The Doctor wrote:

> In article <xn0oitek1hyzjcg003@reader.xsnews.nl>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >
> >> In article <xn0oit5l9hmvdy1001@reader.xsnews.nl>,
> >> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> >> > Idlehands wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Oh and how could Jesus have descendants if he never had a
> >> >> women?
> >> > I can believe Jewsus had descendants. He was a man after all.
> >> > I reckon he rode women all over Judea and Galilee when he was
> >> > young, like any of us would have done.... before he became an
> >> > apprentice messiah of course.
> >>
> >> There is a lie!
> >
> > How can it be a lie when you - or anybody else - cannot prove
> > that Jewsus did not have relationships with women when he was a
> > younger man? The balance of probabilities is that he did. Why
> > wouldn't he, he was a man? So sexual relations could easily
> > result in accidental descendants...
> >
> > It might not be something that you know much about but trust me,
> > it happens!
>
> So you say there is no documentation?

Who knows what a healthy young male got up to two thousand years ago
as he passed through lands on his travels?

I said on the balance of probabilities he had relations with a
woman, based on the fact he was a man. Which COULD have meant he
left descendants behind him. Every single minute of a man's life
from birth to death isn't going to be written on papyrus scrolls in
Hebrew and Greek is it? He would have had his private moments.

Now, some people with agendas could say that he never had relations
with a woman, but how would they actually know for sure?

I'm just putting forward a rational proposition. If you are going to
challenge that, you have to put forward a rational response. That's
how discussions go!

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <QYGcnTZdiZ7sqn_4nZ2dnZfqnPUTyJ2d@giganews.com>,
> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Blueshirt wrote:
> >> The Doctor wrote:
> >>>
> >>> There is a lie!
> >>
> >> How can it be a lie when you - or anybody else - cannot prove
> >> that Jewsus did not have relationships with women when he was a
> >> younger man? The balance of probabilities is that he did. Why
> >> wouldn't he, he was a man? So sexual relations could easily
> >> result in accidental descendants...
> >>
> >> It might not be something that you know much about but trust
> >> me, it happens!
> >>
> > it was 2,000 years ago ,
> > i don't think it matters much now
>
> BS is really crazy.

To put forward a view different to the dogma that you have been
brainwashed with is not "crazy". I might use provocative humour at
times, but there is reason behind my opinions.

Open your mind and think for yourself!

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <9e525e9b0eba70890db0b6bbf3071494@www.novabbs.com>,
> cheesetray <roach4994@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Okay, so do we agree that we are proposing one of two things?
> >
> > 1. Jesus was a virgin
> >
> > or
> >
> > 2. Jesus was gay
>
> 1 !!

You cannot know that... it is a supposition, but what is it based on?

Either 1. or 2. could be correct, but either way there is no
evidence that that actually is the case. Nobody back then could
possibly KNOW.

In article <xn0oiti0ni3pjcc002@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <xn0oiteeihyri3p002@reader.xsnews.nl>,
>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> > The Doctor wrote:
>> >>
>> >> You really are sick!
>> >
>> > All of my observations were formed at the University of Life...
>> > maybe you should attempt going outside and trying it sometime...
>> >
>> > However, the real experts on "sick" would be your paedo pastors
>> > and priests who preach the word of 'god' whilst they molest
>> > children. Now, THAT'S sick!!!
>>
>> Paedo are really sick!
>
>Yes Dave, they are. Very sick.

We concur!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <xn0oitia9i43eyg003@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <xn0oitek1hyzjcg003@reader.xsnews.nl>,
>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> > The Doctor wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <xn0oit5l9hmvdy1001@reader.xsnews.nl>,
>> >> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> >> > Idlehands wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Oh and how could Jesus have descendants if he never had a
>> >> >> women?
>> >> > I can believe Jewsus had descendants. He was a man after all.
>> >> > I reckon he rode women all over Judea and Galilee when he was
>> >> > young, like any of us would have done.... before he became an
>> >> > apprentice messiah of course.
>> >>
>> >> There is a lie!
>> >
>> > How can it be a lie when you - or anybody else - cannot prove
>> > that Jewsus did not have relationships with women when he was a
>> > younger man? The balance of probabilities is that he did. Why
>> > wouldn't he, he was a man? So sexual relations could easily
>> > result in accidental descendants...
>> >
>> > It might not be something that you know much about but trust me,
>> > it happens!
>>
>> So you say there is no documentation?
>
>Who knows what a healthy young male got up to two thousand years ago
>as he passed through lands on his travels?
>
>I said on the balance of probabilities he had relations with a
>woman, based on the fact he was a man. Which COULD have meant he
>left descendants behind him. Every single minute of a man's life
>from birth to death isn't going to be written on papyrus scrolls in
>Hebrew and Greek is it? He would have had his private moments.
>
>Now, some people with agendas could say that he never had relations
>with a woman, but how would they actually know for sure?
>
>I'm just putting forward a rational proposition. If you are going to
>challenge that, you have to put forward a rational response. That's
>how discussions go!
>

But 4 Gospels are written about him.

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <xn0oiticzi47db0004@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <QYGcnTZdiZ7sqn_4nZ2dnZfqnPUTyJ2d@giganews.com>,
>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Blueshirt wrote:
>> >> The Doctor wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> There is a lie!
>> >>
>> >> How can it be a lie when you - or anybody else - cannot prove
>> >> that Jewsus did not have relationships with women when he was a
>> >> younger man? The balance of probabilities is that he did. Why
>> >> wouldn't he, he was a man? So sexual relations could easily
>> >> result in accidental descendants...
>> >>
>> >> It might not be something that you know much about but trust
>> >> me, it happens!
>> >>
>> > it was 2,000 years ago ,
>> > i don't think it matters much now
>>
>> BS is really crazy.
>
>To put forward a view different to the dogma that you have been
>brainwashed with is not "crazy". I might use provocative humour at
>times, but there is reason behind my opinions.
>
>Open your mind and think for yourself!

So you like to dismiss evidence BS.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <xn0oitihoi4e664006@reader.xsnews.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <9e525e9b0eba70890db0b6bbf3071494@www.novabbs.com>,
>> cheesetray <roach4994@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Okay, so do we agree that we are proposing one of two things?
>> >
>> > 1. Jesus was a virgin
>> >
>> > or
>> >
>> > 2. Jesus was gay
>>
>> 1 !!
>
>You cannot know that... it is a supposition, but what is it based on?
>
>Either 1. or 2. could be correct, but either way there is no
>evidence that that actually is the case. Nobody back then could
>possibly KNOW.

2 is false! 1 is true!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:28 am:
> Idlehands wrote:
>> On 2024-02-29 7:37 a.m., Blueshirt wrote:
>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We refer to King Charles III being a descendant of JEsus
>>>> Christ.
>>>
>>> WTF? I must have skipped over some of this discussion. How did we
>>> get to King Charles being a descendant of Jewsus?!
>>
>> First of all who is "We"? Would that be the asswipe and his
>> tapeworm?
>
> Dave has split personalities. So we've got Dave, Yads and The
> Doctor.

and "Yellow Beard Yadallee" and "The Asswipe" ..... so that, sort if,
blows up your 'One person but three' theory!!

> One person but three, hence his "we". Father Brennan says to
> think of it like the leaves on a shamrock!

'Father Brennan'?? We've got one of them, too.

Hmm! A quick search suggests there are a lot of 'Father Brennan''s ....
but I'm guessing toy might be referring to the 'The Omen' one ... i.e.
The Second Doctor!

>> The divine right of kings was well known way back in the day, I
>> don't believe any of them claimed to be the direct descendant of
>> Jesus, the Church would have burned them at the stake.
>>
>> Oh and how could Jesus have descendants if he never had a women?
>
> I can believe Jewsus had descendants. He was a man after all. I
> reckon he rode women all over Judea and Galilee when he was young,
> like any of us would have done.... before he became an apprentice
> messiah of course.
>
--
Daniel

Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 9:38 am:
> The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <9e525e9b0eba70890db0b6bbf3071494@www.novabbs.com>,
>> cheesetray <roach4994@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Okay, so do we agree that we are proposing one of two things?
>>>
>>> 1. Jesus was a virgin
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> 2. Jesus was gay
>>
>> 1 !!
>
> You cannot know that... it is a supposition, but what is it based on?
>
> Either 1. or 2. could be correct, but either way there is no
> evidence that that actually is the case. Nobody back then could
> possibly KNOW.
>
Or 3. Jesus was in a 'Common Law' heterosexual marriage!
--
Daniel

Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 9:33 am:
> The Doctor wrote:
>> In article <QYGcnTZdiZ7sqn_4nZ2dnZfqnPUTyJ2d@giganews.com>,
>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Blueshirt wrote:
>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a lie!
>>>>
>>>> How can it be a lie when you - or anybody else - cannot prove
>>>> that Jewsus did not have relationships with women when he was a
>>>> younger man? The balance of probabilities is that he did. Why
>>>> wouldn't he, he was a man? So sexual relations could easily
>>>> result in accidental descendants...
>>>>
>>>> It might not be something that you know much about but trust
>>>> me, it happens!
>>>>
>>> it was 2,000 years ago ,
>>> i don't think it matters much now
>>
>> BS is really crazy.
>
> To put forward a view different to the dogma that you have been
> brainwashed with is not "crazy". I might use provocative humour at
> times, but there is reason behind my opinions.
>
> Open your mind and think for yourself!
>
No! No. No, for once "Yellow Beard Yadallee" is correct. (Did I really
type that??).

BAT-SHIT is really crazy!!
--
Daniel

Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:17 am:
> Daniel65 wrote:
>> Blueshirt wrote on 1/3/24 1:31 am:
>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry! Where in all that did Jesus rebuke the prostitutes,
>>>
>>> My guess is that he rebuked the prostitutes for charging too
>>> much!
>>
>> Ah!! But that WAS what he did to the Traders in The Temple.
>
> Yes, I read about that in the Book of John...
>
> Two Shekels for a blow-job? You cannot be serious?!!!

Oww Oww! I didn't read that. Chapter and Verse, please!!

I did read where The Bible contains an instance of Incest ... well,
what's the reverse of Incest where the daughters plot to have
intercourse with their father??

>>> He probably thought being god would have got him some sort of a
>>> discount...
>>>
>> Ah Hummmm!! Surely you mean The Son of God .... even if part of
>> the God-Triumvirate.
>
> Men would say anything to a woman to get a shag...
>
> Some claim to be airline pilots, others god!
>
Others that they'll waer a condom!!
--
Daniel

In article <urv1sp$1rhkf$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:28 am:
>> Idlehands wrote:
>>> On 2024-02-29 7:37 a.m., Blueshirt wrote:
>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We refer to King Charles III being a descendant of JEsus
>>>>> Christ.
>>>>
>>>> WTF? I must have skipped over some of this discussion. How did we
>>>> get to King Charles being a descendant of Jewsus?!
>>>
>>> First of all who is "We"? Would that be the asswipe and his
>>> tapeworm?
>>
>> Dave has split personalities. So we've got Dave, Yads and The
>> Doctor.
>
>and "Yellow Beard Yadallee" and "The A%e" ..... so that, sort if,
>blows up your 'One person but three' theory!!
>
>> One person but three, hence his "we". Father Brennan says to
>> think of it like the leaves on a shamrock!
>
>'Father Brennan'?? We've got one of them, too.
>
>Hmm! A quick search suggests there are a lot of 'Father Brennan''s ....
>but I'm guessing toy might be referring to the 'The Omen' one ... i.e.
>The Second Doctor!
>
>>> The divine right of kings was well known way back in the day, I
>>> don't believe any of them claimed to be the direct descendant of
>>> Jesus, the Church would have burned them at the stake.
>>>
>>> Oh and how could Jesus have descendants if he never had a women?
>>
>> I can believe Jewsus had descendants. He was a man after all. I
>> reckon he rode women all over Judea and Galilee when he was young,
>> like any of us would have done.... before he became an apprentice
>> messiah of course.
>>

Jesus never married.

>--
>Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <urv27s$1rhkf$2@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 9:38 am:
>> The Doctor wrote:
>>> In article <9e525e9b0eba70890db0b6bbf3071494@www.novabbs.com>,
>>> cheesetray <roach4994@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
>>>> Okay, so do we agree that we are proposing one of two things?
>>>>
>>>> 1. Jesus was a virgin
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>> 2. Jesus was gay
>>>
>>> 1 !!
>>
>> You cannot know that... it is a supposition, but what is it based on?
>>
>> Either 1. or 2. could be correct, but either way there is no
>> evidence that that actually is the case. Nobody back then could
>> possibly KNOW.
>>
>Or 3. Jesus was in a 'Common Law' heterosexual marriage!

1 !!!

>--
>Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <urv2dl$1rhkf$3@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 9:33 am:
>> The Doctor wrote:
>>> In article <QYGcnTZdiZ7sqn_4nZ2dnZfqnPUTyJ2d@giganews.com>,
>>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is a lie!
>>>>>
>>>>> How can it be a lie when you - or anybody else - cannot prove
>>>>> that Jewsus did not have relationships with women when he was a
>>>>> younger man? The balance of probabilities is that he did. Why
>>>>> wouldn't he, he was a man? So sexual relations could easily
>>>>> result in accidental descendants...
>>>>>
>>>>> It might not be something that you know much about but trust
>>>>> me, it happens!
>>>>>
>>>> it was 2,000 years ago ,
>>>> i don't think it matters much now
>>>
>>> BS is really crazy.
>>
>> To put forward a view different to the dogma that you have been
>> brainwashed with is not "crazy". I might use provocative humour at
>> times, but there is reason behind my opinions.
>>
>> Open your mind and think for yourself!
>>
>No! No. No, for once "Yellow Beard Yadallee" is correct. (Did I really
>type that??).
>
>BAT-S*T is really crazy!!

You did!!

>--
>Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

In article <urv2uj$1roef$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:17 am:
>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>> Blueshirt wrote on 1/3/24 1:31 am:
>>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry! Where in all that did Jesus rebuke the prostitutes,
>>>>
>>>> My guess is that he rebuked the prostitutes for charging too
>>>> much!
>>>
>>> Ah!! But that WAS what he did to the Traders in The Temple.
>>
>> Yes, I read about that in the Book of John...
>>
>> Two Shekels for a blow-job? You cannot be serious?!!!
>
>Oww Oww! I didn't read that. Chapter and Verse, please!!
>

No where!

>I did read where The Bible contains an instance of Incest ... well,
>what's the reverse of Incest where the daughters plot to have
>intercourse with their father??
>

Genesis, The tragedy of Lot.

>>>> He probably thought being god would have got him some sort of a
>>>> discount...
>>>>
>>> Ah Hummmm!! Surely you mean The Son of God .... even if part of
>>> the God-Triumvirate.
>>
>> Men would say anything to a woman to get a shag...
>>
>> Some claim to be airline pilots, others god!
>>
>Others that they'll waer a condom!!
^^

>--
>Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

The Doctor wrote:
> In article <urv2uj$1roef$1@dont-email.me>,
> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>> Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:17 am:
>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>> Blueshirt wrote on 1/3/24 1:31 am:
>>>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry! Where in all that did Jesus rebuke the prostitutes,
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess is that he rebuked the prostitutes for charging too
>>>>> much!
>>>>
>>>> Ah!! But that WAS what he did to the Traders in The Temple.
>>>
>>> Yes, I read about that in the Book of John...
>>>
>>> Two Shekels for a blow-job? You cannot be serious?!!!
>>
>> Oww Oww! I didn't read that. Chapter and Verse, please!!
>>
>
> No where!
>
>> I did read where The Bible contains an instance of Incest ... well,
>> what's the reverse of Incest where the daughters plot to have
>> intercourse with their father??
>>
>
> Genesis, The tragedy of Lot.
>
>>>>> He probably thought being god would have got him some sort of a
>>>>> discount...
>>>>>
>>>> Ah Hummmm!! Surely you mean The Son of God .... even if part of
>>>> the God-Triumvirate.
>>>
>>> Men would say anything to a woman to get a shag...
>>>
>>> Some claim to be airline pilots, others god!
>>>
>> Others that they'll waer a condom!!
> ^^
>
>> --
>> Daniel
>
>
who has to do all that ,
i just ask and she gives it up ,
whatever i ask for

The Doctor wrote on 3/3/24 2:17 am:
> In article <urv2uj$1roef$1@dont-email.me>,
> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>> Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:17 am:
>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>> Blueshirt wrote on 1/3/24 1:31 am:
>>>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry! Where in all that did Jesus rebuke the prostitutes,
>>>>>
>>>>> My guess is that he rebuked the prostitutes for charging too
>>>>> much!
>>>>
>>>> Ah!! But that WAS what he did to the Traders in The Temple.
>>>
>>> Yes, I read about that in the Book of John...
>>>
>>> Two Shekels for a blow-job? You cannot be serious?!!!
>>
>> Oww Oww! I didn't read that. Chapter and Verse, please!!
>
> No where!

Are YOU sure, "Yellow Beard Yadallee"??

>> I did read where The Bible contains an instance of Incest ... well,
>> what's the reverse of Incest where the daughters plot to have
>> intercourse with their father??
>>
>
> Genesis, The tragedy of Lot.

Correct. Genesis Chap 19 V 33-38

What a fine example The Holy Bible is!!
--
Daniel

In article <us1h07$2ebsh$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote on 3/3/24 2:17 am:
>> In article <urv2uj$1roef$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>> Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:17 am:
>>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>> Blueshirt wrote on 1/3/24 1:31 am:
>>>>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry! Where in all that did Jesus rebuke the prostitutes,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My guess is that he rebuked the prostitutes for charging too
>>>>>> much!
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah!! But that WAS what he did to the Traders in The Temple.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I read about that in the Book of John...
>>>>
>>>> Two Shekels for a blow-job? You cannot be serious?!!!
>>>
>>> Oww Oww! I didn't read that. Chapter and Verse, please!!
>>
>> No where!
>
>Are YOU sure, "Yellow Beard Yadallee"??
>
>>> I did read where The Bible contains an instance of Incest ... well,
>>> what's the reverse of Incest where the daughters plot to have
>>> intercourse with their father??
>>>
>>
>> Genesis, The tragedy of Lot.
>
>Correct. Genesis Chap 19 V 33-38
>
>What a fine example The Holy Bible is!!

IYIO!

>--
>Daniel

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

On 2024-03-03 2:47 a.m., Daniel65 wrote:
> The Doctor wrote on 3/3/24 2:17 am:
>> In article <urv2uj$1roef$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Daniel65  <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>> Blueshirt wrote on 2/3/24 1:17 am:
>>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>> Blueshirt wrote on 1/3/24 1:31 am:
>>>>>> Daniel65 wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry! Where in all that did Jesus rebuke the prostitutes,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My guess is that he rebuked the prostitutes for charging too
>>>>>> much!
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah!! But that WAS what he did to the Traders in The Temple.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I read about that in the Book of John...
>>>>
>>>> Two Shekels for a blow-job? You cannot be serious?!!!
>>>
>>> Oww Oww! I didn't read that. Chapter and Verse, please!!
>>
>> No where!
>
> Are YOU sure, "Yellow Beard Yadallee"??
>
>>> I did read where The Bible contains an instance of Incest ... well,
>>> what's the reverse of Incest where the daughters plot to have
>>> intercourse with their father??
>>>
>>
>> Genesis, The tragedy of Lot.
>
> Correct. Genesis Chap 19 V 33-38
>
> What a fine example The Holy Bible is!!

Not too mention Lot offering his daughters to the mob for a bit of gang
rape. Binky loves these chapters and I hate to think of what he does
when he reads them over and over again.

--
Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.

George Bernard Shaw

Idlehands wrote:

> On 2024-03-03 2:47 a.m., Daniel65 wrote:
> >
> > What a fine example The Holy Bible is!!
>
> Not too mention Lot offering his daughters to the mob for a
> bit of gang rape. Binky loves these chapters and I hate to
> think of what he does when he reads them over and over again.

I bet the flimsy pages of his KJV bible are all stuck
together...

In article <xn0oixmo62xis0k002@news.eternal-september.org>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>Idlehands wrote:
>
>> On 2024-03-03 2:47 a.m., Daniel65 wrote:
>> >
>> > What a fine example The Holy Bible is!!
>>
>> Not too mention Lot offering his daughters to the mob for a
>> bit of gang rape. Binky loves these chapters and I hate to
>> think of what he does when he reads them over and over again.

Lying Idlehadns just love to lie about being a theologian!

>
>I bet the flimsy pages of his KJV bible are all stuck
>together...

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

On 2024-03-04 1:24 p.m., Blueshirt wrote:
> Idlehands wrote:
>
>> On 2024-03-03 2:47 a.m., Daniel65 wrote:
>>>
>>> What a fine example The Holy Bible is!!
>>
>> Not too mention Lot offering his daughters to the mob for a
>> bit of gang rape. Binky loves these chapters and I hate to
>> think of what he does when he reads them over and over again.
>
> I bet the flimsy pages of his KJV bible are all stuck
> together...

As I said, I hate to even think of it....

--
Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.

George Bernard Shaw