Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles
Title: Because to two accusatons, I will answer questions
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: May 7, 2015
Author: Pastor Bob Celeste ACP
Post Date: 2015-05-07 13:16:39 by BobCeleste
Keywords: ACP
Views: 28537
Comments: 103
Biff Tannen made this accusation: “Many things, probably most, of the things you claim about God and Christianity are not in the bible.” A Pole made this accusation: “Because you make things up that are not in the Scriptures.” In both instances I replied to them asking them to show even one example of the accusation, neither has done so, but, because of the accusation, I have opened a thirty day email account with HushMail.com I will answer any question dealing with my theology or any non prophecy question regarding the Bible. The email address is biblequestions@hushmail.com Don’t believe Biff Tannen or A Pole, ask your own questions and judge for yourself.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: BobCeleste (#0)
You know, I'm pretty sure it was you who once posted that preachers should never be trusted.
Show me where I ever said "preachers should never be trusted." without a qualifying statement.
If there one accusation that holds water it's that both simple-minded posters Biff Tannen and Logsplitter are lying simpletons. Understandable when you consider both share the same two brain cells.
Impossible. Logsplitter can't even find his own azz cheeks with his own two cloven hooves.
A Pole made this accusation: “Because you make things up that are not in the Scriptures.” In both instances I replied to them asking them to show even one example of the accusation, neither has done so Like magic rosary beads, "holy" water," statues, candles, Marian idoltry, and repeated magic incantations? (OH WAIT. That wasn't you.) Biffy and A Pole have agendas. Even if different. I'd ignore the unscrupulous claims they appear to cowardly NOT back up, Bob.
Thanks Liberator, normally I would, but what concerns me is that there may be a lurker of LPer that is not saved and doesn't know who to believe the slaves of the evil one or me. So, for one week I will answer any, non prophecy, questions. non prophecy for two reasons, one prophecy is hard enough to explain to a serious student of the bible, and second, first comes salvation and then comes the study of prophecy. Thanks again, Bob
I understand. My trust in your sincerity, faith, and knowledge in the service of Jesus Christ has been in inspiration to me....as well as others. May the Lord continue blessing you in your mission of spreading the Gospel as a man of God and a great patriot. Thank you, brutha... Liberator
You are a brave man Bob. I can imagine the spam you are going to get. I guess some will have to decide which multiple email accounts they would use to send you an email:) You may even have one person send you the same question from 7 or more email accounts.
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
I guess some will have to decide which multiple email accounts they would use to send you an email:) You may even have one person send you the same question from 7 or more email accounts. The account I opened has a life of thirty days, after that it is gone, I will only be receiving mail for 7 days, I then have 21 days to answer and then it closes never to open again. Hushmail is a Canadian company that does not cooperate with NSA.
Bob always ignores my most interesting points and tries to direct focus to minutia and boilerplate nonsense. All he'll find out from this little show is how little people care what he thinks. I find him to be a shallow simpleton, at best.
Certainly not preachers involved in politics. Nevermind just because someone says they're a preacher it doesn't mean they are.
Like what? The volume of your belly-button lint? IF he ignores your snide BS, it's because he knows the nonsense YOU post is NEVER serious, never sincere. And let me add what a p*ssy you are for not pinging him. All he'll find out from this little show is how little people care what he thinks. Apparently YOU do. He called you out and now you're whining about him after having attacked his integrity. I find him to be a shallow simpleton, at best. From a guy who probably failed his GED and lives in a van down by the river?
Back it up. IF you can. And we BOTH know you CAN'T.
Problem with that? Why? Is it because a man who knows the Law of God can so easily shame the self-serving Law of secular humanist man? Just because someone says they're a preacher it doesn't mean they are. So you're calling Bob a "liar"? (but NOT posting it TO him?) Wuss.
I have a question for you. Do you see any problem in the legality of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online?
I don't think he's a liar. A simpleton, deluded. Who you find sooo inspiring, lol. Just like you miss goldi so much you could cry, or whatever gibberish you spouted back then.
email the question to: biblequestions@hushmail.com
Eh?
email the question to: biblequestions@hushmail.com What is your reason for not answering my questin on the forum here?
Please email that question to biblequestions@hushmoney.com
True chutzpah from a guy that hides behind the bozo function, to avoid answering uncomfortable questions.
Absolutely!
I do not see any problem in the supposed 'legality' of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online, seeing that the Fed, State, or local govt should have NO business making a religious ceremony either 'legal or illegal'. What's your opinion?
I just did...from a proxy in Denmark with a throwaway email address in Hong Kong.
How many of those did you supply to yukon?
I do not see any problem in the supposed 'legality' of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online, seeing that the Fed, State, or local govt should have NO business making a religious ceremony either 'legal or illegal'. What's your opinion? I don't have an opinion, but I do have a fact. Marriages performed by ministers ordained online are not recognized in some states and jurisdictions. If a legal dispute comes up over a will or another important matter, the marriage would be set aside by a court.
None.
Biff Tannen: How many of those did you supply to yukon? Gatlin: None. Liar.
You "stole" yukon's account because of your association with the old rascal. You and whitesands and 22rifle (Kanary Klub Klan) traded 24 hour positions on libertypost each and every day.
You worked with another rascal, too. The admiral, AKA goatherder and ACLU lover. All of exchanged emails and details together beyond the content of the publick forum. We know what you did with yukon and harrowup. Pretty nasty stuff.
Well that dipshit didn't have the knowhow to provide himself with different emails. He couldn't even cut-and-paste right, lol. Probably took him a week to bookmark i-love-cock.com lololol
I do not see any problem in the supposed 'legality' of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online, seeing that the Fed, State, or local govt should have NO business making a religious ceremony either 'legal or illegal'. What's your opinion? The why did you pose the question? I'd bet you have an agenda, -- correct? So? Our rule of law provides for the settlement of disputes between people, regardless of their religious bonds.
A few years back (maybe two) you were actually examining scriptures and making cogent points from Paul's epistles. What happened man?
"For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
Nothing's changed. I don't bother on forums generally. No one listens to anyone, for the most part, but especially regarding biblical matters. Every once in a while i get annoyed at charlatans and lash out. Getting tired of that too. It's mean and unproductive.
And our rule of law also provides for the settlement of disputes between people based on a legal contract. Marriage is a legal contract. If there is no legal marriage, then there is no legal contract to establish rights and obligations between spouses, between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws. So, our rule of law must then provide for settlement of disputes between people who believe there is a legal contract when there is no legal contract. And that settlement may then be contrary to all prior legal entitlements and agreements set forth in any and all legal documents that were based on a legal marriage contract.
I see that you are back on forum. I have not received your reply to my email. While I am waiting for your reply to my email, I will ask you another question. In James 1:26...
In James 1:26... Does this: If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. Mean this: If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue (fully control bitterness or anger) but deceives his heart (believes something that is not true), this person's religion is worthless (has no good qualities and deserves contempt). Are you REALLY interested in the interpretations of scripture? And are your ad libs really your own interpretation? Or... are you just playing a game of "GOTCHA!"? Pastor Gatlin, as in the past, you've happened to cherry-pick a single verse (suspiciously like all liberals do when they play "GOTCHA!".) Except I wonder why you found it unnecessary to bother including the context of verses sandwiching James 1:26 (James, 1:21-1:25) as well as James 1:27? YOUR homework before Bob answers you is to read James 1:21-1:27 (without cheating) and see if your very same ad libs apply. You second assignment is reading James 3:13-17 (since you seem to be fascinated by James.) I'd be curious in your interpretation (or further ad libbing) in that case as well. Thanks.
Is THAT "gibberish" and the extent of you response? REALLY? Lol...what a space cadet. I'll reach back out to your Mother Ship tomorrow.
Yeah. Those wet noodles sting. OUCH! Getting tired of that too. It's mean and unproductive. It's just...Biffy being Biffy. I don't bother on forums generally. No one listens to anyone, for the most part, but especially regarding biblical matters. Your prerogative to "listen" to "biblical matters." OR ignore them. But how would *you* know who listens to what if you just admitted that you "don't bother on forums generally"?
Comments (42 - 103) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Logsplitter (#1)
You know, I'm pretty sure it was you who once posted that preachers should never be trusted.
#3. To: BobCeleste, Bill Tannen, Logsplitter, Skip Intro (#0)
Biff Tannen made this accusation: “Many things, probably most, of the things you claim about God and Christianity are not in the bible.”
#4. To: BobCeleste, Logsplitter (#2)
Show me where I ever said "preachers should never be trusted." without a qualifying statement.
#5. To: BobCeleste, A Pole, Biff Tannen (#0)
(Edited)
Biff Tannen made this accusation: “Many things, probably most, of the things you claim about God and Christianity are not in the bible.”
#6. To: Liberator (#5)
Biffy and A Pole have agendas. Even if different. I'd ignore the unscrupulous claims they appear to cowardly NOT back up, Bob.
#7. To: BobCeleste (#6)
What concerns me is that there may be a lurker of LPer that is not saved and doesn't know who to believe the slaves of the evil one or me. So, for one week I will answer any, non prophecy, questions.
#8. To: BobCeleste, liberator (#0)
I have opened a thirty day email account with HushMail.com I will answer any question dealing with my theology or any non prophecy question regarding the Bible.
#9. To: redleghunter (#8)
You are a brave man Bob. I can imagine the spam you are going to get.
#10. To: redleghunter (#8)
#11. To: Logsplitter (#1)
#12. To: Biff Tannen, Bob Celeste, redleghunter (#10)
(Edited)
Bob always ignores my most interesting points...
#13. To: Logsplitter, Bob Celeste (#1)
I'm pretty sure it was you who once posted that preachers should never be trusted.
#14. To: Biff Tannen (#11)
...preachers involved in politics.
#15. To: BobCeleste (#0)
I will answer questions.
#16. To: Liberator (#14)
#17. To: Gatlin (#15)
Do you see any problem in the legality of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online?
#18. To: BobCeleste (#2)
...accusatons ... questions...
Well I guess I've got to ask - 'Have you stopped beating your wife?'
#19. To: BobCeleste (#17)
Do you see any problem in the legality of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online?
#20. To: Gatlin (#19)
#21. To: Gatlin, y'all (#19)
What is your reason for not answering my questin on the forum here?
#22. To: tpaine (#21)
True chutzpah ...
#23. To: Gatlin (#22)
Do you see any problem in the legality of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online?
#24. To: BobCeleste, Biff Tannen (#20)
Please email that question to biblequestions@hushmoney.com
#25. To: Gatlin (#24)
#26. To: tpaine (#23)
Do you see any problem in the legality of a wedding that was performed by a friend of someone who was ordained online?
#27. To: Biff Tannen (#25)
How many of those did you supply to yukon?
#28. To: Gatlin, liberator, Deckard (#27)
Gatlin: I just did...from a proxy in Denmark with a throwaway email address in Hong Kong.
#29. To: buckeroo (#28)
(Edited)
NO, I'M NOT!
#30. To: Gatlin (#29)
#31. To: buckeroo (#30)
(Edited)
LIAR!
#32. To: Gatlin (#31)
#33. To: Gatlin (#27)
#34. To: Gatlin (#26)
I don't have an opinion, ---
--- but I do have a fact. Marriages performed by ministers ordained online are not recognized in some states and jurisdictions. If a legal dispute comes up over a will or another important matter, the marriage would be set aside by a court.
#35. To: Biff Tannen (#10)
#36. To: redleghunter (#35)
#37. To: tpaine (#34)
So? Our rule of law provides for the settlement of disputes between people, regardless of their religious bonds.
#38. To: BobCeleste (#37)
Does this:
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless.
Mean this:
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue (fully control bitterness or anger) but deceives his heart (believes something that is not true), this person's religion is worthless (has no good qualities and deserves contempt).
#39. To: Gatlin, BobCeleste (#38)
I will ask you another question.
#40. To: Biff Tannen (#16)
#41. To: Biff Tannen, redleghunter (#36)
Every once in a while i get annoyed at charlatans and lash out.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]