The Gay Denomination?

[99percentatheism]

The Gay Denomination.

For those people that desire same gender sexual behavior or thoughts, AND that claim to be a Christian and claim that their beliefs and theology can fit the New Testament witness, instead of waging an endless, fruitless and vicious war on other Christians - that will NEVER accept their gay doctrines and dogmas . . ., - why won't they just declare a new and alternative denomination, just like Watch Tower theological adherants and Mormons?

Why the need to join forces with anti-Christian and secularist movements to attack "Bible believing" Christians?

Afterall, in referencing the New Testament, there is no justifiable comparison of sex acts to being a slave (slavery), or the charge of bigotry and hatefulness in holding that marriage is a man and a woman.

Why not just start an "Out and Proud" Gay Denomination?

[99percentatheism]

KCKID

Here in America the LGBT's were just about exalted by an elected messiah. I would think that since the greatest man that has ever walked earth at his coronation yesterday in Washington DC would have you sparkling with glee.

I don't live in America. I live in Australia. However, I DO kinda like Obama and I believe that whatever he does he does with sincerity and with the nation's best interests at heart. I hardly think that the GLBT's have been exalted to a status greater than the heterosexual population. It seems to me that it's all about equality and nothing more.

The Christians that believe in the Gospel as Christians have since the Apostles spread it are now vilified by Obama's minions. Legions would be a better definition of his activist orgs actually.

There's your idol worhip KID. In living color.

Yeah . . .

Sarcasm or not, the side he's on is distinctly hostile to Christians that believe as the authentic Christians did in the original Church. The Democrats at his nomination process booed both God and Jerusalem. It had to be the most hostile display towards Christians I have yet to see in my life time. We are entering into a darkness the Church has only faced a fw times. Islam on one side and Obama and his humanistic secularism on the other. It's amazing to see happening.

You can believe as you like. But I've noticed that you have insulted and denigrated the Bible with all of those so-called pro-homosexuality texts you proclaim so highly as much as you have attacked me personally over and over again. Discard the Bible to make your life worthwhile. That is no concern of mine.

I've done no such thing as having insulted and denigrated the Bible. And, there are no such things as 'pro-homosexual' biblical texts. [/quote]

Yes you have. And you treat those of us that handle scripture honestly as bad people. That would make Peter and Paul homophobes and hateful bigots. And of course Jude makes it clear that the gay agenda is hostile to the Truth. Jude would have been sued in today's world. None of these guys would have successful businesses in today's political correctness gone mad.

There ARE, however, alternative interpretations of certain scriptures that are based on FACTS as opposed to relatively recent translations designed specifically to target a group of people that some Christians simply don't like.

There is no shred of facts backing up gay theology. Only cunning wordplay and interpretations based on agenda and not reality. No more original than any other new group coming along demanding The Church bow to its will. To say that gay sex is to be celebrated and same gender marriage is acceptable is the height of heresy. It is based on a different Gospel. One distinctly alien to the one delivered only once to the saints.

By the way, how can the promoting of acceptance and harmony and brotherhood be seen to be 'discarding the Bible'?

It is not surprising that you have that opinion of acceptance and harmony: Everyone having to submit to rule by gay authorities and their new theology. Christians should never condone lies replacing then truth.

My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

- James 4

Have you never considered that it might be YOU who is the 'wanderer from the truth'?

Of course, often. Even on this subject matter. Though the obvious antithetical nature of gay theology stands in its own judgment. It was declared as error by Christians living side by side with the same kinds of people as there are now promoting it. If you were able to side step your emotional and psychological secular conditioning in the matter of gay pride and see the testimony of the Apostles as having immutable worth instead of being dead and buried everytime a new fad comes along, you would be far less hostile to Christians that stand against gay pride taking hold in The Church.

It's interesting to note, you certainly seem to demand your rights to promote your worldview and at the same time demand ours be silenced. In fact, that sems in harmony with what's going on in our politics over here in America.

It's fascinating watching this all develope.

[99percentatheism]

KCKID
Since this particular thread appears to have all but run its course I was going to open a new thread entitled “Exorcism of the Demon of Homosexuality�. I will, however, present the below three YouTube videos, parts 1, 2 and 3 (totalling about 28 minutes), on this thread in the hope of getting some feedback from others on the forum as well as from the thread's author, 99percentatheism.

Does Jesus believe in demon possession?

A simple YES or NO answer KID.

yes______ no_______

I will specifically ask 99percent if he believes that homosexuality IS a form of demon possession and, if so, does he support the so-called exorcism of these alleged demons by the likes of evangelist Bob Larson?

I don't know Bob Larson personally. His efforts seem well intentioned though. Seeing that Jesus dealt with Demons as did his disciples.

Would you rather Larson just allow people to be demon possessed?

Again KID YES or NO: Yes_____ N0_____

Would you, 99percent, welcome such a person, exorcised and now free from the demon of homosexuality, into your particular Church?

Jesus sat down with an ex-demon possessed person after the demons in him were allowed to enter pigs.

I'm thinking there are people that may have voted for Obama in our congregation and now deeply regret it. I'm cool with that.

What's your point?

What kind of evidence would you require that this person is indeed free from the ungodly wiles of this demon before they would not be required by you to start their own denomination?

I guess I'd start with what bumper stickers they have on their car.

Seriously KID, you are grasping at straws here. The ones that are stuffed into the man made up of them.

Just live your life in your own group and have at it.

[KCKID]

KCKID
Since this particular thread appears to have all but run its course I was going to open a new thread entitled “Exorcism of the Demon of Homosexuality�. I will, however, present the below three YouTube videos, parts 1, 2 and 3 (totalling about 28 minutes), on this thread in the hope of getting some feedback from others on the forum as well as from the thread's author, 99percentatheism.

Does Jesus believe in demon possession?

A simple YES or NO answer KID.

There is no simple 'yes' or 'no' answer because we would first need to clarify what a demon is or was supposed to be. You just assume a demon to be some manifestation of Satan within a human being because that's where your particular mindset is at. You seem to use very little logic but instead rely heavily on the written word, particularly the ancient written word. Jesus lived in a world that would have been both very unlike as well as very like our own world. It's truly a waste of time for a layman such as myself to reconstruct for himself the concepts of 2000 years ago. Personally, I DON'T believe in demons, ala Satan, but we do, of course, in modern idiom refer to someone as 'confronting their demons' with regard to their overcoming life's hurdles/facing something they are trying hard to avoid.

The demons referred to in the Gospels might have been (1) bad habits (2) diseases having physical causes (3) evil personalities supposedly attributed to Satan. There are a number of definitions for demons in the Bible so, yes, I guess Jesus would have believed in demon possession in some form or another. Let us just qualify this from the outset, however, that sexual orientation - be it gay or straight - has nothing to do with any form of 'demon possession'.

I will specifically ask 99percent if he believes that homosexuality IS a form of demon possession and, if so, does he support the so-called exorcism of these alleged demons by the likes of evangelist Bob Larson?

I don't know Bob Larson personally. His efforts seem well intentioned though. Seeing that Jesus dealt with Demons as did his disciples.

It's somewhat bemusing to me how the demons always speak in a pseudo/gutteral voice as if they've previously seen the movie, The Exorcist. They don't appear to have mastered the 360 degree headspin, however. Pity ...that would look so impressive. Obviously, I don't believe that Bob Larson is dealing with a demon at all. I believe that it's a sham intended as part of an evangelical package to fleece the gullible church-goers of their hard-earned dollars.

Would you rather Larson just allow people to be demon possessed?

Again KID YES OR NO.

In my view Larson is a religious charlatan. Being 'gay' is NOT demon possession!

I doubt that there is any such thing as demon possession, as in supernatural, anyway. This is the real world, 99percent. You perhaps need to get your head out of the hobgoblin myths of the ancients and start to use your God-given logic.

Would you, 99percent, welcome such a person, exorcised and now free from the demon of homosexuality, into your particular Church?

Jesus sat down with an ex-demon possessed person after the demons in him were allowed to enter pigs.

Yes, so I believe. But you are not Jesus, are you?

I'm thinking there are people that may have voted for Obama in our congregation and now deeply regret it.

Simply because he approves of equality for homosexuals?

I'm cool with that.

You're cool with their regretting that they voted for a president that approves of equality for homosexuals?

What's your point?

My point was quite clear. Would you be okay with someone attending your Church who previously had a 'homosexual demon' ( ) dwelling inside him that has now been exorcised from him? I mean, would this now mean that the man is now converted to the God-intended as-pure-as-driven-snow heterosexual that you believe he should be?

What kind of evidence would you require that this person is indeed free from the ungodly wiles of this demon before they would not be required by you to start their own denomination?

I guess I'd start with what bumper stickers they have on their car.

So, the Ghandhi quote bumper sticker "If it were not for Christians I'd become a Christian" would disqualify one from attending your Church, eh?

Seriously KID, you are grasping at straws here. The ones that are stuffed into the man made up of them.

I don't grasp at straws, 99percent. You should know that by now.

Just live your life in your own group and have at it.

Do you mean my demon possessed group? I mean, I am a supporter of GLBT rights. Does this make me and other supporters demon possessed also? I usually dislike mocking people and their beliefs but your brand of archaic religiosity just lends itself to mockery. And, to make it clear, this has NOTHING to do with mocking scripture ...just YOUR interpretation of it!

[99percentatheism]

KCKID

KCKID
Since this particular thread appears to have all but run its course I was going to open a new thread entitled “Exorcism of the Demon of Homosexuality�. I will, however, present the below three YouTube videos, parts 1, 2 and 3 (totalling about 28 minutes), on this thread in the hope of getting some feedback from others on the forum as well as from the thread's author, 99percentatheism.

Does Jesus believe in demon possession?

A simple YES or NO answer KID.

There is no simple 'yes' or 'no' answer because we would first need to clarify what a demon is or was supposed to be. You just assume a demon to be some manifestation of Satan within a human being because that's where your particular mindset is at. You seem to use very little logic but instead rely heavily on the written word, particularly the ancient written word. Jesus lived in a world that would have been both very unlike as well as very like our own world. It's truly a waste of time for a layman such as myself to reconstruct for himself the concepts of 2000 years ago. Personally, I DON'T believe in demons, ala Satan, but we do, of course, in modern idiom refer to someone as 'confronting their demons' with regard to their overcoming life's hurdles/facing something they are trying hard to avoid.

The demons referred to in the Gospels might have been (1) bad habits (2) diseases having physical causes (3) evil personalities supposedly attributed to Satan. There are a number of definitions for demons in the Bible so, yes, I guess Jesus would have believed in demon possession in some form or another. Let us just qualify this from the outset, however, that sexual orientation - be it gay or straight - has nothing to do with any form of 'demon possession'.

So your answer is YES. Sheesh, all that very common machination to avoid truth? How political is that.

I will specifically ask 99percent if he believes that homosexuality IS a form of demon possession and, if so, does he support the so-called exorcism of these alleged demons by the likes of evangelist Bob Larson?

I don't know Bob Larson personally. His efforts seem well intentioned though. Seeing that Jesus dealt with Demons as did his disciples.

It's somewhat bemusing to me how the demons always speak in a pseudo/gutteral voice as if they've previously seen the movie, The Exorcist.

I couldn't agree with that statement more. I would think their voices would be more gleeful sounding.

They don't appear to have mastered the 360 degree headspin, however. Pity ...that would look so impressive. Obviously, I don't believe that Bob Larson is dealing with a demon at all. I believe that it's a sham intended as part of an evangelical package to fleece the gullible church-goers of their hard-earned dollars.

Like starting and running a Church where anything goes? Where established Christian truth is discarded so that crowds of unruly people can pretend their behaviors and beliefs can somehow replace Christian reality?

That's a huge money maker too KID. HUGE.

I believe Obama received tens of millions of dollars from these kinds of people.

Would you rather Larson just allow people to be demon possessed?

Again KID YES OR NO.

In my view Larson is a religious charlatan. Being 'gay' is NOT demon possession!

Add his name to that of Mel White and we finally agree to something.

I doubt that there is any such thing as demon possession, as in supernatural, anyway.

Then in keeping with that "logic" you think Jesus is insane?

Yes or no can only apply.

This is the real world, 99percent. You perhaps need to get your head out of the hobgoblin myths of the ancients and start to use your God-given logic.

I have proven over and over again to use logic in my positions. Let's take for example the logic of calling a man another man's wife or husband? There is not one shred of logic in that. Nor Christian truth. None, nada, zippo. Just emotionalism driven by emotionalism and sanctioned by the world and its ways and nothing else.

"Back in the day," if a man introduced his doctor to another man as his "wife" he would have been labeled medically unkindly. Nowadays, reality is a hate crime.

Would you, 99percent, welcome such a person, exorcised and now free from the demon of homosexuality, into your particular Church?

Just like Jesus did.

Jesus sat down with an ex-demon possessed person after the demons in him were allowed to enter pigs.

Yes, so I believe. But you are not Jesus, are you?

You have an odd way of believing things from the Bible. Kinda of salad bar-ish. My name is not Joshua. I am not God. Jesus (Joshua, in today's english lingo) is.

I'm thinking there are people that may have voted for Obama in our congregation and now deeply regret it.

Simply because he approves of equality for homosexuals?

How cunning to use the ruse of civil rights lingo for your goals to take possession of logic. A man cannot be a husband of another man. A woman cannot be the husband of another woman. A man cannot be the wife of another man. A woman cannot be the wife of another man. Not in Christian truth or logic.

Here let me repeat the logic of that:

A man cannot be a husband of another man. A woman cannot be the husband of another woman. A man cannot be the wife of another man. A woman cannot be the wife of another man. Not in Christian truth or logic anyway. But HEY! "the world" can do anything it likes with truth. Including discarding it. History lesson forgotten 101.

I'm cool with that.

You're cool with their regretting that they voted for a president that approves of equality for homosexuals?

I approve their knowing they voted for a man they shouldn't have. But that's a common mistake.

What's your point?

My point was quite clear. Would you be okay with someone attending your Church who previously had a 'homosexual demon' ( ) dwelling inside him that has now been exorcised from him? I mean, would this now mean that the man is now converted to the God-intended as-pure-as-driven-snow heterosexual that you believe he should be?

Actually, to use logic, you do not believe someone can repent and be "as-pure-as-driven-snow." You've made that clear many, many times with adulterers, divorce and remarriage. So why should I waste my time in logical debate with you on that? It's like pulling the string on a doll. I know your answers already. I've heard them so many times.

But as I have made clear. "I" like Jesus teaches, do believe in repentance and forgiveness that wipes the slate clean. Jesus is not an idiot though and "Go, and sin no more," is a reality that no one can achieve this side of spiritual life. That is why the taeching and preaching about how many times you'll be needing to forgive a fellow-believer.

But as I have mentioned, THAT for another thread. In this one we are dealing with a theology that celebrates sin, sinning and sinners. And I feel that that should be plied in another kind of place than a Bible affirming Christian Church.

What kind of evidence would you require that this person is indeed free from the ungodly wiles of this demon before they would not be required by you to start their own denomination?

I guess I'd start with what bumper stickers they have on their car.

So, the Ghandhi quote bumper sticker "If it were not for Christians I'd become a Christian" would disqualify one from attending your Church, eh?

Ghandi was shot and killed by a member of his own religion.

The Christians helped him make it through college attain his Juris Doctorate. He would have lived a longer life as a Christian. A lawyer to boot.

Not all heores are smart.

Ghandi is not a great hero to me. Just a hero. But his observation about the "behaviors" of people that claim to be Christian, is well applied to this debate about homosexuality being affirmed and celebrated by so-called Christians. Not everyone that says they are a Christian acts like it. Mel White springs quickly to mind. As does the MCC.

Seriously KID, you are grasping at straws here. The ones that are stuffed into the man made up of them.

I don't grasp at straws, 99percent. You should know that by now.

I meant grasping at the straws that have slipped out of the stack in both your hands that you have tight control of. I have watched you build such a giant with the hay of your theology that I feel I am dealing with a model of Goliath standing behind your postions leering at me.

But like David, I am well prepared to deal with that, with years of experiencing real encounters with people liike you. No fear need apply. Like David . . . all I need is the rock of ages.

Just live your life in your own group and have at it.

Do you mean my demon possessed group? I mean, I am a supporter of GLBT rights. Does this make me and other supporters demon possessed also?

Have I accused you of being demon-possessed?

I do not believe that Satan or Demons need to waste their time with those that are already supporting their causes. Junk food sellers do not worry about the obese and gluttonous. They worry about the exercise health food culture.

Neither Satan or the Demos are not omniscient or omnipresent but certainly smart. Just watch western politics and pop culture and see.

How many humans have been slaughtered in the name of "Pro Choice?"

How many people need life-saving latex protection to feel safe during sex acts?

If mockery hits anything KID, it is to be pointed at the lunacy of modern morality with as much accuracy as an Olympic Rifle in the hands of the Gold Medalist.

I usually dislike mocking people and their beliefs but your brand of archaic religiosity just lends itself to mockery.

Jesus and Peter made it clear that people like you and their reactions and comments would be the norm.

And, to make it clear, this has NOTHING to do with mocking scripture ...just YOUR interpretation of it!

I don't think that qualifies as a retraction of the times you have denigrated scripture without any connection to my positions.

But then again, non and anti Christians do not need to follow the guidelines of Christian life because they have rejected it and chosen another path. People that want to invent religions and say they base them on some Christian scriptures have that right too. But when they claim to be orthodox? Then they get to be challenged.

See how open minded I am.

[99percentatheism]

JohnPaul:
I am not religious, not Mormon, and not gay, but I think you got a little carried away here. I don't think Joseph Smith asked anybody to change their religion to accomodate him.

He created a new religion for himself and his followers.

Why don't gays stop whining and get off their butts to do the same?

I am sure if they did not include "Tea Party" in their name, they could get tax-exempt status, and could even ask a few rich gays to put their money where their mouth is and build impressive Temples in which only gays would be allowed to be married. What a concept! Do something for themselves instead of whining to the government.

It is intersting that even though the redefinition is completely a secular task, there seems a need, an insatiable drive, to have the Evangelical Church forced to accept same gender marriage.

Why? The right to form a new religious movement - like JohnPaul so rightly sees - is all the LGBT "community" needs to do, if they want a religious aspect to their sex acts.

[Allahakbar]

JohnPaul:
I am not religious, not Mormon, and not gay, but I think you got a little carried away here. I don't think Joseph Smith asked anybody to change their religion to accomodate him.

He created a new religion for himself and his followers.

Why don't gays stop whining and get off their butts to do the same?

I am sure if they did not include "Tea Party" in their name, they could get tax-exempt status, and could even ask a few rich gays to put their money where their mouth is and build impressive Temples in which only gays would be allowed to be married. What a concept! Do something for themselves instead of whining to the government.

It is intersting that even though the redefinition is completely a secular task, there seems a need, an insatiable drive, to have the Evangelical Church forced to accept same gender marriage.

Why? The right to form a new religious movement - like JohnPaul so rightly sees - is all the LGBT "community" needs to do, if they want a religious aspect to their sex acts.

Yeah then they can call you heretics like you do to the religions you broke away from, yay. Of course they still get to claim christianity like your lot do!

[99percentatheism]

JohnPaul:
I am not religious, not Mormon, and not gay, but I think you got a little carried away here. I don't think Joseph Smith asked anybody to change their religion to accomodate him.

He created a new religion for himself and his followers.

Why don't gays stop whining and get off their butts to do the same?

I am sure if they did not include "Tea Party" in their name, they could get tax-exempt status, and could even ask a few rich gays to put their money where their mouth is and build impressive Temples in which only gays would be allowed to be married. What a concept! Do something for themselves instead of whining to the government.

It is intersting that even though the redefinition is completely a secular task, there seems a need, an insatiable drive, to have the Evangelical Church forced to accept same gender marriage.

Why? The right to form a new religious movement - like JohnPaul so rightly sees - is all the LGBT "community" needs to do, if they want a religious aspect to their sex acts.

Yeah then they can call you heretics like you do to the religions you broke away from, yay. Of course they still get to claim christianity like your lot do!

I wouldn't know. I, like most standard Christians, follow the same Gospel that Peter and Jude did.

You do notice that Bible-believing Christians, do not get sued by Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses for our refusual to support them right? Nor do those groups that formed their own religious orgs call us bigots, hateful or any other propagandist accusation.

[Allahakbar]

JohnPaul:
I am not religious, not Mormon, and not gay, but I think you got a little carried away here. I don't think Joseph Smith asked anybody to change their religion to accomodate him.

He created a new religion for himself and his followers.

Why don't gays stop whining and get off their butts to do the same?

I am sure if they did not include "Tea Party" in their name, they could get tax-exempt status, and could even ask a few rich gays to put their money where their mouth is and build impressive Temples in which only gays would be allowed to be married. What a concept! Do something for themselves instead of whining to the government.

It is intersting that even though the redefinition is completely a secular task, there seems a need, an insatiable drive, to have the Evangelical Church forced to accept same gender marriage.

Why? The right to form a new religious movement - like JohnPaul so rightly sees - is all the LGBT "community" needs to do, if they want a religious aspect to their sex acts.

Yeah then they can call you heretics like you do to the religions you broke away from, yay. Of course they still get to claim christianity like your lot do!

I wouldn't know. I, like most standard Christians, follow the same Gospel that Peter and Jude did.

You do notice that Bible-believing Christians, do not get sued by Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses for our refusual to support them right? Nor do those groups that formed their own religious orgs call us bigots, hateful or any other propagandist accusation.

Peter and Jude were dead before the bible existed, strike one.
You did notice my sig regarding bible believing christians did you?

[99percentatheism]

Allahakbar

JohnPaul:
I am not religious, not Mormon, and not gay, but I think you got a little carried away here. I don't think Joseph Smith asked anybody to change their religion to accomodate him.

He created a new religion for himself and his followers.

Why don't gays stop whining and get off their butts to do the same?

I am sure if they did not include "Tea Party" in their name, they could get tax-exempt status, and could even ask a few rich gays to put their money where their mouth is and build impressive Temples in which only gays would be allowed to be married. What a concept! Do something for themselves instead of whining to the government.

It is intersting that even though the redefinition is completely a secular task, there seems a need, an insatiable drive, to have the Evangelical Church forced to accept same gender marriage.

Why? The right to form a new religious movement - like JohnPaul so rightly sees - is all the LGBT "community" needs to do, if they want a religious aspect to their sex acts.

Yeah then they can call you heretics like you do to the religions you broke away from, yay. Of course they still get to claim christianity like your lot do!

I wouldn't know. I, like most standard Christians, follow the same Gospel that Peter and Jude did.

You do notice that Bible-believing Christians, do not get sued by Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses for our refusual to support them right? Nor do those groups that formed their own religious orgs call us bigots, hateful or any other propagandist accusation.

Peter and Jude were dead before the bible existed, strike one.

They both had a Bible on their night stands. They were both Jews. Now, if you mean a copy of the printed New Testament, that does not alter their orthodoxy. And Jude, he even had a copy of the Book of Enoch.

It was a fould ball and certainly not a swing and miss kind of strike. But nice try pal.

You did notice my sig regarding bible believing christians did you?

You quote a common atheist and what, that means something to me? I need to yawn.

[Allahakbar]

Allahakbar

JohnPaul:
I am not religious, not Mormon, and not gay, but I think you got a little carried away here. I don't think Joseph Smith asked anybody to change their religion to accomodate him.

He created a new religion for himself and his followers.

Why don't gays stop whining and get off their butts to do the same?

I am sure if they did not include "Tea Party" in their name, they could get tax-exempt status, and could even ask a few rich gays to put their money where their mouth is and build impressive Temples in which only gays would be allowed to be married. What a concept! Do something for themselves instead of whining to the government.

It is intersting that even though the redefinition is completely a secular task, there seems a need, an insatiable drive, to have the Evangelical Church forced to accept same gender marriage.

Why? The right to form a new religious movement - like JohnPaul so rightly sees - is all the LGBT "community" needs to do, if they want a religious aspect to their sex acts.

Yeah then they can call you heretics like you do to the religions you broke away from, yay. Of course they still get to claim christianity like your lot do!

I wouldn't know. I, like most standard Christians, follow the same Gospel that Peter and Jude did.

You do notice that Bible-believing Christians, do not get sued by Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses for our refusual to support them right? Nor do those groups that formed their own religious orgs call us bigots, hateful or any other propagandist accusation.

Peter and Jude were dead before the bible existed, strike one.

They both had a Bible on their night stands.

hahahahaha.......do you know when the bible was compiled? Are you for real? Do you actually know nothing about this bible you so worship? You are hilarious! Before 325CE there was no BIBLE. YOU base your worship on a document created by the CATHOLICS. No-one else............. those catholics you so hate.

They were both Jews. Now, if you mean a copy of the printed New Testament,

are you now claiming as a BIBLE BELIEVING christian that the new testament is the bible? You are just getting funnier! You don't even understand what this book that you claim you are a believer in IS. oh dear

that does not alter their orthodoxy. And Jude, he even had a copy of the Book of Enoch.

It was a fould ball and certainly not a swing and miss kind of strike. But nice try pal.

You did notice my sig regarding bible believing christians did you?

You quote a common atheist and what, that means something to me? I need to yawn.

I quote intelligence and you quote ignorance.
You quote the book of catholicism, how funny is that. It's even funnier than that, you claim that you are a follower of the TRUE bible, a bible that you think precedes the real bible, the only bible, the first ever bible, the bible compiled under the inspiration of god. That is the bible you base your quotes on and then claim that your bible was compiled before the bible you use. Apparently by mystical unknown and unnamed beings.
Oh dear, you are funny.