthArticleCreed.htm


There are many books, not just the books of the Bible, but books that
were not accepted as part of the Bible. BUT REJECTED.

TODAYS EXAMPLE OF THOSE EXCOMMUNICATED.

the pandora papers tell you some of them their kind.

https://www.icij.org/investigations/pandora-papers/global-investigation-tax-havens-offshore/

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/more-than-60-container-ships-wait-to-dock-as-log-jam-hits-port-of-la/ar-AAONFuE


and the rest is what happens to us those who believe, is persecution by
those that do not. I Daniel of my God, which means I do my best to
obey Him, as if He were sitting right next to me, because He is, Do so
understand He made the world in opposites, and I do mean everything, and
no one, is going to get away with it against Him. You either believe
the Bible, or you do not. And you either exercise it, as it says here
above, or you do not.

These links explain, that of those who are phony, are such.
And yes, they have stolen quin trillions of dollars from us.
And have ruined the economy on purpose. Do you really think
they will stop now, just because they tell you another lie?

They will go to hell, if they do not believe in all of My good God,
all three beings in one. Same as Jesus said so. Blasphemy of the Holy
Ghost is not forgivable.

[tesla sTinker]

want to see what this says?



And they will go, because they already have built a space ship.
whether it be this one, or the next one, it will be to the place thats
called Polaris. So far, this book has been true, I do not think it is
going to change now...... Because He has scattered us today, no doubt.
And there are not many of us. And will do it again. And when they do
go, God will so force them back here. Just as it says. And He always
tells the truth.

Deuteronomy

3 The Lord thy God will bring back again thy captivity, and will have
mercy on thee, and gather thee again out of all the nations, into which
he scattered thee before. 4 If thou be driven as far as the poles of
heaven, the Lord thy God will fetch thee back from thence, 5 And will
take thee to himself, and bring thee into the land which thy fathers
possessed, and thou shalt possess it: and blessing thee, he will make
thee more numerous than were thy fathers.

9 And the Lord thy God will make thee abound in all the works of thy
hands, in the fruit of thy womb, and in the fruit of thy cattle, in the
fruitfulness of thy land, and in the plenty of all things. For the Lord
will return to rejoice over thee in all good things, as he rejoiced in
thy fathers: 10 Yet so if thou hear the voice of the Lord thy God, and
keep his precepts and ceremonies, which are written in this law: and
return to the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul.

works, see it,,,,,,well, that word, is listed in the true Bible more
than 400 times.
And its an action word. No doubt.

And a demand of His precepts being kept. Not to mention, the
Sacrifice of the Mass, ceremony.

So when He died on the cross, He only did it for those that will so keep
His Precepts and commandments. The [precept law exists in the Bible, of
"not to leave the seasons"] Which means the earths atmosphere. So yes,
He says it above,

the Lord thy God will fetch thee back from thence.

We, will likely die in a mass amount today, because the infidel
believes, they can screw God and people. For they do not love thy
neighbor. Of which is, one of His Precepts.

No one, will get out of the opposites. Just as the invisible, yes,
could be the heavens, above the heavens. Just as the true DRV Bible
says so. Black holes, yes, they are up there.



On 10/3/2021 8:37 PM, Matt scribbled:

[tesla sTinker]

On 10/12/2021 1:42 PM, Robert scribbled:
> On Oct 12, 2021, tesla sTinker wrote
> (in article<sk4ebq$73i$1...@dont-email.me>):

>
>>
>> They will go to hell, if they do not believe in all of My good God, all three
>> beings in one. Same as Jesus said so. Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is not
>> forgivable.
>

> Jesus said that blasphemy is attributing the works of the Holy Spirit to
> Satan is the blasphemy.
>
> Mat 12:25-32 (DRB)
>
> 25 And Jesus knowing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided
> against itself shall be made desolate: and every city or house divided
> against itself shall not stand.
>
> 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself: how then shall
> his kingdom stand?
>
> 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them
> out? Therefore they shall be your judges.
>
> 28 But if I by the Spirit of God cast out devils, then is the kingdom of God
> come upon you.
>
> 29 Or how can any one enter into the house of the strong, and rifle his
> goods, unless he first bind the strong? and then he will rifle his house.
>
> 30 He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me,
> scattereth.
>
> 31 Therefore I say to you: Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but
> the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven.
>
> 32 And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be
> forgiven him:but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be
> forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come.
>
> Jesus was anointed with the Holy Spirit by God the Father, and so is the Born
> Again believer since the day of Pentecost.
>
> You really need to read the scripture, and you need to be Born Again,
> otherwise you are a pretender.
>
> Rom 8:7-9 (DRB)
>
> 7 Because the wisdom of the flesh is an enemy to God. For it is not subject
> to the law of God: neither can it be.
>
> 8 And they who are in the flesh cannot please God.
>
> 9 But you are not in the flesh, but the spirit, if so be that the Spirit of
> God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of
> his.
>
>

making your own stories up is not ok.
This is not true.

Jesus said that blasphemy is attributing the works of the Holy Spirit to
Satan is the blasphemy.

Nor is it proper sentenced, so that one can make sense of.

[Matt]

I do not believe it is required for Salvation or Jesus would have
made that plain.

As for the Bible when you read the red letter edition without the
words of Paul then Pauls words it seems like a different belief
system, Paul's is more militant.

[tesla sTinker]

The bible is not below, that is a protestant made up peice of shit.
Which I have told you, is not valid.

God was specific, not only on the Trinity, but the fact that you
cannot speak with God, unless you accept the other person in Him.
His spirit. And He told you, to keep it the same, His Holy Word,
and anyone that does not use it, it is not His.

23 Jesus answered, and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my
word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will
make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not, keepeth not my words.
And the word which you have heard, is not mine; but the Father's who
sent me. 25 These things have I spoken to you, abiding with you. 26 But
the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he
will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever
I shall have said to you.

The reason he says this, is because it is already written in the old
testament, To keep the Bible the same. Not to mention His Holy Ghost.

What you wrote below, is a bunch of poppy cocky. Invalid texts.

now, if you accepted the true Bible, you would know, that you have to
accept the Holy Ghost as the one who will be teaching you. As it says
here. That means, you would except the three beings in one God.
But you advertise false texts from a false Bible. Your Bible, does not
say these things.


On 10/11/2021 6:58 AM, zeb...@windstream.net scribbled:

[zeb...@windstream.net]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2021 08:49:17 -0700, tesla sTinker
<seav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>The bible is not below, that is a protestant made up peice of shit.
>Which I have told you, is not valid.
>
>God was specific, not only on the Trinity, but the fact that you
>cannot speak with God, unless you accept the other person in Him.
>His spirit. And He told you, to keep it the same, His Holy Word,
>and anyone that does not use it, it is not His.

I accept God as the Bible portrays Him. God is not a fourth century
Trinity. Nowhere in the Bible does it say He is 3 persons in 1 God.
I accept God, as the Bible defines Him, as POURING out His holy spirit
upon people. (Acts 2:18) You can't pour out a person. The Holy Spirit
is God's force for accomplishing His will.

>
>23 Jesus answered, and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my
>word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will
>make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not, keepeth not my words.
>And the word which you have heard, is not mine; but the Father's who
>sent me.

Looks like most of Christendom have disobeyed Jesus' words. They
participate in wars, such as WWI and WWII. In doing so, they defy
Jesus' words at Mt 5:44:

(Matthew 5:44) However, I say to you: Continue to love your enemies
and to pray for those who persecute you,

Vs 24 shows Jesus and God to be two separate people. Jesus told others
about God's word, but NOT Jesus' words.

> 25 These things have I spoken to you, abiding with you. 26 But
>the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he
>will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever
>I shall have said to you.

The HS here is personified, just like wisdom is. (wisdom has children)

>
>The reason he says this, is because it is already written in the old
>testament, To keep the Bible the same. Not to mention His Holy Ghost.
>
>What you wrote below, is a bunch of poppy cocky. Invalid texts.

No Scriptural texts in the Bible is invalid. It is all, "beneficial
for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for
disciplining in righteousness." (2 Tim 3:16)

>
>now, if you accepted the true Bible, you would know, that you have to
>accept the Holy Ghost as the one who will be teaching you. As it says
>here.

I accept most all parts of various Bible translations. Yes, God can
use His HS to teach people. But the HS is a FORCE, not a person.

>That means, you would except the three beings in one God.
>But you advertise false texts from a false Bible. Your Bible, does not
>say these things.

Nonsense. The Bible doesn't teach 3 beings in one God. On the
contrary, the Bible says God is ONE. (Deut 6:4)

If anyone has any Bible questions, just ask.

[tesla sTinker]

On 10/20/2021 12:27 AM, zeb...@windstream.net scribbled:

Even the merriam webster knows there is.
But you wish to say, God cannot be a person,? by not claiming,
the 3 in one God. Typical of a bible basher.
Which is why I know, you are not in His Holy Church. Just your own.

Par•a•clete \"par-e-'klet\ noun [ME Paraclyte, fr. LL Paracletus,
Paraclitus, fr. Gk Parakletos, lit., advocate, intercessor, fr.
parakalein to invoke, fr. para- + kalein to call — more at low] (15c)
: holy spirit

(C)1996 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. All
rights reserved

[tesla sTinker]

On 10/20/2021 12:27 AM, zeb...@windstream.net scribbled:

The only fight you have, is that it does not descript the Father in
the Bible. Yet it does.

Book of Daniel, three in the fire furnace.
these are the words of the evil king, an he did see God
the Father yes. His words were,

chapter 3 Daniel verse 91-
"was astonished, and rose up in haste, and said to his nobles: Did we
not cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered the
king, and said: True, O king. 92 He answered, and said: Behold I see
four men loose, and walking in the midst of the fire, and there is no
hurt in them, and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. 93 Then
Nabuchodonosor came to the door of the burning fiery furnace, and said:
Sidrach, Misach, and Abdenago, ye servants of the most high God, go ye
forth, and come. And immediately Sidrach, Misach, and Abdenago went out
from the midst of the fire."


So it says he saw with his own eyes, The Son of God. Now, how can he
know who it is that he saw, of one that was not put in there with the
other 3. His define, was God of the person he saw. And it would have
to be God the Father, because Jesus was not born yet.

Now, you can eat your hat, because yes there is define of a person as
God, that someone, yes a evil king, did see, and it was recorded in the
book of Daniel. Long Time ago.

That would mean, according to the rest of the true Bible, DRV
That there are 3 beings, in one God yes. One of which has no physical
body being, but, is only Holy Spirit.

The other 2, God the Father, and God the Son, are both physical body and
have been seen yes.

[zeb...@windstream.net]

On Sat, 23 Oct 2021 12:09:56 -0700, tesla sTinker

<seav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>On 10/20/2021 12:27 AM, zeb...@windstream.net scribbled:
>> On Sat, 16 Oct 2021 08:49:17 -0700, tesla sTinker
>> <seav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The bible is not below, that is a protestant made up peice of shit.
>>> Which I have told you, is not valid.

Which Bible translation are you the most comfortable with?

God most definitely IS a person.

>Typical of a bible basher.
>Which is why I know, you are not in His Holy Church.
>Just your own.

I am not in any "church".I go to a Kingdom Hall.

[zeb...@windstream.net]

On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 08:49:03 -0700, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Oct 25, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>(in article<bhddnglhvs85m8rg8...@4ax.com>):

>
>> I am not in any "church".I go to a Kingdom Hall.
>

>That to is nothing special. God does not dwell in buildings, but in the
>heart.

It is a place where believers can get together to worship their God.

>
>There is a Kingdom of Satan

Of course. And Satan blinds many people to not see wisdom and goodness
found in Jesus.

>
>And
>
>A Kingdom of God.
>
>The kingdom of God is spiritual at this time,
>
>The Kingdom of Satan is the reality of this world we live in.
>
>Notice that your patriarchs Named them Kingdom Halls without specifying that
>they are of Satan.

That is the last thing they are. But the churches of Christendom are,
because of their pagan beliefs such as an immortal soul taught by the
pagan Plato and his students.

James
understand the Bible
www.jw.org



>

>Sneaky, weren't they. :)

[ZEB...@windstream.net]

On Tue, 02 Nov 2021 16:10:40 -0700, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 2, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>(in article<pvf2og594fep1pc7l...@4ax.com>):

>
>> On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 08:49:03 -0700, Robert<no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Oct 25, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>> > (in article<bhddnglhvs85m8rg8...@4ax.com>):
>> >
>> > > I am not in any "church".I go to a Kingdom Hall.
>> >
>> > That to is nothing special. God does not dwell in buildings, but in the
>> > heart.
>>
>> It is a place where believers can get together to worship their God.
>>
>> >
>> > There is a Kingdom of Satan
>>
>> Of course. And Satan blinds many people to not see wisdom and goodness
>> found in Jesus.
>

>At one time you wouldn't even admit the reality of Satan. And now while you
>admit there is a Jesus, you do not admit that he is the Messiah, nor God.

Jesus is the Messiah. He is NOT God.

>
>So tell us, who is it that lives within the heart of every Born Again
>Believer?

Jesus and God.

>>
>>
>> >
>> > And
>> >
>> > A Kingdom of God.
>> >
>> > The kingdom of God is spiritual at this time,
>> >
>> > The Kingdom of Satan is the reality of this world we live in.
>> >
>> > Notice that your patriarchs Named them Kingdom Halls without specifying that
>> > they are of Satan.
>>
>> That is the last thing they are. But the churches of Christendom are,
>> because of their pagan beliefs such as an immortal soul taught by the
>> pagan Plato and his students.
>

>Well, you have a problem there. Obviously you all are not Christians, even
>though you like to use the name. You do not make Jesus the Master of your
>lives, nor your group. You pretend that the spirit of man is not eternal,
>that there is not the Lake of Fire and Brimstone where eternal torure takes
>place, and therefore you depart from the Scriptures. And I could go on and
>list a lot of things that you all do not follow even though the scriptures
>says to do so.

Nonsense. God is the supreme leader. Jesus is next. As the apostle
Paul said when Jesus was in Heaven with God:

- King James
1 Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every
man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of
Christ is God.

Hellfire is not a Bible doctrine. For one thing, the righteous man Job
wanted to go to hell to EASE HIS PAINS:

Who will grant me this, that thou mayst protect me in hell, and hide
me till thy wrath pass, and appoint me a. time when thou wilt remember
me? (DRA)

You need to study the Bible more.

There is nothing inherently eternal with mankind:

-- King James
Ezekiel 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father,
so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall
die.
No immortal soul here.

Yes, there is more errors in Christendom such as belief in the
Trinity. That is a 4th century doctrine, which was long after the
Bible was written. But it is very popular in Christendom.


>
>So as you are not part of the Kingdom of God, either present of future, there
>then only remains one kingdom that you are part of, both now and in the
>future in eternity. And you know whose kingdom that is. Unless you repent.

Speaking of the kingdom of God, the Bible shows us the true religion
would be doing the following in the last days:

-- King James
Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all
the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
Guess who is fulfilling that Scripture. Just look at any Bible aid
magazine the Watchtower, and read the cover. It says:

"ANNOUNCING JEHOVAH'S KINGDOM".

James
understand the Bible
www.jw.org



>>
>>

>> James

[P+Barker]

Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>Tell me. When you got married and you became here head. Was she skilled
>enough at using makeup to make you think you were not kissing yourself? ;)

Would Jesus approve of your insults?

[P+Barker]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2021 08:44:29 -0700, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 4, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<j3h7ogtt10cf8teke...@4ax.com>):

>There you go, lack of reading comprehension, once again.

I do not believe Jesus would deliberately insult people.

[P+Barker]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2021 12:52:30 -0700, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 4, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>(in article<n1e8ogtgdt64seqs3...@4ax.com>):

>Yet you do it.

I don't claim to have the Holy Spirit dwelling in me. I do not claim
to be able to speak for Jesus. And I do not claim to have discussions
with God.

[zeb...@windstream.net]

On Wed, 03 Nov 2021 18:37:43 -0700, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 3, 2021, ZEB...@WINDSTREAM.NET wrote
>(in article<5o56oglq7ur5vrdl3...@4ax.com>):

>
>> On Tue, 02 Nov 2021 16:10:40 -0700, Robert<no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Nov 2, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>> > (in article<pvf2og594fep1pc7l...@4ax.com>):
>> >
>> > > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 08:49:03 -0700, Robert<no...@none.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On Oct 25, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>> > > > (in article<bhddnglhvs85m8rg8...@4ax.com>):
>> > > >
>> > > > > I am not in any "church".I go to a Kingdom Hall.
>> > > >
>> > > > That to is nothing special. God does not dwell in buildings, but in the
>> > > > heart.
>> > >
>> > > It is a place where believers can get together to worship their God.
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > There is a Kingdom of Satan
>> > >
>> > > Of course. And Satan blinds many people to not see wisdom and goodness
>> > > found in Jesus.
>> >
>> > At one time you wouldn't even admit the reality of Satan. And now while you
>> > admit there is a Jesus, you do not admit that he is the Messiah, nor God.
>>
>> Jesus is the Messiah. He is NOT God.
>

>Where in scripture is that said?

John 1:41,42
1 Cor 11:3, John 14:26, John 14:28

>>
>>
>> >
>> > So tell us, who is it that lives within the heart of every Born Again
>> > Believer?
>>
>> Jesus and God.
>

>Where in Scripture is that said?

See above.

>>
>>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > And
>> > > >
>> > > > A Kingdom of God.
>> > > >
>> > > > The kingdom of God is spiritual at this time,
>> > > >
>> > > > The Kingdom of Satan is the reality of this world we live in.
>> > > >
>> > > > Notice that your patriarchs Named them Kingdom Halls without specifying
>> > > > that
>> > > > they are of Satan.
>> > >
>> > > That is the last thing they are. But the churches of Christendom are,
>> > > because of their pagan beliefs such as an immortal soul taught by the
>> > > pagan Plato and his students.
>> >
>> > Well, you have a problem there. Obviously you all are not Christians, even
>> > though you like to use the name. You do not make Jesus the Master of your
>> > lives, nor your group. You pretend that the spirit of man is not eternal,
>> > that there is not the Lake of Fire and Brimstone where eternal torure takes
>> > place, and therefore you depart from the Scriptures. And I could go on and
>> > list a lot of things that you all do not follow even though the scriptures
>> > says to do so.
>>
>> Nonsense. God is the supreme leader. Jesus is next. As the apostle
>> Paul said when Jesus was in Heaven with God:

(1 Corinthians 11:3) But I want you to know that the head of every man
is the Christ; in turn, the head of a woman is the man; in turn, the
head of the Christ is God.

>
>And He is seated at the right Hand of God, at this time.

>>
>>
>> - King James
>> 1 Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every
>> man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of
>> Christ is God.
>

>I took the liberty of snipping everything else you posted here. Why>
>
>You ignored all that has been said on this subject, and you showed no respect
>for the scriptures given that explained that verse. You immediately close
>your eyes, mouth and ears when you are shown the truth, and then proceed to
>parrot this false doctrine of Yours.

Very clever. Remove my comments so a person can't judge for themselves
what is true or not.

>
>You'll have no meaningful dialogue. Even though you claim to do as Paul did.

So we should do as you do, and snip away opposing views?

>
>Not every man has Christ as their head.

>
>Tell me. When you got married and you became here head. Was she skilled
>enough at using makeup to make you think you were not kissing yourself? ;)

You need to change your pills. They are scrambling your brain.

[tesla sTinker]

On 11/6/2021 7:31 AM, zeb...@windstream.net scribbled:

It does not use the to before know, and it does not use the t h e,
before the name Christ, which means, there is not another.

and woman are to remain silent. chpt14


34 Let women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted them
to speak, but to be subject, as also the law saith. 35 But if they would
learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a shame
for a woman to speak in the church.

and automatically is spelled with 2 ls, not one

There are others that are of God, not just Jesus.
Samson was one of them born by an angel of a woman barren.
So its important people return to the truth of history because we
forget, and the Bible tells us we forget, Jesus said, and we do.

[zeb...@windstream.net]

On Sat, 06 Nov 2021 23:00:26 -0700, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 6, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>(in article<bb3dogt9fufn1254h...@4ax.com>):

>
>> On Wed, 03 Nov 2021 18:37:43 -0700, Robert<no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Nov 3, 2021, ZEB...@WINDSTREAM.NET wrote
>> > (in article<5o56oglq7ur5vrdl3...@4ax.com>):
>> >
>> > > On Tue, 02 Nov 2021 16:10:40 -0700, Robert<no...@none.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On Nov 2, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>> > > > (in article<pvf2og594fep1pc7l...@4ax.com>):
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 08:49:03 -0700, Robert<no...@none.com> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On Oct 25, 2021, zeb...@windstream.net wrote
>> > > > > > (in article<bhddnglhvs85m8rg8...@4ax.com>):
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I am not in any "church".I go to a Kingdom Hall.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > That to is nothing special. God does not dwell in buildings, but in the
>> > > > > > heart.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It is a place where believers can get together to worship their God.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > There is a Kingdom of Satan
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Of course. And Satan blinds many people to not see wisdom and goodness
>> > > > > found in Jesus.
>> > > >
>> > > > At one time you wouldn't even admit the reality of Satan. And now while
>> > > > you
>> > > > admit there is a Jesus, you do not admit that he is the Messiah, nor God.
>> > >
>> > > Jesus is the Messiah. He is NOT God.
>> >
>> > Where in scripture is that said?
>>
>> John 1:41,42
>> 1 Cor 11:3, John 14:26, John 14:28
>

>NONE of them say it.

The Bible says to REASON on the Scriptures. In John 1:41,42, it says:

"We have found the Mes·si´ah” Thus Jesus was the Messiah. No Scripture
says the Messiah was to be God.

At 1 Cor 11:3 it says that while Jesus is in Heaven with God, God is
greater than Jesus.

John 14:26,28 says "for the Father is greater than I am."

THUS JESUS CANNOT BE GOD, ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE.

>>
>>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > > So tell us, who is it that lives within the heart of every Born Again
>> > > > Believer?
>> > >
>> > > Jesus and God.
>> >
>> > Where in Scripture is that said?
>>
>> See above.
>

>NONE of them say it.

Yes they do if you reason on the Bible.

>
>>
>>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > And
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > A Kingdom of God.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > The kingdom of God is spiritual at this time,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > The Kingdom of Satan is the reality of this world we live in.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Notice that your patriarchs Named them Kingdom Halls without specifying
>> > > > > > that
>> > > > > > they are of Satan.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > That is the last thing they are. But the churches of Christendom are,
>> > > > > because of their pagan beliefs such as an immortal soul taught by the
>> > > > > pagan Plato and his students.
>> > > >
>> > > > Well, you have a problem there. Obviously you all are not Christians, even
>> > > > though you like to use the name. You do not make Jesus the Master of your
>> > > > lives, nor your group. You pretend that the spirit of man is not eternal,
>> > > > that there is not the Lake of Fire and Brimstone where eternal torure
>> > > > takes
>> > > > place, and therefore you depart from the Scriptures. And I could go on and
>> > > > list a lot of things that you all do not follow even though the scriptures
>> > > > says to do so.
>> > >
>> > > Nonsense. God is the supreme leader. Jesus is next. As the apostle
>> > > Paul said when Jesus was in Heaven with God:
>>
>> (1 Corinthians 11:3) But I want you to know that the head of every man
>> is the Christ; in turn, the head of a woman is the man; in turn, the
>> head of the Christ is God.
>

>Which has zero to do with the topic.

Which clearly tells us that Jesus in Heaven, cannot be God.

>>
>>
>> >
>> > And He is seated at the right Hand of God, at this time.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > - King James
>> > > 1 Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every
>> > > man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of
>> > > Christ is God.
>> >
>> > I took the liberty of snipping everything else you posted here. Why>
>> >
>> > You ignored all that has been said on this subject, and you showed no
>> > respect
>> > for the scriptures given that explained that verse. You immediately close
>> > your eyes, mouth and ears when you are shown the truth, and then proceed to
>> > parrot this false doctrine of Yours.
>>
>> Very clever. Remove my comments so a person can't judge for themselves
>> what is true or not.
>

>You've been shown those were all lies countless times before. And I did what
>you have done before.
>How do you like those apples.

You should seek out better apples. Yours are rotten.

>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > You'll have no meaningful dialogue. Even though you claim to do as Paul did.
>>
>> So we should do as you do, and snip away opposing views?
>

>You already did that, many times.

Not at all. I RARELY if ever, do snipping. For you to say that I do is
a pure lie, and you know that it is.

>>
>>
>> >
>> > Not every man has Christ as their head.
>> >
>> > Tell me. When you got married and you became here head. Was she skilled
>> > enough at using makeup to make you think you were not kissing yourself? ;)
>>
>> You need to change your pills. They are scrambling your brain.
>

>So you cannot gripe the picture, eh? That is the verse you always quote from
>that scripture, married the two become one flesh, so if you are one, then
>whose head reigns supreme? According to you it is the man.

We all are one flesh with a head that controls the body (arms and legs
etc) Jesus said a married couple is one flesh. But like our body, they
become one flesh with the husband as the head of the wife:

(1 Corinthians 11:3) But I want you to know that the head of every man
is the Christ; in turn, the head of a woman is the man; in turn, the
head of the Christ is God.

[zeb...@windstream.net]

The wife does not exercise her authority over the husband. And she
can't teach a man spiritual things, but can answer at the meetings,
etc.

>
>
>34 Let women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted them
>to speak, but to be subject, as also the law saith. 35 But if they would
>learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is a shame
>for a woman to speak in the church.

This means a woman cannot get up in front of the church and give
spiritual talks. But she can say "praise the Lord" and other such
things.

>
>and automatically is spelled with 2 ls, not one
>
>There are others that are of God, not just Jesus.
>Samson was one of them born by an angel of a woman barren.
>So its important people return to the truth of history because we
>forget, and the Bible tells us we forget, Jesus said, and we do.

Angels and humans are not to normally mix. Each has their own place in
God's service.

[Matt]

On Thu, 04 Nov 2021 07:32:18 -0400, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Would he approve of the RCC's pedophilia and lies? Would he approve
of the cover-up done for centuries?

[P+Barker]

On Sat, 13 Nov 2021 17:18:18 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Jesus does not approve of any sin.

[Matt]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 10:39:58 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

That is true. The lies of the RCC are not from a organization of
Jesus.

[P+Barker]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 09:47:13 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 14, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<udb2pg56pqelc2185...@4ax.com>):

>And he holds those in leadership to a higher standard than others, for they
>are your leaders and examples of how to live a Godly life. They do not get
>special dispensations as Earl stated they did many times.

God holds EVERYONE responsible for their own acts.

[P+Barker]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 10:12:04 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 10:39:58 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 13 Nov 2021 17:18:18 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 04 Nov 2021 07:32:18 -0400, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Tell me. When you got married and you became here head. Was she skilled
>>>>>enough at using makeup to make you think you were not kissing yourself? ;)
>>>>
>>>>Would Jesus approve of your insults?
>>>
>>>
>>> Would he approve of the RCC's pedophilia and lies? Would he approve
>>>of the cover-up done for centuries?
>>>
>>
>>Jesus does not approve of any sin.
>
>
>That is true. The lies of the RCC are not from a organization of
>Jesus.

What lies?

[Matt]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 14:59:01 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 10:12:04 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 10:39:58 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 13 Nov 2021 17:18:18 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 04 Nov 2021 07:32:18 -0400, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Tell me. When you got married and you became here head. Was she skilled
>>>>>>enough at using makeup to make you think you were not kissing yourself? ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>Would Jesus approve of your insults?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Would he approve of the RCC's pedophilia and lies? Would he approve
>>>>of the cover-up done for centuries?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Jesus does not approve of any sin.
>>
>>
>>That is true. The lies of the RCC are not from a organization of
>>Jesus.
>
>What lies?

Do you want them listed again? OK, there are many. The trinity is
one as it is not biblical, then you have all the reasons for the
inquisitions, then you have the lie and greedy use of indulgences,
then the lies as to the Pope's authority from God, then the lies told
in the cover-up of pedophilia. Do I need to go on?

[Matt]

On Sun, 14 Nov 2021 14:58:37 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Yes and does he hold people who claim to represent him on earth to
the same standard as he does one of the sheep who did evil at the
direction of said priest or Pope? As a example those that burned
people at the behest of the RCC for over 500 years?

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:

>>God holds EVERYONE responsible for their own acts.
>
> Yes and does he hold people who claim to represent him on earth to
>the same standard as he does one of the sheep who did evil at the
>direction of said priest or Pope?

Ask God. I don't speak for him.

>As a example those that burned
>people at the behest of the RCC for over 500 years?

<Yawn>

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:

>>>>Jesus does not approve of any sin.

>>>That is true. The lies of the RCC are not from a organization of
>>>Jesus.

>>What lies?


> Do you want them listed again? OK, there are many. The trinity is
>one as it is not biblical,

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching
them to obey everything I have commanded you."
Matthew 28:19-20a

>then you have all the reasons for the>inquisitions,

You think this is a lie?
It actually is history.

>then you have the lie and greedy use of indulgences,

Several hundred years ago some evil "larry's" made money on people.

>then the lies as to the Pope's authority from God,

Papal supremacy is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the Pope,
by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, the visible source and
foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company
of the faithful, and as pastor of the entire Catholic Church, has
full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power
which he can always exercise unhindered:[1] that, in brief, "the Pope
enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal
power in the care of souls."[

> then the lies told
>in the cover-up of pedophilia.

Why did you lie about yer own pops, larry?
How many kids could you have saved if you had turned him in earlier?

> Do I need to go on?

Be my guest, junior.

[P+Barker]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:29:10 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 16, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>> > P+Barker<PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>
>> > > > > Jesus does not approve of any sin.

>> Papal supremacy is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the Pope,
>> by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, the visible source and
>> foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company
>> of the faithful, and as pastor of the entire Catholic Church, has
>> full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power
>> which he can always exercise unhindered:[1] that, in brief, "the Pope
>> enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal
>> power in the care of souls."[
>

>That is the doctrine of men, not of God.

Yes. It is the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
That is exactly what I just said.


>It is no different than the rulers
>of the past who considered themselves gods.

OK.
The pope does not consider himself as God.
He also does not claim to have conversations with God.
And he also does not claim to be able to heal people.


>This was what the RCC had
>transferred to them in a deal made with the last of the Roman rulers.

Perhaps you could show actual references for this?


>Check out the history if you do not believe it, and this is how the Pontiff
>got his titles.

You make the claim.
You provide the references.

[P+Barker]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 15:09:41 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 16, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>(in article<11d8pgde1maluh0o4...@4ax.com>):

>
>> On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:29:10 -0800, Robert<no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Nov 16, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>>
>> > > > P+Barker<PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > > > > Jesus does not approve of any sin.
>>
>> > > Papal supremacy is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the Pope,
>> > > by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, the visible source and
>> > > foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company
>> > > of the faithful, and as pastor of the entire Catholic Church, has
>> > > full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power
>> > > which he can always exercise unhindered:[1] that, in brief, "the Pope
>> > > enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal
>> > > power in the care of souls."[
>> >
>> > That is the doctrine of men, not of God.
>>
>> Yes. It is the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
>> That is exactly what I just said.
>

>You said it was by divine institution, which is a lie.

What I said was:

"the Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and
universal power in the care of souls."

Do you recall the words: "Upon this rock I will build my church.?"
Jesus KNEW He would die, and leave this world. He knew that someone
must keep the Gospel alive, and spread it to all the world.
The pope takes seriously his task of care of the the souls.

>>
>>
>> > It is no different than the rulers
>> > of the past who considered themselves gods.
>>
>> OK.
>> The pope does not consider himself as God.
>> He also does not claim to have conversations with God.
>> And he also does not claim to be able to heal people.
>

>They are proclaimed to be as God by PayPal decree. That doctrine has never
>been denied once it was proclaimed.

>>
>>
>> > This was what the RCC had
>> > transferred to them in a deal made with the last of the Roman rulers.
>>
>> Perhaps you could show actual references for this?
>>
>> > Check out the history if you do not believe it, and this is how the Pontiff
>> > got his titles.
>>
>> You make the claim.
>> You provide the references.
>

>Given all the times you have been shown the truth, and turned right around
>and denied it, and also willingly lie to defame truths one learns not to
>invest their time upon those that trample pearls.
>

[P+Barker]

Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:


>> The pope does not consider himself as God.
>> He also does not claim to have conversations with God.
>> And he also does not claim to be able to heal people.
>

>They are proclaimed to be as God by PayPal decree.

Do you really like to throw crap against the wall?
You make stupid allegations.
Prove it.

>That doctrine has never
>been denied once it was proclaimed.

"Upon this rock I will build my church.

This is a serious statement.
And the pope takes it seriously.

>>
>> > This was what the RCC had
>> > transferred to them in a deal made with the last of the Roman rulers.
>>
>> Perhaps you could show actual references for this?

I guess you can't prove your stupid allegations.
Uh oh.... will robert take another powder and run away again?

>> > Check out the history if you do not believe it, and this is how the Pontiff
>> > got his titles.
>>
>> You make the claim.
>> You provide the references.
>

>Given all the times you have been shown the truth, and turned right around
>and denied it, and also willingly lie to defame truths one learns not to
>invest their time upon those that trample pearls.

You don't show any truths.
You make stupid claims.
that you cannot back up with proof.

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes and does he hold people who claim to represent him on earth to
>the same standard as he does one of the sheep who did evil at the
>direction of said priest or Pope? As a example those that burned
>people at the behest of the RCC for over 500 years?

BTW, how is your dad?
The Red Cross is opening an emergency shelter in Mount Vernon at 6
p.m. at the Bethany Covenant Church, 1318 18th Street.

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:


>>God holds EVERYONE responsible for their own acts.

Is that why:

The Red Cross opened a shelter Sunday night in Sedro Woolley for
residents escaping flooding in the area. The shelter is located at the
Hamiton First Baptist Church, 797 Hamilton Cemetery Road. Assistance
at the shelter includes food cots and other needs.

Anyone heading to the shelter is encouraged to bring any prescriptions
or emergency medication, extra clothing, pillows, blankets and hygiene
supplies.

The mayor of Mount Vernon declared a civil emergency for Monday,
deploying flood walls in downtown and closing the Skagit Riverwalk and
Plaza. Also, Edgewater and Lions parks are closed.

On Monday, a number of districts closed due to flooding, power
outages and road conditions, including Bellingham, Ferndale, Mount
Baker, Orcas Island, and Meridian public schools and Lynden Christian
schools.

[Rod]

On 11/17/2021 7:29 AM, P+Barker wrote:
> Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> The pope does not consider himself as God.
>>> He also does not claim to have conversations with God.
>>> And he also does not claim to be able to heal people.
>>
>> They are proclaimed to be as God by PayPal decree.
>
> Do you really like to throw crap against the wall?
> You make stupid allegations.
> Prove it.
>
>
>> That doctrine has never
>> been denied once it was proclaimed.
>
> "Upon this rock I will build my church.
> This is a serious statement.
> And the pope takes it seriously.
>
>
>
>
>>>
>>>> This was what the RCC had
>>>> transferred to them in a deal made with the last of the Roman rulers.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you could show actual references for this?
>
> I guess you can't prove your stupid allegations.
> Uh oh.... will robert take another powder and run away again?

Yes...

[P+Barker]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 10:34:31 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 17, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<sf0apg53b69hibd8d...@4ax.com>):

>Again you said it was by Divine Institution.
>That is still a lie.

"UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."
That seems to be Divine Institution to me.


>I have also explained many times and recently a couple times why your
>twistisin on what Christ said to Peter was not only False, but Peter was not
>the head of Any Church, and never appeared in Rome.

Are you claiming the Bible spouts lies?
Was Jesus lying?
What else in the Bible do you dispute?



>In fact Paul spoke against the idea of following Peter, Paul, Apollos, or
>anyone else except Jesus.

Prove it.
HERE BELOW>>>>

[P+Barker]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 10:38:16 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 17, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>(in article<gn0apgt3su345t1j2...@4ax.com>):

>
>> Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > The pope does not consider himself as God.
>> > > He also does not claim to have conversations with God.
>> > > And he also does not claim to be able to heal people.
>> >
>> > They are proclaimed to be as God by PayPal decree.
>>
>> Do you really like to throw crap against the wall?
>> You make stupid allegations.
>> Prove it.
>

>The RCC purchased their Papal rights from the failed Roman Empire.

<Yawn>
What a crock of shit.

Prove it.



>> > That doctrine has never
>> > been denied once it was proclaimed.
>>
>> "Upon this rock I will build my church.
>> This is a serious statement.
>> And the pope takes it seriously.
>

>No doubt he believes that lie, as do you.

It is in the Bible.
It is quite plain and simple.


>Jesus is the Rock. Peter is a stone.

Jesus pronounced a blessing upon Peter and proclaimed Peter's answer
as having been derived by divine inspiration. He then stated, “And I
say also unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”

This includes you.

[P+Barker]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 18:25:52 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 17, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>(in article<049bpgtnbqek1650l...@4ax.com>):

>Rock, yes, a massive immovable Rock, not a stone, wi=hich was the name of
>Peter. Jesus is the Rock. And that was foretold in the OT

If you are going to make a claim, prove it.

As Greek scholars—even non-Catholic ones—admit, the words petros and
petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant “small stone”
and “large rock” in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the
time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language
by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in
meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was
written in Koine Greek—an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek,
both petros and petra simply meant “rock.” If Jesus had wanted to call
Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used.

As you know, Aramaic was the language Jesus and the apostles and all
the Jews in Palestine spoke. It was the common language of the place.
The words of Jesus were "translated" into Greek for the writing. And
as I said earlier, In Koine Greek, both petros and petra simply meant
“rock.”

Many, if not most of them, knew Greek, of course, because Greek was
the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world. It was the language of
culture and commerce; and most of the books of the New Testament were
written in it, because they were written not just for Christians in
Palestine but also for Christians in places such as Rome, Alexandria,
and Antioch, places where Aramaic wasn’t the spoken language.

We know that Jesus spoke Aramaic because some of his words are
preserved for us in the Gospels. Look at Matthew 27:46, where he says
from the cross, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ That isn’t Greek; it’s
Aramaic, and it means, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’

You have masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns. The Greek word petra
is feminine. You can use it in the second half of Matthew 16:18
without any trouble. But you can’t use it as Simon’s new name, because
you can’t give a man a feminine name—at least back then you couldn’t.
You have to change the ending of the noun to make it masculine. When
you do that, you get Petros, which was an already-existing word
meaning rock.
https://www.catholic.com/tract/peter-the-rock

+ Now, I could go on, but I don't believe you would read what I say.

>> > I have also explained many times and recently a couple times why your
>> > twistisin on what Christ said to Peter was not only False, but Peter was not
>> > the head of Any Church, and never appeared in Rome.
>>
>> Are you claiming the Bible spouts lies?
>

>You are not the Bible.

"UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."

>> Was Jesus lying?
>> What else in the Bible do you dispute?
>

>the Bible disputes your words and false understandings.

"UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."

>>
>>

>> > In fact Paul spoke against the idea of following Peter, Paul, Apollos, or
>> > anyone else except Jesus.
>>
>> Prove it.
>> HERE BELOW>>>>
>

>“Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye
>all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that
>ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
>For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of
>the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say,
>that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas;
>and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye
>baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but
>Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own
>name.” (1Co 1:10-15, KJV)

That does NOT say we should not follow Peter.
It says we should follow Jesus.
Peter is NOT Jesus. He is the bureaucratic head of the church that
was left behind by Jesus. No one claims Peter should be followed
next.



>“For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife,
>and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am
>of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul,
>and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave
>to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So
>then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God
>that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one:
>and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. For
>we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's
>building.” (1Co 3:3-9, KJV)

Yup, we are laborers for the Lord.
Not for Peter or Paul.



>You are supposed to hide the word of God in your soul so that you will not
>sin against him.

When will you start hiding the word of God in your soul?


>et a far better way to to be Born Again, and be a new
>creature in Christ Jesus, so that you will live with a new found desire to
>please God First.

All Catholics are born again when they are Baptised.




>And you will see that you will even hate to tell a small
>white lie, that it would be detestable to you as part of your new nature in
>Christ Jesus. You would start finding out that you mo longer want to be a
>troll, and that you would find immense displeasure with these day by day
>denials of yours regarding of the truth of God.

Troll?
You call me a troll when I conront you about LIES about the Catholic
faith, doctrine and dogma -- in my own Catholic newsgroup?

How funny.

[P+Barker]

Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 17, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>> > > "Upon this rock I will build my church.
>> > > This is a serious statement.
>> > > And the pope takes it seriously.
>> >
>> > No doubt he believes that lie, as do you.
>>
>> It is in the Bible.
>> It is quite plain and simple.
>>
>> > Jesus is the Rock. Peter is a stone.
>>
>> Jesus pronounced a blessing upon Peter and proclaimed Peter's answer
>> as having been derived by divine inspiration. He then stated, “And I
>> say also unto thee, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
>> church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”
>>
>> This includes you.
>

>Which is to say, that art a stone, and, but is a better term, upon this Rock
>massive in size, I will build my Church.

I went over this in an earlier post.
If you need me to write it again, I will.

As Greek scholars—even non-Catholic ones—admit, the words petros and
petra were synonyms in first century Greek. They meant “small stone”
and “large rock” in some ancient Greek poetry, centuries before the
time of Christ, but that distinction had disappeared from the language
by the time Matthew’s Gospel was rendered in Greek. The difference in
meaning can only be found in Attic Greek, but the New Testament was
written in Koine Greek—an entirely different dialect. In Koine Greek,
both petros and petra simply meant “rock.” If Jesus had wanted to call
Simon a small stone, the Greek lithos would have been used.

>Christ is the builder of the Church,

There is no disagreement here.
Jesus left us 2000 years ago.
The church that He built (upon Peter) uses Holy Scripture, Apostolic
Tradition and explanations of the Magistrate to keep the huge ship of
Catholicism going in the right direction.


>not Cephas which was to whom he was speaking. Read it again. Peter had
>nothing to do with the Church of Rome.

That's yer story, and yer stickin ta it.
Peter was not, and never claimed to be the head of the Roman Catholic
Church. Come up with a new whine.



>As to the RCC buying the rights to the Roman government and its rule, it is a
>matter of public records which also included their clam shell hats of the
>heathen religion. That you are ignorant of it all is your problem, not mine.

Post your references.
I'm willing and able to tell you what they say and lie about.

[Matt]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 09:41:04 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes and does he hold people who claim to represent him on earth to
>>the same standard as he does one of the sheep who did evil at the
>>direction of said priest or Pope? As a example those that burned
>>people at the behest of the RCC for over 500 years?
>
>BTW, how is your dad?

My dad passed away over a decade ago and isn't buried in WA.

>The Red Cross is opening an emergency shelter in Mount Vernon at 6
>p.m. at the Bethany Covenant Church, 1318 18th Street.

I also have a houseful as well as my converted barn. Solar system
held up and works well.

[Matt]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 09:42:46 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

You forgot Concrete area. Did you have a point in posting this? My
property is above those areas and has backup power.

[Matt]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:06:21 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>>>>>Jesus does not approve of any sin.
>
>>>>That is true. The lies of the RCC are not from a organization of
>>>>Jesus.
>
>>>What lies?
>
>
>> Do you want them listed again? OK, there are many. The trinity is
>>one as it is not biblical,
>
>"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the
>name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching
>them to obey everything I have commanded you."
>Matthew 28:19-20a
>
>
>>then you have all the reasons for the>inquisitions,
>
>You think this is a lie?

I think you doubt the history of the RCC and of the inquisitions.

>It actually is history.
>
>
>>then you have the lie and greedy use of indulgences,
>
>Several hundred years ago some evil "larry's" made money on people.
>
>
>
>>then the lies as to the Pope's authority from God,
>
>Papal supremacy is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the Pope,
>by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, the visible source and
>foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company
>of the faithful, and as pastor of the entire Catholic Church, has
>full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power
>which he can always exercise unhindered:[1] that, in brief, "the Pope
>enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal
>power in the care of souls."[
>
>
>
>> then the lies told
>>in the cover-up of pedophilia.
>
>Why did you lie about yer own pops, larry?

My dad isn't named Larry that is a lie you use in your attempts at
detraction.

>How many kids could you have saved if you had turned him in earlier?

How many kids could Melanie Berkmen or Melissa Kalt?

>
>
>> Do I need to go on?
>
>Be my guest, junior.

OK The box is broken.

[Matt]

On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 17:47:47 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:29:10 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 16, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>
>>> > P+Barker<PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>>
>>> > > > > Jesus does not approve of any sin.
>
>>> Papal supremacy is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the Pope,
>>> by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, the visible source and
>>> foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company
>>> of the faithful, and as pastor of the entire Catholic Church, has
>>> full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power
>>> which he can always exercise unhindered:[1] that, in brief, "the Pope
>>> enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and universal
>>> power in the care of souls."[
>>
>>That is the doctrine of men, not of God.
>
>Yes. It is the doctrine of the Catholic Church.
>That is exactly what I just said.

Yes the history of the RCC proves it is a pagan with a small side of
Paul Church. Yet mostly pagan as the idols show.

[Matt]

On Wed, 17 Nov 2021 19:58:07 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Does not say that is Catholic as the RCC did not exist then. Maybe
the "ROCK" is the earth? The inquisitions that went on for
centuries, the stealing of art and property and the pedophilia prove
the RCC is not what was talked about. This was written about 70 AD.

[Michael Christ]

Patrick Barker is one sick twisted religious freakazoid individual, but
next to Robert, he is a choir boy!







Michael Christ

>
>>
>>
>>> I have also explained many times and recently a couple times why your
>>> twistisin on what Christ said to Peter was not only False, but Peter was not
>>> the head of Any Church, and never appeared in Rome.
>>
>> Are you claiming the Bible spouts lies?
>> Was Jesus lying?
>> What else in the Bible do you dispute?
>>
>>
>>
>>> In fact Paul spoke against the idea of following Peter, Paul, Apollos, or
>>> anyone else except Jesus.
>>
>> Prove it.
>> HERE BELOW>>>>

--
Jesus is the Father, Jesus is God, Jesus is the Lord.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth? The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination".

"Compromise will condemn you".

"There are no sinners in Christ Jesus".

"My sons are born of Me. In them is no darkness at all".

"You can't learn righteousness. Haven't you had enough time already to
know that?"

"The way of truth is the testimony of life".

"I merely speak the truth, what is revealed to me, and the cards fall
where God intends."

"Nothing that is produced is produced without first being faith."

"You can only find proof of God through faith because that is how we all
live, by faith."

"It is not what you do that matters, it is how you treat Me."

"Keep going forward. Forget about the past. Lift up your head, look
ahead."

"You cannot be free with guilt in your heart."

"Priority is everything".

"The truth doesn't need evidence, it is evidence."

"There is no greater possession a man has than his own will, to squander
it or to place it where it truly belongs."

"An atheist is a fool who thinks truth is found in living a lie."

"Saying 'prove it' [as a foundation] is merely a straw man, to a straw man."

"Wait, rest, be still, and know."

"No man can wash his own hands!!!"

"I find this in the Christianity religions: 'Nobody's perfect' they say,
and they use that as an excuse not to do what is perfect."

The Atheist: "They don't believe and put their faith in a Creator. So
no evidence and proof is to be found!!"

[P+Barker]

Michael Christ <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On 19/11/2021 6:10 am, Matt wrote:

, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>

>>>>> What I said was:
>>>>> "the Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and
>>>>> universal power in the care of souls."
>>>>> Do you recall the words: "Upon this rock I will build my church.?"
>>>>> Jesus KNEW He would die, and leave this world. He knew that someone
>>>>> must keep the Gospel alive, and spread it to all the world.
>>>>> The pope takes seriously his task of care of the the souls.
>>>>
>>>> Again you said it was by Divine Institution.
>>>> That is still a lie.
>>>
>>> "UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."
>>> That seems to be Divine Institution to me.
>>
>> Does not say that is Catholic as the RCC did not exist then. Maybe
>> the "ROCK" is the earth? The inquisitions that went on for
>> centuries, the stealing of art and property and the pedophilia prove
>> the RCC is not what was talked about. This was written about 70 AD.
>
>Patrick Barker is one sick twisted religious freakazoid individual, but
>next to Robert, he is a choir boy!

Ohhh, mikey... mikey....

[P+Barker]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:45:48 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 18, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<vomcpg921d5nehg4s...@4ax.com>):

>You said nothing. Like a good little boy in catechism you repeated the words
>of the RCC and totally disagreed with your post I read earlier where you
>stated reading in block and understanding the Bible in the whole context of
>what it taught. Way to go, again you made yourself a liar.

Are you totally stupid?
I followed your lead with the greek interpretations.
And I proved you to be in error.
And I still read more than one phrase at a time in the Bible.
You should try it.

>
>Throughout the old and the NT's Jesus is spoken of as The Rock. And not a
>stone. Jesus knew that way better than you will ever know.

Why do you think that is?
Could "Rock" mean something sturdy, dependable, stable, firm..?
Can more than one person be considered a Rock?
What shall I do about Duane Johnson?

Why can't Peter be considered a Rock?




>They, the RCC just pulled the wool over your eyes as the minions of the evil
>one do.

You sound like you have experience with the evil one.



>1Co 10:4 (KJV)
>4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that
>spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

"upon this rock I will build my church."

>> "UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."
>

>Ah yes, the RCC chanter.

What charter do you use?
Upon this calvin I will build my church - but I can deny him also.

>> > > > In fact Paul spoke against the idea of following Peter, Paul, Apollos, or
>> > > > anyone else except Jesus.
>> > >
>> > > Prove it.
>> > > HERE BELOW>>>>
>> >
>> > “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that
>> > ye
>> > all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that
>> > ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
>> > For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of
>> > the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say,
>> > that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of
>> > Cephas;
>> > and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye
>> > baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but
>> > Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own
>> > name.” (1Co 1:10-15, KJV)
>>
>> That does NOT say we should not follow Peter.
>> It says we should follow Jesus.
>

>It said you were not to claim adherence to any of them.

I don't adhere to any leader in my church.
Most people do not even know the name of their own bishop.

>
>> Peter is NOT Jesus. He is the bureaucratic head of the church that
>> was left behind by Jesus. No one claims Peter should be followed
>> next.
>

>Then the pope is out, and to be disregarded as to what he directs the RCC to
>do. It stands to reason.

What does he direct the church to do that does not agree with Jesus
Words? C'mon.... be the man.... show me up.

>> > “For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and
>> > strife,
>> > and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am
>> > of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul,
>> > and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave
>> > to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So
>> > then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but
>> > God
>> > that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one:
>> > and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. For
>> > we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's
>> > building.” (1Co 3:3-9, KJV)
>>
>> Yup, we are laborers for the Lord.
>> Not for Peter or Paul.
>

>Only if you are Born Again, otherwise it is all a pretense.

<Yawn>
Are you boasting again?

>> > You are supposed to hide the word of God in your soul so that you will not
>> > sin against him.
>>
>> When will you start hiding the word of God in your soul?
>>
>> > et a far better way to to be Born Again, and be a new
>> > creature in Christ Jesus, so that you will live with a new found desire to
>> > please God First.
>>
>> All Catholics are born again when they are Baptised.
>

>Not true. If it were to be true then the RCC should lease a fleet of 747
>water droppers and fly over all the world with "holy water" and baptize all
>the people of the word. Look at all the child molesters in the RCC who were
>baptized.

What hog wash.
1. All Catholics are born again when they are baptised.
2. You rent a 747 - what a wierd thought.
3. Yes, I am positive that some child molestors were baptised.
4. The RCC knows that we are all sinners, as Jesus once said.
That is why we have the Sacrament of Penance.
We do have the opportunity to repent and be brought back into the
fold. Unlike you who may sin, and you don't have to admit it because
you claim you cannot sin.

>> > And you will see that you will even hate to tell a small
>> > white lie, that it would be detestable to you as part of your new nature in
>> > Christ Jesus. You would start finding out that you mo longer want to be a
>> > troll, and that you would find immense displeasure with these day by day
>> > denials of yours regarding of the truth of God.
>>
>> Troll?
>> You call me a troll when I conront you about LIES about the Catholic
>> faith, doctrine and dogma -- in my own Catholic newsgroup?
>

>Yes, because you are extremely gullible

And now you say I am a troll because I am gullible?
Somehow I don't recall that being a characteristic of a troll.



>and not man enough to verify what
>they cram down your throat, does not mean they are feeding you truth.

The RCC crams the words of Jesus down my throat.
But we don't consider it cramming.
Maybe you do.


>You
>keep saying things like the molesting issue is over and done with as the RCC
>has fixed it, yet up pops the molesters, daily. Yes, you are a troll.

The issue is not over.
It will never be over until all sins are done with.
However, the RCC went through a crisis where they had to confront
their own fallibility, past decisions, improper protocols, and poor
decisions to follow the leadinf shrinks of the time.
We screwed up.
The RCC addressed this "ISSUE" in 2002, and came up with good
corrective actions. These actions will never prevent all future sin.
You are a fool if you think that.



>You never fight for the purity of the RCC and the cleanup of its corruption.

The RCC has never claimed to be pure.
Only fakes (like you) can make that claim.
Let's look at some of the actions taken about child abuse over the
years.

Actions by the Vatican - taken to stop the abuse crisis…..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

Catholic bishops in the 50's and 60's viewed sexual abuse by priests
as "a spiritual problem, one requiring a spiritual solution, i.e.
prayer". However, starting in the sixties, the bishops came to adopt
an emerging view based on the advice of medical personnel who
recommended psychiatric and psychological treatment for those who
sexually abused minors. This view asserted that, with proper
treatment, priests who had molested children could safely be placed
back into ministry. This approach viewed pedophilia as an addiction,
such as alcoholism which many feel cannot be cured but which can be
treated and restrained.
In 1962, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, Secretary of the Sacred
Congregation of the Holy Office, sent a letter which became known as
the Crimen sollicitationis. In this letter, the Holy Office laid down
procedures to be followed in dealing with cases of clerics (priests or
bishops) of the Roman Catholic Church accused of having used the
sacrament of Penance to make sexual advances to penitents. In
addition, it reiterated the seriousness and gravity of ever breaking
the seal of confession.
In 1983, the Vatican promulgated a revised Code of Canon Law which
included a canon (1395, 2) which explicitly named sex with a minor by
clerics as a canonical crime.
The burgeoning number of scandals evoked deep concern among some
Catholic observers, and in 1985 a confidential report entitled "The
Problem of Sexual Molestation by Roman Catholic Clergy: Meeting the
Problem in a Comprehensive and Responsible Matter" was submitted to
the Catholic hierarchy. The authors included Gauthe's attorney, F. Ray
Mouton, and two clerics [priests], Thomas P. Doyle and Michael
Peterson.... The group warned of the need to take urgent action in the
face of scandals, to react swiftly to complaints, and also to avoid
charges of secretive proceedings or cover-ups. (p. 37) Tragically,
either this advice was not followed, or not followed often enough.
This approach continued to be practiced by the bishops well into the
mid-1980s, a period which characterizes as the "tipping point in the
understanding of the problem within the church and in society".
Pope John Paul II took a number of steps to address the problem of
priestly formation. On March 25, 1992, he completed the apostolic
exhortation Pastores Dabo Vobis ("I Shall Give You Shepherds"), one of
the longest papal documents in history. This explored the crisis of
priestly identity, the renewal of priestly life and the reform of
seminaries in detail. Some have attributed the scant number of abuse
allegations from the 1990s as evidence that the late Pope's reform
efforts were fruitful.
In April 2001, Pope John Paul II issued Sacramentorum sanctitatis
tutela (Safeguarding the Sanctity of the Sacraments). This replaced
the Crimen sollicitationis. All priestly sex crimes cases were to be
placed under the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
which, in most cases, would authorize the bishops to conduct trials
themselves. In May 2001, a letter from the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, in line with the 1983 Code of Canon Law and the
1990 Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, was sent to the Catholic
bishops.
Pope John Paul II declared in 2003 that "there is no place in the
priesthood and religious life for those who would harm the young".
With the approval of the Vatican, the hierarchy of the church in the
United States instituted reforms to prevent future abuse including
requiring background checks for Church employees and volunteers and,
noting the preponderance of adolescent males (teenage boys) amongst
victims of abuse, warned that a more searching inquiry is necessary
for a homosexually oriented man; and the worldwide Church also
prohibited the ordination of men with "deep-seated homosexual
tendencies."
Early in 2010 Cardinal Claudio Hummes, the head of the Congregation
for Clergy, said that instances of sexual abuse by priests were
"criminal facts" as well as serious sins and required co-operation
with the civil justice system
The Pope took the extraordinary steps of ordering the retirement of
Cardinal Bernard Law Archbishop John Aloysius Ward, the most senior
member of the Roman Catholic Church in Wales, in the wake of a
paedophile scandal which rocked their dioceses to its foundations. The
72-year-old archbishop Ward, who had been under severe criticism from
clergy and congregations following the convictions of two priests for
child sexual abuse offences, was forced to resign despite making clear
his determination to stay in office. He had been accused of repeatedly
ignoring warnings about the two priests' conduct.
Actions by the Vatican - taken to stop the abuse crisis…..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

Catholic bishops in the 50's and 60's viewed sexual abuse by priests
as "a spiritual problem, one requiring a spiritual solution, i.e.
prayer". However, starting in the sixties, the bishops came to adopt
an emerging view based on the advice of medical personnel who
recommended psychiatric and psychological treatment for those who
sexually abused minors. This view asserted that, with proper
treatment, priests who had molested children could safely be placed
back into ministry. This approach viewed pedophilia as an addiction,
such as alcoholism which many feel cannot be cured but which can be
treated and restrained.
In 1962, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, Secretary of the Sacred
Congregation of the Holy Office, sent a letter which became known as
the Crimen sollicitationis. In this letter, the Holy Office laid down
procedures to be followed in dealing with cases of clerics (priests or
bishops) of the Roman Catholic Church accused of having used the
sacrament of Penance to make sexual advances to penitents. In
addition, it reiterated the seriousness and gravity of ever breaking
the seal of confession.
In 1983, the Vatican promulgated a revised Code of Canon Law which
included a canon (1395, 2) which explicitly named sex with a minor by
clerics as a canonical crime.
The burgeoning number of scandals evoked deep concern among some
Catholic observers, and in 1985 a confidential report entitled "The
Problem of Sexual Molestation by Roman Catholic Clergy: Meeting the
Problem in a Comprehensive and Responsible Matter" was submitted to
the Catholic hierarchy. The authors included Gauthe's attorney, F. Ray
Mouton, and two clerics [priests], Thomas P. Doyle and Michael
Peterson.... The group warned of the need to take urgent action in the
face of scandals, to react swiftly to complaints, and also to avoid
charges of secretive proceedings or cover-ups. (p. 37) Tragically,
either this advice was not followed, or not followed often enough.
This approach continued to be practiced by the bishops well into the
mid-1980s, a period which characterizes as the "tipping point in the
understanding of the problem within the church and in society".
Pope John Paul II took a number of steps to address the problem of
priestly formation. On March 25, 1992, he completed the apostolic
exhortation Pastores Dabo Vobis ("I Shall Give You Shepherds"), one of
the longest papal documents in history. This explored the crisis of
priestly identity, the renewal of priestly life and the reform of
seminaries in detail. Some have attributed the scant number of abuse
allegations from the 1990s as evidence that the late Pope's reform
efforts were fruitful.
In April 2001, Pope John Paul II issued Sacramentorum sanctitatis
tutela (Safeguarding the Sanctity of the Sacraments). This replaced
the Crimen sollicitationis. All priestly sex crimes cases were to be
placed under the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
which, in most cases, would authorize the bishops to conduct trials
themselves. In May 2001, a letter from the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, in line with the 1983 Code of Canon Law and the
1990 Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, was sent to the Catholic
bishops.
Pope John Paul II declared in 2003 that "there is no place in the
priesthood and religious life for those who would harm the young".
With the approval of the Vatican, the hierarchy of the church in the
United States instituted reforms to prevent future abuse including
requiring background checks for Church employees and volunteers and,
noting the preponderance of adolescent males (teenage boys) amongst
victims of abuse, warned that a more searching inquiry is necessary
for a homosexually oriented man; and the worldwide Church also
prohibited the ordination of men with "deep-seated homosexual
tendencies."
Early in 2010 Cardinal Claudio Hummes, the head of the Congregation
for Clergy, said that instances of sexual abuse by priests were
"criminal facts" as well as serious sins and required co-operation
with the civil justice system
The Pope took the extraordinary steps of ordering the retirement of
Cardinal Bernard Law Archbishop John Aloysius Ward, the most senior
member of the Roman Catholic Church in Wales, in the wake of a
paedophile scandal which rocked their dioceses to its foundations. The
72-year-old archbishop Ward, who had been under severe criticism from
clergy and congregations following the convictions of two priests for
child sexual abuse offences, was forced to resign despite making clear
his determination to stay in office. He had been accused of repeatedly
ignoring warnings about the two priests' conduct.

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:

>>>> "the Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and
>>>> universal power in the care of souls."
>>>> Do you recall the words: "Upon this rock I will build my church.?"
>>>> Jesus KNEW He would die, and leave this world. He knew that someone
>>>> must keep the Gospel alive, and spread it to all the world.
>>>> The pope takes seriously his task of care of the the souls.
>>>
>>>Again you said it was by Divine Institution.
>>>That is still a lie.
>>
>>"UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."
>>That seems to be Divine Institution to me.
>
> Does not say that is Catholic as the RCC did not exist then.

It also doesn't say "divine institution"
Boy... you are so good.

> Maybe the "ROCK" is the earth?

Jesus was talking to Peter, not the earth.
Open a Bible.
Then get back to me.

[P+Barker]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:58:16 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 18, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<uincpg104alc0h43t...@4ax.com>):

>It was and I explained that in depth many times. You OTH explained nothing
>you parroted the RCC dogma.

You used fals scholarly attempts to BS me.
I gave you the real scoop.
Wake up. Get up. Get with the program.

>> > Christ is the builder of the Church,
>>
>> There is no disagreement here.
>> Jesus left us 2000 years ago.
>> The church that He built (upon Peter) uses Holy Scripture, Apostolic
>> Tradition and explanations of the Magistrate to keep the huge ship of
>> Catholicism going in the right direction.
>

>Wrong,

Don't tell me this is wrong.
You don't qualify to tell me what Catholics believe.

>> > not Cephas which was to whom he was speaking. Read it again. Peter had
>> > nothing to do with the Church of Rome.
>>
>> That's yer story, and yer stickin ta it.
>> Peter was not, and never claimed to be the head of the Roman Catholic
>> Church. Come up with a new whine.
>

>Thank you, for admitting he had nothing to do with the RCC

I have always said that.
The RCC did not exist when Jesus said: Upon this rock..."



>Mat 16:17-18 (NKJV)
>17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for
>flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
>18And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My
>church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
>Here is is again, in a block of directly translated from koine Greek to
>modern English.

Yup. Peter is the "ROCK."


>Mat 16:13 (Wuest) 13(13-20)
>
>Now, Jesus having come into the districts adjacent to Caesarea Philippi, was
>asking His disciples, saying, Who do men say that the Son of Man is? And they
>said, Some, indeed, John the Baptizer, but others, Elijah, and still others,
>Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. He says to them, But as for you, who do you
>say that I am? And answering, Simon Peter said, As for you, you are the
>Christ, the Son of God, the living God. And answering, Jesus said to him,
>Spiritually prosperous are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did
>not reveal this to you but my Father who is in heaven. Moreover, as for
>myself, I also am saying to you, You are Rock, and upon this massive rock I
>will build my Church. And the councils of the unseen world shall not
>overpower it. I shall give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and
>whatever you bind on earth, shall have been already bound in heaven; and
>whatever you loose on earth, shall have already been loosed in heaven. Then
>He admonished the disciples sharply that they should tell not even one person
>that He himself is the Christ.
>Peter was not called a pebble but a stone.

He was called a ROCK.
Not stone.

>> Post your references.
>> I'm willing and able to tell you what they say and lie about.
>

>You do that continuously with no shame.

I am not ashamed to point out your lies about Catholic faith, doctrine
and dogma.

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:


>Yes the history of the RCC proves it is a pagan with a small side of
>Paul Church. Yet mostly pagan as the idols show.

<Yawn>

[P+Barker]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 10:54:36 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Nov 2021 16:06:21 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>>Jesus does not approve of any sin.
>>
>>>>>That is true. The lies of the RCC are not from a organization of
>>>>>Jesus.
>>
>>>>What lies?
>>
>>
>>> Do you want them listed again? OK, there are many. The trinity is
>>>one as it is not biblical,
>>
>>"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the
>>name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching
>>them to obey everything I have commanded you."
>>Matthew 28:19-20a
>>
>>
>>>then you have all the reasons for the>inquisitions,
>>
>>You think this is a lie?
>
> I think you doubt the history of the RCC and of the inquisitions.

Why would I.
I do not deny history.
I merely deny your interpretaion of that history.

>OK The box is broken.

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

[Matt]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 19:24:58 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>
>>>>> "the Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and
>>>>> universal power in the care of souls."
>>>>> Do you recall the words: "Upon this rock I will build my church.?"
>>>>> Jesus KNEW He would die, and leave this world. He knew that someone
>>>>> must keep the Gospel alive, and spread it to all the world.
>>>>> The pope takes seriously his task of care of the the souls.
>>>>
>>>>Again you said it was by Divine Institution.
>>>>That is still a lie.
>>>
>>>"UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."
>>>That seems to be Divine Institution to me.
>>
>> Does not say that is Catholic as the RCC did not exist then.
>
>It also doesn't say "divine institution"
>Boy... you are so good.

Good distraction is that all you have?

>
>
>> Maybe the "ROCK" is the earth?
>
>Jesus was talking to Peter, not the earth.

True but "UPON THIS ROCK" in the original language may not mean
what you claim or the RCC.

[Michael Christ]

Patrick Barker, that does not mean the rock on the ring of your Pope.




Michael Christ

[P+Barker]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 16:22:31 +1100, Michael Christ

Never said it did.
Peter didn't wear a ring.

[P+Barker]

Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 18, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>No, you didn't. You just pumped out RCC propaganda. I posted a literal
>translation of it which showed you to be wrong, one that actually supported
>everything I stated in the past.

I followed Greek translations and gave you the truth.
The Gospels were written in Koine Greek, not attic greek that fell out
of use a century before the gospels were written. Get informed.

>> > Throughout the old and the NT's Jesus is spoken of as The Rock. And not a
>> > stone. Jesus knew that way better than you will ever know.
>>
>> Why do you think that is?
>> Could "Rock" mean something sturdy, dependable, stable, firm..?
>> Can more than one person be considered a Rock?
>> What shall I do about Duane Johnson?
>

>I don't know who he is.

>>
>> Why can't Peter be considered a Rock?
>

>Ask Jesus.

I did.
Then I read the Gospels.
You should try it.

Matthew 16:13-20
King James Version
13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his
disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some,
Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of
the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon
Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my
Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I

will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against

it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and
whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

>> > > "UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."
>> >
>> > Ah yes, the RCC chanter.
>>
>> What charter do you use?
>> Upon this calvin I will build my church - but I can deny him also.
>

>Again you bring up Calvin whom I have no part with. And told you so at least
>five times in the past couple weeks.

Perhaps if you studied what calvin tqaught, you might just see that
you really have many things in common. I know you claim to follow no
one's teachings (except Christ), but get over it. That is what every
single preacher says.

>> I don't adhere to any leader in my church.
>> Most people do not even know the name of their own bishop.
>

>Like you?

I know his name. I have never seen him or met him.
He is a bureaucratic leader of a huge area that is responsible for
ensuring his assigned priests are spreading the Good News of Jesus.

>> What does he direct the church to do that does not agree with Jesus
>> Words? C'mon.... be the man.... show me up.
>

>Matt just reminded you regarding his statements on RC fundies, where he said
>that the RCC is "MY Church!"

Is that your BIG argument?
I also have MY car, MY house, MY wife and MY savior.
If you don't have any of these things, uou need to worry.

>
>> > Not true. If it were to be true then the RCC should lease a fleet of 747
>> > water droppers and fly over all the world with "holy water" and baptize all
>> > the people of the word. Look at all the child molesters in the RCC who were
>> > baptized.
>>
>> What hog wash.
>> 1. All Catholics are born again when they are baptised.
>> 2. You rent a 747 - what a wierd thought.
>> 3. Yes, I am positive that some child molestors were baptised.
>> 4. The RCC knows that we are all sinners, as Jesus once said.
>> That is why we have the Sacrament of Penance.
>> We do have the opportunity to repent and be brought back into the
>> fold. Unlike you who may sin, and you don't have to admit it because
>> you claim you cannot sin.
>

>So you are opposed to the RCC leasing a fleet of 747's to save the world.

Why do you even mention something so stupid?
You are an idiot if you think the RCC would make up crap like you.


>My patience is running thin with you, right about now. You are full of false
>accusations, you cannot even comprehend what you read, and then you make
>ridiculous statements about it show you comprehended nothing.

I didn't bring up the 747.

[P+Barker]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 20:25:33 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 19:24:58 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>> "the Pope enjoys, by divine institution, supreme, full, immediate, and
>>>>>> universal power in the care of souls."
>>>>>> Do you recall the words: "Upon this rock I will build my church.?"
>>>>>> Jesus KNEW He would die, and leave this world. He knew that someone
>>>>>> must keep the Gospel alive, and spread it to all the world.
>>>>>> The pope takes seriously his task of care of the the souls.
>>>>>
>>>>>Again you said it was by Divine Institution.
>>>>>That is still a lie.
>>>>
>>>>"UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BULD MY CHURCH."
>>>>That seems to be Divine Institution to me.
>>>
>>> Does not say that is Catholic as the RCC did not exist then.
>>
>>It also doesn't say "divine institution"
>>Boy... you are so good.
>
> Good distraction is that all you have?

Why are you trolling here?
Don't you have some "good" works you could be doing?

[Matt]

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 19:22:48 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Why should he be?

[Matt]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:40:43 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>

Why are you using personal attacks on people and then cry like a
baby when it is returned in kind.

>Don't you have some "good" works you could be doing?

Why are you asking about that. A Christian should do good and help
his neighbors without needed any reward.

[Matt]

I suspect Patrick Barker was a Catholic school choir boy and liked
the abuse and now defends the pedophilia. He was the priest favorite
when he bent over. Now he might molest other children even to his
grand kids. I think he and this Larry guy he talks about so much have
much in common.

[Matt]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 06:53:25 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

How do you know?

[Michael Christ]

You kissing the Pope's ring rock won't do you any good.

> Peter didn't wear a ring.

Did he prefer tea or coffee??

[Michael Christ]

As far as I am concerned, Patrick Barker is just a fraud, in a fraud
religion, so what he actually does is moot.






Michael Christ

>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Michael Christ
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I have also explained many times and recently a couple times why your
>>>>> twistisin on what Christ said to Peter was not only False, but Peter was not
>>>>> the head of Any Church, and never appeared in Rome.
>>>>
>>>> Are you claiming the Bible spouts lies?
>>>> Was Jesus lying?
>>>> What else in the Bible do you dispute?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> In fact Paul spoke against the idea of following Peter, Paul, Apollos, or
>>>>> anyone else except Jesus.
>>>>
>>>> Prove it.
>>>> HERE BELOW>>>>

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> And mikey said:

>>Patrick Barker is one sick twisted religious freakazoid individual, but
>>next to Robert, he is a choir boy!
>
> I suspect Patrick Barker was a Catholic school choir boy and liked
>the abuse and now defends the pedophilia. He was the priest favorite
>when he bent over. Now he might molest other children even to his
>grand kids. I think he and this Larry guy he talks about so much have
>much in common.

One sick bastard insults the catholic.
And the next one high fives him.
How sweet.

[P+Barker]

Michael Christ <jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>As far as I am concerned, Patrick Barker is just a fraud, in a fraud
>religion, so what he actually does is moot.

<Yawn>

[P+Barker]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 10:36:09 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 19, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>> > > I followed your lead with the greek interpretations.
>> > > And I proved you to be in error.
>> > > And I still read more than one phrase at a time in the Bible.
>> > > You should try it.
>> >
>> > No, you didn't. You just pumped out RCC propaganda. I posted a literal
>> > translation of it which showed you to be wrong, one that actually supported
>> > everything I stated in the past.
>>
>> I followed Greek translations and gave you the truth.
>> The Gospels were written in Koine Greek, not attic greek that fell out
>> of use a century before the gospels were written. Get informed.
>

>Koine Greek has been in use during 336 BC – 300 AD, who are you trying to
>kid?

Exactly. My point.
You used attic greek instead of Koine Greek.


>You are so gullible. Yes, I know that the NT was written in koine Greek and
>have been stating that for years, not that you ever paid attention to it.

Then you should know the truth.

>> Matthew 16:13-20
>> King James Version
>> 13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his
>> disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
>> 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some,
>> Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
>> 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
>> 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of
>> the living God.
>> 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon
>> Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my
>> Father which is in heaven.
>> 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I
>> will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
>> it.
>> 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and
>> whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and
>> whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
>

>Translated into todays English is says this.
>
>Mat 16:13
>The word "and" would be better translated as "but" for clarity.

Which bible are you now using? Your own?


>I never studied Calvin, that is a con job teaching of your church. Blame
>everything on Him and Luther.

Luther was a person who really was a scholar and a constructive
criticizer. The RCC needed him to jolt it back from some of the paths
that some RCC leaders were going.

calvin and you make up stuff - the easy way to heaven.


>>My bishop: I know his name. I have never seen him or met him.

>> He is a bureaucratic leader of a huge area that is responsible for
>> ensuring his assigned priests are spreading the Good News of Jesus.
>

>Well, he should be fired, since you are so clueless about it.

Tell me more.

>> > Matt just reminded you regarding his statements on RC fundies, where he said
>> > that the RCC is "MY Church!"
>>
>> Is that your BIG argument?
>> I also have MY car, MY house, MY wife and MY savior.
>> If you don't have any of these things, uou need to worry.
>

>And the man called the pope says the RCC is his, not God's, as usually you
>just don't get it.

God doesn't CLAIM to own the RCC.
Who doesn't get it here?


>You are the one who says that sprinkling water of people whose minds are not
>developed can save them, yet you would seek to deny it to the rest of the
>world? You claim its true, but want to keep it to yourself? It is the RCC
>whose doctrine it is that says water baptism, not blood washes away the sins
>of mankind. They are the ones who claim they are authorized to administer it
>unto people who are clueless and care not whether they are willing or
>unwilling.
>Yeah, it is YOU that touts that doctrine. The doctrine that you says is
>Idiotic.

What a strange idea.
Maybe that is why you claimed you had not been baptised.


>Which is why I implore you that in the days that you feel comprehensive that
>you consider making sure of your state of Salvation per the commandments of
>God.

The commandments of God will not save me.
Only our Lord and Savior can do that.
Wake up.

[P+Barker]

tt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:

>>Why can't Peter be considered a Rock?
>
>Why should he be?

Sacred Scripture.
Go fix breakfast for your boarders, matty.
You have work to do.

[P+Barker]

, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:

[P+Barker]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 13:37:34 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 20, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>(in article<8aohpg9jhlntcdf42...@4ax.com>):

>OOpsie! Did you not just call people names and judge them?

Names.... yes.
Judge them.... I'll let someone else judge them.

[P+Barker]

Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:


>I do, and that is why I fed you the update from the translation to the old
>English, to the current American English.

And now you claim to be an expert in English?
Where did you graduate?

>> Which bible are you now using? Your own?
>>
>> > I never studied Calvin, that is a con job teaching of your church. Blame
>> > everything on Him and Luther.
>>
>> Luther was a person who really was a scholar and a constructive
>> criticizer. The RCC needed him to jolt it back from some of the paths
>> that some RCC leaders were going.
>

>So now he is a good guy to the RCC?

I dunno.
I don't speak for the entire Roman Catholic Church.
I speak for me.

>> calvin and you make up stuff - the easy way to heaven.
>

>Jesus did make things as simple as possible so that even the mentally
>challenged could believe and receive. Yes, He 'gifted' Salvation to us. It
>cannot be earned. He promised to help and assist us in ALL aspects of our
>life, even to the point of giving us the will and want to do.

OK.
Just remember, He is not responsible for your actions.
You are.


>You can mock it all you want, but until you humble yourself before God,
>realizing that you can do nothing of yourself, you will be lost, and
>knowingly lost, as you have no guarantee from the Lord.

There are no guarantees from the Lord.
He puts a light on the path.
It is up to us to actually go up that path.

>> God doesn't CLAIM to own the RCC.
>> Who doesn't get it here?
>

>You. The pope owns it, and so you are beholden to him, not God.

Shaddup, you idiot.
Bearing false witness again, I see.

>> Maybe that is why you claimed you had not been baptised.
>

>I never did that. That was a lie generated by the old lady, who I suppose
>still opposed me.

Why did you hem and haw about this for so long?
Afraid to make a commitment?
What old lady?

>> The commandments of God will not save me.
>> Only our Lord and Savior can do that.
>> Wake up.
>

>Is Jesus not God? Are his commandments of no value to you? Jesus said it is
>His way, or the highway to hell.

[Michael Christ]

On 21/11/2021 8:37 am, Robert wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2021, P+Barker wrote
> (in article<8aohpg9jhlntcdf42...@4ax.com>):

> OOpsie! Did you not just call people names and judge them?

The Holy Fuckin' die daily Robert!! :-))))))))))).





Michael Christ

[Michael Christ]

You call someone a sick bastard and are not judging them?

So what are you doing??

Thank you in advance for not calling me that. I mean, that would be bad.

[Matt]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 11:32:38 +1100, Michael Christ

To rape children is never 'moot' and should never be covered -up.
Patrick defends the pedophilia.

[Matt]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 06:53:17 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

The religion of the person doesn't matter. I now to you Catholics
have the right to molest children just for being Catholic. You I
suspect liked it.

[Matt]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 07:28:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>tt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>>wrote:
>
>>>Why can't Peter be considered a Rock?
>>
>>Why should he be?
>
>Sacred Scripture.

Doesn't say that.

>Go fix breakfast for your boarders, matty.

Have no boarders, but we all take turns with meals.

>You have work to do.

Nope not today.

[Matt]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 07:29:12 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I've been posting to the Christian groups since the days of AOL.
This NG is to discuss things for and about Catholics be they good or
bad.

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> To rape children is never 'moot' and should never be covered -up.
>Patrick defends the pedophilia.

pooh widdle matty. His life must really suck with all the anger he
holds.

[P+Barker]

On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 09:13:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 21/11/2021 8:40 am, P+Barker wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 13:37:34 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 20, 2021, P+Barker wrote
>>> (in article<8aohpg9jhlntcdf42...@4ax.com>):
>>>
>>>> Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> And mikey said:
>>>>
>>>>>> Patrick Barker is one sick twisted religious freakazoid individual, but
>>>>>> next to Robert, he is a choir boy!
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect Patrick Barker was a Catholic school choir boy and liked
>>>>> the abuse and now defends the pedophilia. He was the priest favorite
>>>>> when he bent over. Now he might molest other children even to his
>>>>> grand kids. I think he and this Larry guy he talks about so much have
>>>>> much in common.
>>>>
>>>> One sick bastard insults the catholic.
>>>> And the next one high fives him.
>>>> How sweet.
>>>
>>> OOpsie! Did you not just call people names and judge them?
>>
>> Names.... yes.
>> Judge them.... I'll let someone else judge them.
>
>You call someone a sick bastard and are not judging them?

Not in this case. I call a spade --- a spade.
No judgement. Just fact.

>So what are you doing??
>Thank you in advance for not calling me that. I mean, that would be bad.

Don't lie about me, my religion, or Catholic Doctrine or Dogma.
I won't need to have to confront you or have any discussion.

[P+Barker]

Matt <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The religion of the person doesn't matter. I now to you Catholics
>have the right to molest children just for being Catholic. You I
>suspect liked it.

Did you like it?

[P+Barker]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 18:16:51 -0800, Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:

>On Nov 20, 2021, P+Barker wrote

>(in article<erqipg5l9c9chlujq...@4ax.com>):

>
>> Robert <no...@none.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I do, and that is why I fed you the update from the translation to the old
>> > English, to the current American English.
>>
>> And now you claim to be an expert in English?
>> Where did you graduate?
>

>LOL, speaking of reading comprehension or lack of it. You really need to
>rethink that thought.

And now you claim to be an expert in English?
Where did you graduate?

And in case you ask me: Eastern Illinois University - 1976 and 1978.
Bachelor and Master's Degrees.

>> I don't speak for the entire Roman Catholic Church.
>> I speak for me.
>

>I wish you would instead of search for the words of others, that way you can
>develop thoughts that grow with you.

My thoughts change all the time.
That is what is so cool about self retrospection.

BTW, what does it mean to you when the Lord said "I am the alpha and
the Omega."?

>> OK.
>> Just remember, He is not responsible for your actions.
>> You are.
>

>I am responsible for my choices.

oooooh..... how deep......

>> > You can mock it all you want, but until you humble yourself before God,
>> > realizing that you can do nothing of yourself, you will be lost, and
>> > knowingly lost, as you have no guarantee from the Lord.
>>
>> There are no guarantees from the Lord.
>> He puts a light on the path.
>> It is up to us to actually go up that path.
>

>2Th 3:3 (KJV)
>3 But the Lord is faithful, who shall stablish you, and keep you from evil.

You still have to choose the right path and follow it.

>> > > God doesn't CLAIM to own the RCC.
>> > > Who doesn't get it here?
>> >
>> > You. The pope owns it, and so you are beholden to him, not God.
>>
>> Shaddup, you idiot.
>> Bearing false witness again, I see.
>

>If God does not own it, then who, The pope or Satan.
>The pope did say "this is my Church".
>More name calling again?

Are you saying you do not know what the pope means?
The RCC is also my church.
It is the church I belong to.
It is the church I attend.
And it is the church's doctrines that I believe.

Do you really have a problem with this English?

>> > > Maybe that is why you claimed you had not been baptised.
>> >
>> > I never did that. That was a lie generated by the old lady, who I suppose
>> > still opposed me.
>>
>> Why did you hem and haw about this for so long?
>> Afraid to make a commitment?
>> What old lady?
>

>I never hemmed and hawed about it.

Why did you hem and haw about this for so long?
Afraid to make a commitment?
What old lady?


>> > > The commandments of God will not save me.
>> > > Only our Lord and Savior can do that.
>> > > Wake up.
>> >
>> > Is Jesus not God? Are his commandments of no value to you? Jesus said it is
>> > His way, or the highway to hell.
>>
>> The commandments of God will not save me.
>> Only our Lord and Savior can do that.
>> Wake up.
>

>The Commandment of Jesus when He stated "You must be born again", and others

That wasn't a commandment.
Would you like to know what Jesus said about the "important"
commandments to follow?
Would you like a lesson?

[P+Barker]

On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:14:50 -0800, Matt <trdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[Matt]

On Sun, 21 Nov 2021 10:18:03 -0500, P+Barker <PBa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Not angry. Sickened by how long the cover-up actually worked and how
many parents put the RCC before their own kids.