| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Pastor Dave" |
| Date: |
25 Dec 2004 02:20:36 PM |
| Object: |
*_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 17:23:10 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 09:25:05 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu22_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PSEUDO-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
PSEUDO-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
"FredThe Fish" <xxx@nono.com> wrote:
"Steven L." <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Sôrdö wrote:
[[[ READERS: Please take a few minutes to read this post
carefully. It is the KEY to victory for FAIR-minded people
who value and defend human rights and personal liberties. ]]]
If your argument was so full of facts, you wouldn't
bother to spend time trying to promote false percentages...
You're LYING again, **pseudo**-pastor.
Insulting me won't make the problem go away.
Employing accurate descriptors is NO insult. It's reality. We
determined a long time back that you have never been ordained,
and that you perform practically ZIP pasdtoral duties. You're a
phony from the word "go," and you support UN-Christian and
hateful agendas that seek to impose immense hardships upon
millions of people. You're a loser.
This is propaganda.
You're LYING again, pseudo-pastor. Having ALL of the rele-
vant FACTS on my side, it would be pointless to propagandize.
Propagandizing is for ignorant and desperate losers who have
NO facts going for them. People like you, and all the other
sociopaths of the RRR cult.
Prove each and every claim in theabove paragraph.
Of course we both know you won't, because you can't, ...
LOL!!!! Bull-CRAP!!
...because they aren't true and that you won't have the
integrity to retract them.
Wrong again. As usual.
Employing accurate descriptors is NO insult. It's reality.
Self-evident. And any time I apply descriptors to any person
or agenda, they first have to PROVE themselves to be as I
describe. In ALL cases, that has always been the case.
We determined a long time back that you have never been
ordained, and that you perform practically ZIP pastoral duties.
A Google search of these groups will locate at least one post
wherein you admitted that, after being cornered. I won't waste time
doing that, but ANY reader knowing how to search the groups will
be able to do it. And if you're honest (LOL!!! **That'll** be the
day!), you remember it, too. Unless, of course, your subconscious
has blocked it from your memory as something that's too painful to
you.
Propagandizing is for ignorant and desperate losers who
have NO facts going for them.
Self-evident. Since there is NO good reason to oppose either
abortion or same-sex marriage, all we egalitarians have to do is use
the FACTS to spotlight the ignorance and hatefulness of bigots like
you. Having NO facts on your side to counter that, bigots like you
always are revealed as the FOOLS that they are.
Notice folks, Craig made the following accusations
against me...
1) I have never been ordained.
2) I provide "practically zip" pastoral duties.
3) I am a phony.
4) I support hateful and unChristian agendas.
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
6) That I am a loser.
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things. Of course, you won't provide it. I.e., you
refuse to prove your claims. You are a lying COWARD
who lacks any integrity. Want to prove me wrong?
provide the post, or retract your claims.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
| User: "Spartakus" |
|
| Title: Re: *_PHONY "PASTOR" DAVE_* |
28 Dec 2004 10:21:20 AM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote...
Notice folks, Craig made the following accusations
against me...
1) I have never been ordained.
Given your irrational and undisciplined Bible interpretation, this is a
reasonable assumption. Where do you attend seminary? Where were you
ordained?
2) I provide "practically zip" pastoral duties.
What church, hospital, school, etc, do you serve?
3) I am a phony.
That follows from items 1 and 2.
4) I support hateful and unChristian agendas.
Your words speak for themselves.
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
See item #4.
6) That I am a loser.
That follows from items 1 through 4, along with the fact that you are posting
on Christmas Day, and that you put a fucking sword barfic in your .signature.
.
|
|
|
| User: "RFP" |
|
| Title: Re: *_PHONY "PASTOR" DAVE_* |
02 Jan 2005 12:43:29 AM |
|
|
"Spartakus" <no.spam@this.address> escribió en el mensaje
news:1104259179.a1b8ba31a89ed9a00303a3db174f59e0@teranews...
"Pastor Dave" <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote...
Notice folks, Craig made the following accusations
against me...
1) I have never been ordained.
Given your irrational and undisciplined Bible interpretation, this is a
reasonable assumption. Where do you attend seminary? Where were you
ordained?
2) I provide "practically zip" pastoral duties.
What church, hospital, school, etc, do you serve?
3) I am a phony.
That follows from items 1 and 2.
4) I support hateful and unChristian agendas.
Your words speak for themselves.
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
See item #4.
6) That I am a loser.
That follows from items 1 through 4, along with the fact that you are
posting
on Christmas Day, and that you put a fucking sword barfic in your
.signature.
I really love the way he waves around its little sword. He reminds me a bit
of a kid waving a toy gun at some invisible threat. Chanting to strengthen
his faith. What a brave little soldier, one would say. So much infantile.
Let's quote it again, one more time ...
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
The greatest invention of the human sciences in the past century is the
analytical theory.
No doubt.
As a young man - 18 - its foundator (Sigmund Freud) did not wave toy swords
at anyone, but he rather wrote an interesting book called "the future of an
illusion".
One of the central sentences of the book states that :
"The man of faith and piety is eminently protected against the danger of
some neurotic diseases : adopting the universal neurosis dispenses him from
building up his own personal one"
One of my own personal bibles.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
25 Dec 2004 04:27:37 PM |
|
|
Dave <newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
Notice folks, Craig made the following accusations
against me...
1) I have never been ordained.
2) I provide "practically zip" pastoral duties.
3) I am a phony.
4) I support hateful and unChristian agendas.
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
6) That I am a loser.
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
And?
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things. Of course, you won't provide it. I.e., you
refuse to prove your claims. You are a lying COWARD
who lacks any integrity. Want to prove me wrong?
provide the post, or retract your claims.
Will you admit that you're an unChristian and hateful liar
if he does?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
26 Dec 2004 09:19:05 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Dec 2004 20:20:36 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com) wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu22_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PSEUDO-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PSEUDO-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
"FredThe Fish" <xxx@nono.com> wrote:
"Steven L." <sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
Sôrdö wrote:
[[[ READERS: Please take a few minutes to read this post
carefully. It is the KEY to victory for FAIR-minded people
who value and defend human rights and personal liberties. ]]]
If your argument was so full of facts, you wouldn't
bother to spend time trying to promote false percentages...
You're LYING again, **pseudo**-pastor.
Insulting me won't make the problem go away.
Employing accurate descriptors is NO insult. It's reality. We
determined a long time back that you have never been ordained,
and that you perform practically ZIP pasdtoral duties. You're a
phony from the word "go," and you support UN-Christian and
hateful agendas that seek to impose immense hardships upon
millions of people. You're a loser.
This is propaganda.
You're LYING again, pseudo-pastor. Having ALL of the rele-
vant FACTS on my side, it would be pointless to propagandize.
Propagandizing is for ignorant and desperate losers who have
NO facts going for them. People like you, and all the other
sociopaths of the RRR cult.
Prove each and every claim in theabove paragraph.
Of course we both know you won't, because you can't, ...
LOL!!!! Bull-CRAP!!
...because they aren't true and that you won't have the
integrity to retract them.
Wrong again. As usual.
Employing accurate descriptors is NO insult. It's reality.
Self-evident. And any time I apply descriptors to any person
or agenda, they first have to PROVE themselves to be as I
describe. In ALL cases, that has always been the case.
We determined a long time back that you have never been
ordained, and that you perform practically ZIP pastoral duties.
A Google search of these groups will locate at least one post
wherein you admitted that, after being cornered. I won't waste time
doing that, but ANY reader knowing how to search the groups will
be able to do it. And if you're honest (LOL!!! **That'll** be the
day!), you remember it, too. Unless, of course, your subconscious
has blocked it from your memory as something that's too painful to
you.
Propagandizing is for ignorant and desperate losers who
have NO facts going for them.
Self-evident. Since there is NO good reason to oppose either
abortion or same-sex marriage, all we egalitarians have to do is use
the FACTS to spotlight the ignorance and hatefulness of bigots like
you. Having NO facts on your side to counter that, bigots like you
always are revealed as the FOOLS that they are.
Notice folks, Craig made the following accusations
against me...
1) I have never been ordained.
Two or three years ago, during a discussion of this, you admitted
it in one of your posts.
2) I provide "practically zip" pastoral duties.
Since my father was a minister, I know how time-consuming that is.
You spend 'WAY too much time in Usenet to be able to do that properly.
In one of your posts, you *claimed* you averaged 2 hours a day in
Usenet. But the time-stamps of your posts prove that it's far more
than that. Which is fine for someone like me, who has a staff to whom
most tasks can be delegated. But NOT for a bonafide preacher.
3) I am a phony.
See (1) and (2).
4) I support hateful and unChristian agendas.
You are opposed to same-sex marriage, which is totally harmless.
And probably several other of the EQUAL rights that gays seek.
Whether or not that's the case, your opposition to same-sex marriage
alone is enough to make "hateful" an ACCURATE descriptor of you.
As for "un-Christian," see the last paragraph of my response to (5).
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You sup[port a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will. Resulting in the DENIAL of their
rights... their RELEGATION to second-class-citizen status... their
INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE to mere, NON-sentient developing
entities which are, in all important ways, equivalent to gametes
(sperm & ova) -- (human, unique, NON-sentient, a stage of develop-
ment without which NO births would occur -- and alive); entities
which the WOMEN would very properly, under the circumstances,
regard to be parasitic. Further manifestations of that hardship
would be the DISRUPTION of their well-being, both short-term
and long-term (as in, for decades or a lifetime)... and the
DESTRUCTION of countless of their opportunities.
Christ indicated that above all, we should show love and
comassion to our neighbors. You advocate doing the diametric
OPPOSITE. You are without excuse.
6) I am a loser.
See all of the above. That's exactly what that adds up to.
ALL control-freakish sociopaths are losers. To put it crudely,
but accurately, in terms of being analogous -- bigots like you
are turds in humanity's punchbowl.
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
<Remaining distortions, whines, and outright LYING flushed.>
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
(E-Mail address is valid when removing _ from it.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
26 Dec 2004 03:51:27 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:19:05 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
http://www.pregnantpause.org/court/re-roe.htm
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
26 Dec 2004 03:53:29 PM |
|
|
In article <edcus0hnoja48nu32ohcds585b6aahqs5h@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:19:05 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
http://www.pregnantpause.org/court/re-roe.htm
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant then and
is now.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,487 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 01:15:44 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:53:29 -0800,
David W. Barnes wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
[ ... ]
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant
then and is now.
Precisely. She's been an unfortunate pawn on both sides, and
clearly is rather unintelligent.
This is about YOU, Pseudo-pastor Dave.
YOU support a truly LOATHSOME and unconsionable agenda of
hate that DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
You are without excuse.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
(E-Mail address is valid when removing _ from it.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 09:49:14 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:15:44 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,487 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:53:29 -0800,
David W. Barnes wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
[ ... ]
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant
then and is now.
Precisely. She's been an unfortunate pawn on both sides, and
clearly is rather unintelligent.
Oh of course. That's because she disagrees with you.
<chuckle>
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 09:59:42 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:49:14 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
[ ... ]
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant
then and is now.
Precisely. She's been an unfortunate pawn on both sides, and
clearly is rather unintelligent.
Oh of course. That's because she disagrees with you.
Wrong. Even when she was doing countless tens of millions of
people a huge favor by facilitating Roe vs. Wade, her role still was
only that of a rather dimwitted pawn.
But she can be very PROUD for having been a part of that
phenomenally-beneficial accomplishment! Talk about having a
Lifetime Achivement Award!!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
(E-Mail address is valid when removing _ from it.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 01:52:36 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:59:42 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:49:14 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
[ ... ]
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant
then and is now.
Precisely. She's been an unfortunate pawn on both sides, and
clearly is rather unintelligent.
Oh of course. That's because she disagrees with you.
Wrong. Even when she was doing countless tens of millions of
people a huge favor by facilitating Roe vs. Wade, her role still was
only that of a rather dimwitted pawn.
Yea and I'm sure that your posts before she came out
and said what she did reflected the same opinion. Yea,
right. <chuckle>
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 02:26:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:52:36 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
[ ... ]
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant
then and is now.
Precisely. She's been an unfortunate pawn on both sides, and
clearly is rather unintelligent.
Oh of course. That's because she disagrees with you.
Wrong. Even when she was doing countless tens of millions of
people a huge favor by facilitating Roe vs. Wade, her role still was
only that of a rather dimwitted pawn.
Yea and I'm sure that your posts before she came out
and said what she did reflected the same opinion. Yea,
right.
Obviously not. It's called supporting the effort for the greater
good. The issue of extricating millions of women from second-class-
citizen status massively outweighted the confort levels of any single
individual. (Plus, it wasn't until many years later -- after she'd
turned traitor to her cause -- that I heard an interview with her for
the *first* time... and only learned THEN that she was no mental
giant.)
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 05:33:28 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:26:30 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:52:36 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
[ ... ]
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant
then and is now.
Precisely. She's been an unfortunate pawn on both sides, and
clearly is rather unintelligent.
Oh of course. That's because she disagrees with you.
Wrong. Even when she was doing countless tens of millions of
people a huge favor by facilitating Roe vs. Wade, her role still was
only that of a rather dimwitted pawn.
Yea and I'm sure that your posts before she came out
and said what she did reflected the same opinion. Yea,
right.
Obviously not. It's called supporting the effort for the greater
good.
So in other words, you admit that you used to claim the
opposite of what you do now. Gotcha liar.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 06:53:25 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:33:28 GMT,
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
David W. Barnes wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
[ ... ]
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant
then and is now.
Precisely. She's been an unfortunate pawn on both sides, and
clearly is rather unintelligent.
Oh of course. That's because she disagrees with you.
Wrong. Even when she was doing countless tens of millions of
people a huge favor by facilitating Roe vs. Wade, her role still was
only that of a rather dimwitted pawn.
Yea and I'm sure that your posts before she came out
and said what she did reflected the same opinion. Yea,
right.
Obviously not. It's called supporting the effort for the greater
good. ###--> The issue of extricating millions of women from second-
class-citizen status massively outweighted the confort levels of any
single individual. (Plus, it wasn't until many years later -- after she'd
turned traitor to her cause -- that I heard an interview with her for
the *first* time... and only learned THEN that she was no mental
giant.) <--###
So in other words, you admit that you used to claim the opposite
what you do now.
Oh good grief! Your dishonesty is exceeded only by your abject
stupidity!
Did you really think you could get away with omitting everything
between the "###" symbols (which I've restored) so that you could
make that INANE comment? You should know better!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 03:45:35 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:15:19 GMT,
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Jack White <user@example.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
Now where in that quote do I say that I have never been
ordained? Oh that's right, I don't.
In combination with what you said in a conversation that
WE had, 4 or 5 years ago, it's part of your rationalization.
I might have found that one by now, except that over the last
couple of days, Google has managed to LOUSE UP its advanced
groups' search engine in some ungodly manner. It's not NEARLY as
user-friendly as it was, just a few days ago. When you could still
being up an entire thread with ease, and pick out the posts within it.
I wonder what total DUNCE was responsible for setting their progress
back so badly?
Wow what a pisspoor excuse craig, just admit that you are
a liar and apologize for your lie.
How would YOU feel if it was your own strict policy to NEVER
lie in any post, and then have people saying that to you?
That IS my policy. And the post I referred to DOES exist,
unless Google's screwed-up new system lost a bunch of them.
Apparently you failed to uphold your own policy. What
I said in the post that you are referencing, was that
formal schooling by a seminary is not a requirement of
God to be a pastor.
I said that ordainment is by God, not man and that a
church, or even another servant of God can do the
ceremony. In fact, in the previous centuries in this
country and even sometimes today, a man is put in the
position of pastor in small communities, because he is
a believer and is well studied (whether formally
schooled or not) in the Scriptures. The job of a
minister has nothing to do with trying to impress
people with their schooling, but rather, to faithfully
preach the word of God.
A school does not ordain anyone. ...
That would have come as a surprise to my father, who
attended New Brusnwick Seminary for three years and gradu-
ated with a certificate of Ordination in the Reformed Church in
America.
... They merely give you
a piece of paper that says that you completed the
required courses to earn your degree. In fact, you may
not have even studied the same courses as other
pastors. There is no set of certain courses to enable
one to be ordained as a pastor and in fact, one may
study these courses and go and teach at a university
and never become a pastor and may not even believe in
God at all.
And btw, the original church fathers had no seminary.
Neither did the ones who replaced them, neither did the
ones who replaced those who replaced the church fathers
and so on and so on.
The bottom line is that I never said anything about my
own schooling in that post, nor did I say I was never
ordained. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I am
an ordained minister and years ago I posted the place I
graduated from. I will never do that again, since the
place was flooded with obnoxious phone calls from
atheist, etc. and they asked me not to do it again.
The fact is however, that I did post the information
and I have repeatedly stated that I am an ordained
pastor. You on the other hand, have merely claimed
that I am not and have failed to provide any proof of
your accusation.
I'm not ABOUT to apologize for being TRUTHFUL!
You weren't truthful and you could have easily admitted
that you may have made a mistake, but that wouldn't fit
with your attempts to try to denigrate and ridicule me.
To lie in a post, one must intentionally attempt to deceive.
I have not done that. What I have done is state that I have
a clear recollection of a statement that you made in a post
during a dialogue that we had around 4 or 5 years ago.
Based on your statement above, I am going to take your
word for this, and accept that you were ordained. Somewhere.
Formally. (But you certainly waste a lot of time on the 'net that
COULD be spent making sick calls, etc., etc. -- things that most
bonafide pastors do. That surprises me.)
My recollection of that post -- which I wish I could find, since
it would clear up a lot of confusion! -- is that you mentioned you
had not been ordained. That which is causing me to moderate
my position of this now was the fact that you used some of the
SAME wording in *this* post that you did then... about institutions
not being able to ordain people. It is possible that I mistook that,
back then, for your having said you hadn't been formally ordained.
Thus, I will leave it at that, and take you at your word.
I never lie in my posts, and I have no malicious intent toward
my oponents, either. No matter how bigoted thay may have given
plenty of proof that they are. I've seen segregationists OUTGROW
their former bigotry, and I figure that as soon as their agendas have
become extinct, that will also happen with most of the homophobes
and Anti-Choicers.
No matter how much it may appear that I ridicule my bigoted
opponents, that which I ACTUALLY am ridiculing are their ludicrous
and hateful POSITIONS on those issue. Again -- most bigots DO
ultimately OUTGROW their immature and hateful stances against
personal liberties.
So this ordination discussion wasn't an attack on you, per se. It
was based upon your apparently-minimal carrying-out of pastoral
duties, in combination with a post that I may have misinterpreted as
your having indicated that you had not been ordained.
I apologize for unintended apparent viciousness toward you
on my part.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
(E-Mail address is valid when removing _ from it.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 05:58:04 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:45:35 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:15:19 GMT,
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
Jack White <user@example.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
Now where in that quote do I say that I have never been
ordained? Oh that's right, I don't.
In combination with what you said in a conversation that
WE had, 4 or 5 years ago, it's part of your rationalization.
I might have found that one by now, except that over the last
couple of days, Google has managed to LOUSE UP its advanced
groups' search engine in some ungodly manner. It's not NEARLY as
user-friendly as it was, just a few days ago. When you could still
being up an entire thread with ease, and pick out the posts within it.
I wonder what total DUNCE was responsible for setting their progress
back so badly?
Wow what a pisspoor excuse craig, just admit that you are
a liar and apologize for your lie.
How would YOU feel if it was your own strict policy to NEVER
lie in any post, and then have people saying that to you?
That IS my policy. And the post I referred to DOES exist,
unless Google's screwed-up new system lost a bunch of them.
Apparently you failed to uphold your own policy. What
I said in the post that you are referencing, was that
formal schooling by a seminary is not a requirement of
God to be a pastor.
I said that ordainment is by God, not man and that a
church, or even another servant of God can do the
ceremony. In fact, in the previous centuries in this
country and even sometimes today, a man is put in the
position of pastor in small communities, because he is
a believer and is well studied (whether formally
schooled or not) in the Scriptures. The job of a
minister has nothing to do with trying to impress
people with their schooling, but rather, to faithfully
preach the word of God.
A school does not ordain anyone. ...
That would have come as a surprise to my father, who
attended New Brusnwick Seminary for three years and gradu-
ated with a certificate of Ordination in the Reformed Church in
America.
... They merely give you
a piece of paper that says that you completed the
required courses to earn your degree. In fact, you may
not have even studied the same courses as other
pastors. There is no set of certain courses to enable
one to be ordained as a pastor and in fact, one may
study these courses and go and teach at a university
and never become a pastor and may not even believe in
God at all.
And btw, the original church fathers had no seminary.
Neither did the ones who replaced them, neither did the
ones who replaced those who replaced the church fathers
and so on and so on.
The bottom line is that I never said anything about my
own schooling in that post, nor did I say I was never
ordained. In fact, I have repeatedly stated that I am
an ordained minister and years ago I posted the place I
graduated from. I will never do that again, since the
place was flooded with obnoxious phone calls from
atheist, etc. and they asked me not to do it again.
The fact is however, that I did post the information
and I have repeatedly stated that I am an ordained
pastor. You on the other hand, have merely claimed
that I am not and have failed to provide any proof of
your accusation.
I'm not ABOUT to apologize for being TRUTHFUL!
You weren't truthful and you could have easily admitted
that you may have made a mistake, but that wouldn't fit
with your attempts to try to denigrate and ridicule me.
To lie in a post, one must intentionally attempt to deceive.
And that is what you have done, when proof was demanded
and even though you couldn't supply it, you still
insisted it was true. Read on...
I have not done that. What I have done is state that I have
a clear recollection of a statement that you made in a post
during a dialogue that we had around 4 or 5 years ago.
You should have said you remembered it that way. That
leaves room for a mistake, which humans make. You kept
insisting though. Granted, I could have asked if maybe
you were mistaken, but your post was so vicious that I
didn't respond as maybe I should have. Read on...
Based on your statement above, I am going to take your
word for this, and accept that you were ordained. Somewhere.
Formally. (But you certainly waste a lot of time on the 'net that
COULD be spent making sick calls, etc., etc. -- things that most
bonafide pastors do. That surprises me.)
Your assessment of how I should spend my time is
irrelevant. Besides this, I never said that I work at
my ministry full time, since I also hold a regular job.
I do not get paid a dime for my pastoral services. I
also minister over the Net and I have no automobile, so
I can't just up and go whenever I want. My wife and I
have been through some extremely tough times in the
last few years and at one point, existed on a package
of Ramen noodles a day and sometimes nothing. As I
said, I don't accept money and any that comes into the
church goes right back out to spread the Gospel and
help people who need it. Yet here we are and now we're
doing better, by being faithful to God and now my wife
has a car, which she uses to go to her job and can give
me a ride here and there. Sometimes she can give me a
ride to work and sometimes I take the bus.
Should my ministry turn into a full time thing, then I
will accept a salary, once the church is able to
provide it, since I won't be able to do both that and
work a regular job and as the Bible says, "the workman
is worthy of his meat". I don't plan on getting rich
off of the church though. Just enough to take care of
basic bills and eat and not have to worry about my
children.
Right now I've been kind of out of it, due to an
accident at work and I'm on three different medications
and don't do much and work only a couple of days a week
and even that puts me down in bed (which I can't stay
in too long, as I have to keep alternating between
standing, sitting and laying down). I'm in physical
therapy right now as well. This is why recently my
level of posting has increased so much and had you
asked about it, rather than accused me, I would have
told you this sooner.
My recollection of that post -- which I wish I could find, since
it would clear up a lot of confusion! -- is that you mentioned you
had not been ordained.
I told you what it said.
That which is causing me to moderate
my position of this now was the fact that you used some of the
SAME wording in *this* post that you did then... about institutions
not being able to ordain people. It is possible that I mistook that,
back then, for your having said you hadn't been formally ordained.
That is a correct interpretation of the events.
Thus, I will leave it at that, and take you at your word.
I never lie in my posts, and I have no malicious intent toward
my oponents, either.
I disagree with that, but that is another thread. :)
No matter how bigoted thay may have given
plenty of proof that they are. I've seen segregationists OUTGROW
their former bigotry, and I figure that as soon as their agendas have
become extinct, that will also happen with most of the homophobes
and Anti-Choicers.
No matter how much it may appear that I ridicule my bigoted
opponents, that which I ACTUALLY am ridiculing are their ludicrous
and hateful POSITIONS on those issue. Again -- most bigots DO
ultimately OUTGROW their immature and hateful stances against
personal liberties.
You're going into your speech again Craig. :)
So this ordination discussion wasn't an attack on you, per se. It
was based upon your apparently-minimal carrying-out of pastoral
duties, in combination with a post that I may have misinterpreted as
your having indicated that you had not been ordained.
See earlier in post.
I apologize for unintended apparent viciousness toward you
on my part.
If you apologize for viciousness, then at least admit
that you were vicious. Then I could accept your
apology. Viciousness is never unintended Craig. It
may be due to being overemotional, but that does not
negate the intent. That isn't an attack. I'm being
honest about intent. I cannot be vicious toward you
and then claim it was unintentional, nor would you let
someone claim that without calling them on it, so now I
am calling you on it.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
26 Dec 2004 06:34:26 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:53:29 -0800, while scaling the
Mt. Everest, "David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com>
pontificated:
In article <edcus0hnoja48nu32ohcds585b6aahqs5h@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:19:05 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
http://www.pregnantpause.org/court/re-roe.htm
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant then and
is now.
Of course, but that's only because now she isn't saying
what you want. Let's just forget all about that Roe v
Wade case, shall we? And of course, you won't
reference it anymore, right?
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
26 Dec 2004 08:18:08 PM |
|
|
In article <93mus01otfhlp9e07mk83oc2i7cd0dubq5@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:53:29 -0800, while scaling the
Mt. Everest, "David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com>
pontificated:
In article <edcus0hnoja48nu32ohcds585b6aahqs5h@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:19:05 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
http://www.pregnantpause.org/court/re-roe.htm
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant then and
is now.
Of course, but that's only because now she isn't saying
what you want.
I never cared what she said.
Let's just forget all about that Roe v
Wade case, shall we? And of course, you won't
reference it anymore, right?
Why? It is great law.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S **INDICTMENT** of PSEUDO-Pastor DAVE_* |
27 Dec 2004 09:48:39 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 18:18:08 -0800, while scaling the
Mt. Everest, "David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com>
pontificated:
In article <93mus01otfhlp9e07mk83oc2i7cd0dubq5@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 13:53:29 -0800, while scaling the
Mt. Everest, "David W. Barnes" <spam@aol.com>
pontificated:
In article <edcus0hnoja48nu32ohcds585b6aahqs5h@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave
<newsgroupmail@nospam-tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:19:05 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion. You support a truly LOATHSOME
agenda the DOES seek to impose immense hardship upon no fewer
than tens of MILLIONS of women by FORCING full-term gestation
upon them. AGAINST their will.
Well, if that's true, then I guess the original "Roe",
from "Roe v Wade" is seeking to impose hardships too.
http://www.pregnantpause.org/court/re-roe.htm
What the original ROE had to say about abortion was irrelevant then and
is now.
Of course, but that's only because now she isn't saying
what you want.
I never cared what she said.
Let's just forget all about that Roe v
Wade case, shall we? And of course, you won't
reference it anymore, right?
Why? It is great law.
Hypocrisy = what you posted by Barnes above.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
26 Dec 2004 03:32:45 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 15:19:05 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,488 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
Notice folks, Craig made the following accusations
against me...
1) I have never been ordained.
Two or three years ago, during a discussion of this, you admitted
it in one of your posts.
You are making the same accusation again. Your
accusation is not proof.
2) I provide "practically zip" pastoral duties.
Since my father was a minister, I know how time-consuming that is.
You spend 'WAY too much time in Usenet to be able to do that properly.
In one of your posts, you *claimed* you averaged 2 hours a day in
Usenet. But the time-stamps of your posts prove that it's far more
than that. Which is fine for someone like me, who has a staff to whom
most tasks can be delegated. But NOT for a bonafide preacher.
My time varies. Some days I do more than others.
However, I do not sit here typing all day. I check
periodically. There are days I don't post at all, or
only in the morning, or evening, etc.. There are also
days that I have nothing to do whatsoever, like any
human being. Now can you prove your claim or not?
3) I am a phony.
See (1) and (2).
You haven't proved anything with those. You have
simply accused me again.
4) I support hateful and unChristian agendas.
You are opposed to same-sex marriage, which is totally harmless.
According to you. Others disagree.
And probably several other of the EQUAL rights that gays seek.
Since gays claim that their lifestyle is the same as
everyone else's, the only thing they're looking to
protect, is gay sex and that would be a special
protection, not an equal rights issue. Their own
claims condemn their movement.
Whether or not that's the case, your opposition to same-sex marriage
alone is enough to make "hateful" an ACCURATE descriptor of you.
As for "un-Christian," see the last paragraph of my response to (5).
You mean hateful as far as you believe.
Now are you going to prove your claim or not?
5) I seek to impose immense hardships on people.
Take your stance on abortion.
I believe that people should be responsible and
accountable for their actions. I do not believe in
killing unborn babies, for matters of convenience,
which is what at minimum, 95% percent of the women, by
their own words, claim to have an abortion for. There
is no "immense hardship" according to them. So it is
the women that you call liars and I have provided the
statistics for you on more than one occasion, when you
denied this.
Christ indicated that above all, we should show love and
comassion to our neighbors. You advocate doing the diametric
OPPOSITE. You are without excuse.
Compassion does not equal approval of sin. Show me
where God says that He approves of sin, because you
happen to want the sin to exist. And where did Christ
tell women to have abortions?
Now, are you going to prove your claim or not?
6) I am a loser.
See all of the above. That's exactly what that adds up to.
ALL control-freakish sociopaths are losers. To put it crudely,
but accurately, in terms of being analogous -- bigots like you
are turds in humanity's punchbowl.
Name calling isn't proof. Are you going to prove your
claim or not?
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,487 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
27 Dec 2004 01:18:45 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 21:32:45 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
27 Dec 2004 09:54:00 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 07:18:45 GMT, while scaling the Mt.
Everest, (Craig Chilton --
Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,487 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!!) pontificated:
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 21:32:45 GMT,
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton < > wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
Now where in that quote do I say that I have never been
ordained? Oh that's right, I don't.
Three options for you with your next response:
1) Provide the post you claim exists.
2) Retract your claim and apologize for accusing me.
3) Do neither of the above and demonstrate that you
have no integrity.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"I have more understanding than all my teachers:
for thy testimonies are my meditation." - Psalm 119:99
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
27 Dec 2004 10:11:40 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:54:00 GMT,
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
Now where in that quote do I say that I have never been
ordained? Oh that's right, I don't.
In combination with what you said in a conversation that
WE had, 4 or 5 years ago, it's part of your rationalization.
I might have found that one by now, except that over the last
couple of days, Google has managed to LOUSE UP its advanced
groups' search engine in some ungodly manner. It's not NEARLY as
user-friendly as it was, just a few days ago. When you could still
being up an entire thread with ease, and pick out the posts within it.
I wonder what total DUNCE was responsible for setting their progress
back so badly?
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Every time a person supports bigotry in public, and presents NO
relevant FACTS to back his/her stance in behalf of a loathsome
agenda against individual liberties and human rights, that person
has -- ironically -- further **damaged** the cause he/she supports.
And every time a fair-minded and sensible egalitarian opposes
such a bigot, publicly, and **presents** relevant FACTS that are
damaging to the bigot's agenda, that TOO is an additional nail in
the coffin lid of the agenda, and a push of that casket CLOSER
to the Drain of Extinction -- its well-deserved ultimate destination.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
(E-Mail address is valid when removing _ from it.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack White" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
27 Dec 2004 11:36:57 AM |
|
|
Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!! wrote:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:54:00 GMT,
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
Now where in that quote do I say that I have never been
ordained? Oh that's right, I don't.
In combination with what you said in a conversation that
WE had, 4 or 5 years ago, it's part of your rationalization.
I might have found that one by now, except that over the last
couple of days, Google has managed to LOUSE UP its advanced
groups' search engine in some ungodly manner. It's not NEARLY as
user-friendly as it was, just a few days ago. When you could still
being up an entire thread with ease, and pick out the posts within it.
I wonder what total DUNCE was responsible for setting their progress
back so badly?
wow what a pisspoor excuse craig, just admit that you are a liar and
apologize for your lie.
oh wait, you are a liberal, in the face of overwhelming evidence that
proves you are a liar you will still claim that you didnt lie and/or try
to pass the blame somewhere (anywhere) else.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
28 Dec 2004 12:18:23 AM |
|
|
"Jack White" <user@example.net> wrote in message
news:1104169015.3c09253eb7d3c6e07ef3e6dd66589f33@teranews...
Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie!
Forever!! wrote:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:54:00 GMT,
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
Now where in that quote do I say that I have never been
ordained? Oh that's right, I don't.
In combination with what you said in a conversation that
WE had, 4 or 5 years ago, it's part of your rationalization.
I might have found that one by now, except that over the last
couple of days, Google has managed to LOUSE UP its advanced
groups' search engine in some ungodly manner. It's not NEARLY as
user-friendly as it was, just a few days ago. When you could still
being up an entire thread with ease, and pick out the posts within it.
I wonder what total DUNCE was responsible for setting their progress
back so badly?
wow what a pisspoor excuse craig, just admit that you are a liar and
apologize for your lie.
oh wait, you are a liberal, in the face of overwhelming evidence that
proves you are a liar you will still claim that you didnt lie and/or try
to pass the blame somewhere (anywhere) else.
Lying requires the intent to deceive. In other words, the speaker must know
that their claim is false. Perhaps he believes that which he claims; thus he
would not be lying. Just my two cents. :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
28 Dec 2004 10:20:19 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:18:23 -0800,
"Chris" <reddd@juno.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
Lying requires the intent to deceive. In other words, the
speaker must know that their claim is false. Perhaps [Craig]
believes that which he claims; thus he would not be lying. Just
my two cents. :)
My posts contain irrefutable facts, and the opinions I
express in those posts are BASED on those truths.
So there are TWO reasons my posts do not contain lies; I post
what I believe, and that which I believe is 100% FACT-based.
Q.E.D.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Countdown to 1/20/09: 1,486 days to BYE-BYE Bushie! Forever!!" |
|
| Title: Re: *_CRAIG CHILTON'S LIE_* |
27 Dec 2004 01:21:45 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 12:36:57 -0500,
Jack White <user@example.net> wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
PHONY-Pastor Dave wrote:
Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
7) That I have admitted to all of this.
I never said that. I said that you had admitted to having not
been ordained. Which, in at least one of your posts, you did.
If you deny that now, sooner or later that post will crop up to
haunt you, nailing you in *another* lie. In that same post, or
another one in the same time-frame, you admitted that your
carrying out of the pastoral duties that I had listed was incon-
sistent with my listing. But I don't recall now just how you
worded that.
Since you make the claim, you need to provide the post.
But we both know you can't.
You CLAIM that there is a post in which I admit these
things.
No I didn't. See my response to (7).
Fine, then we'll limit your requirement of proof to
your claim that I have admitted that I am not ordained.
Prove it, or have the integrity to retract your claim.
"I believe that God calls whom He calls and
that God makes men what they are and not schools
(although study is necessary)."
Thread: "Gay Assault on America"
alt.bible -- April 13, 2000
Now where in that quote do I say that I have never been
ordained? Oh that's right, I don't.
In combination with what you said in a conversation that
WE had, 4 or 5 years ago, it's part of your rationalization.
< | | | | | | |
