WHO IS *ANE *LLMAN, AND WHY IS HE SAYING THOSE TERRIBLE THINGS ABOUT ME?

UPDATE Thursday, December 03, 2009: I had told Google Blog Search that if they stopped censoring me, I'd say so on this Blog. As of this "UPDATE," Google Blog Search is now showing 1,967 posts as indexed and linked. () That's up again from only 4 at one point. Therefore, I'm adding this update.

1,967 is not all of the posts, but it seems that perhaps they are slowly re-indexing the site. I give them the benefit of the doubt. I haven't looked to see if they are avoiding "controversial" posts.


It has occurred to me that the allusion in the title of this post has gone unconnected and that the title is taken as a common plea on my part. It is not a common plea. I am asking for help, for no one brings forth alone; however, I am asking for help with bringing forth the Christian Commons, as no one deserves it who doesn't help bring it forth. I want everyone who can receive it to deserve it and to have it. I am not asking for help in solving a riddle. There is no riddle on my part about the *ane *llman here.

What the title is alluding to is the movie, "Who Is Harry Kellerman and Why Is He Saying Those Terrible Things About Me?" For those who know the movie (and I have not seen it since it was first release to the theaters) and who also may have some insight, I am not *ane *llman. *ane *llman is *ane *llman. If that is cryptic to readers, that's not my intention. Just consider the title, "Who is...". Who really is....

This is not an endorsement of the film by the way. For one, I remember feeling at the time that Dustin Hoffman did not fit the scene, as it were. I suspect that many of my contemporaries felt the same way at the time.

What I'm saying is that *ane *llman is not my alter ego. He is not my arch-anything. I am not a Marvel comic book character. I don't subscribe to the gratuitous violence, etc., of that whole mindset. To those men amongst you with your comic book collections who are offended by that and think Marvel or DC Comics is on a par with or supersedes the Gospel of Jesus (and is not misleading and harmful if not highly qualified), it's not my fault. However, discussions to qualify can be enlightening if properly constructed and received.

I don't go in for the whole Matrix-movie-series-type statement. Freedom is freedom from evil. It is not freedom to do evil. If you don't think that supposed freedom to do evil is the underlying message of those movies, that's your problem. This is also not an invitation to Marvel enthusiast to defend Marvel or the Wachowski brothers. You might have your opportunity in future posts. We'll see.

This answers one who calls himself *ane *llman over Derek Webb and homosexuality in the Church.

Well *ane,

I've written this after having only glanced at your comment. I did not read it word-for-word. I may not. What I did pick up from a quick scan is certainly more than enough to know that you haven't a real clue. By the way, I don't owe it to you to read your statement word-for-word, especially after your previous dark-side statements and seeing that you haven't changed or seen the light that definitely is here.

I've been in the middle of working to spread the real message of Jesus Christ, not the phony one where openly and totally unrepentant homosexuals (fiercely proselytizing for their buggery, etc.) kneel at the communion rail right next to heterosexuals who know this about those homosexuals but "accept" them and "affirm" them provided for now that they claim monogamy and fidelity in filthy and utterly disgusting buggery. You don't count that as error though — where there is nothing wrong with that "narrow" opening in the gate for homosexuality, although there is in their minds, plenty wrong with other things for a while until that gate is opened further for some and shut completely for others. I focus in on your cause here to start, and it is your cause, because it is your cause here (it's what you're arguing; you chimed it on it) and I'm still addressing you here directly.

Here's what's going on with you. You're the proverbial dog in the manger. You're not alone. In fact, there are more dogs than souls who can partake. You can't eat what's on offer, and you bark and snap and growl in front of the food. Do you and your proverbial kind know what you're all doing?

Telling about you in particular, *ane, is that while you can't eat the spiritual food that would result in the New Heaven coming to form the New Earth without turmoil were there no "dogs," you allude to how great the food really is. You do. It's there. You think your obvious hedging will save you. It won't.

You didn't address any of the specifics of the Christian Commons that comes out from the Holy Spirit; and if you were to do so now, it would only be in a mad scramble to increase the volume of your barking, to twist in the minds of others what you can see but don't want them to see or hear and understand and eat.

What you say to others is, don't go in because the person, the soul, saying that what he's offering is consistent with what Jesus Christ was saying we ought to do, really doesn't believe it. Of course, you and I both know that you don't believe that. You have nothing upon which to base your accusation. There is no history that shows I do not believe in the Commons as I've presented it. You can point to nothing. All you can do is tell others that my theology is something I don't believe in.

I'm right that Jesus was/is a communist in the original sense before the lost Marx breathed his first. I'm right that the capitalists misstate the parables and the other things for effect. I'm right that Jesus was/is a total pacifist. I'm right that the militants misstate the parables and the other things for effect. I'm right that Jesus was/is for heterosexual-only sex if there is to be any sex at all, which there doesn't have to be since we are spirit after the flesh if you believe as I do. I'm right that the homosexuals misstate the parables and the other things for effect.

Now, who are you? You don't give a URL. Don't you have any URL? Do have no blog or even-slightly verified Twitter account or public membership-profile anywhere? Are you in the Book, or are you unlisted and unpublished? I'm not asking why you didn't supply a URL for the people. I'm pointing it out that you didn't while I know you could have but deliberately (not subconsciously) decided not to because you like to dish it out while you are unwilling to stand where others can publicly comment about your positions in a way that is as lasting as here and that is directly connected to you so that anyone and everyone can know that it is that *ane (you, your sole/soul identity) and not some other. Considering the field you're in, if you have no such URL, it would only prove my point all the more. You would have to go way out of your way to stay hidden. In fact, I don't think you've been able to do that. I think you have URL's you could have used here that would identify you with your evil spewing here. You do, don't you! Of course, you are depending on me not to divulge who you are even though I'm the most despicable person on the face of the Earth if what you say about me here is true. Have I moved you to now divulge yourself with protestations that I've misread the lack of a URL? Are you that computer careless or unaware? I know better.

If what you say about me here is true, then I'm the Anti-Christ, and not just an anti-Christ, not just one of the many, many antichrists John says existed then (whose spiritual and flesh offspring are on view now more than then) and all contrary to your worthless point about my use of the term "anti-Christ."

Interesting though that if I am that one, where's my evil power? Why don't I summons it up as Satan does? Why am I calling for turning the worldly Empire right-side up and leveling it, per Jesus? What's in that for Satan? Do you hold that the Anglo-American-Israeli Empire is Christian built upon Jesus's way? If this puts you in mind of Jesus's teaching that a house divided cannot stand, it ought to. If the reason Jesus said it to the Pharisees slithering around saying much the same things against him that you are saying about me also applies to you here, then who are you, a proverbial dog-snake or actually a dog-snake who shape-shifted into human form before the womb? Spirit, *ane, which one is your root, since you are against the Christian Commons?

You have accused me here of taking some sort of twisted, self-satisfying pleasure (with a sexual allusion that still shows your bent) in getting at the root cause (theology; God study) of all that ails that is selfishness. Do you really want to continue attempting to make that case? You've tried and failed to use logic here, whether Aristotelian or Christian. They aren't the same, since you apparently didn't know it or have just hidden it.

So *ane, I hate what you say and a tree is known by its fruit. Am I advocating that people do violence on your body and mind and soul, or am I saving souls with the truth? Are you going to turn me in to the Satanic court? Are your feelings hurt while I have none? "Can't we all just agree that anyone can do anything that he wants?" Are you a fan of Aleister Crowley? His moral compass was broken. He would be the first to complain were the greatest demons to work him over endlessly. Where is his soul now? Should we have taken communion with him while he was here? He was bi-sexual and orgiastic in the extreme you know. He was a Freemason too, quite high. I've been censored by Google Blog Search for stating these truths about his type. They started by blocking a few posts where I identify the evil.

That last one was the one that apparently moved them to censorship out of fear that people would learn the truth. Thousands of post disappeared from Google Blog Search after that one. Cowards and liars for dupes

You don't care about any of that though. You're standing with Alfred Kinsey's lying supporters and against me here whether you would now claim to have been doing otherwise. Remember, you are trying to get people to run from what I'm saying (all of it since it's all summated in the New Commandment with which I hold).

The heavy-metal lovers know full well who Aleister Crowley was. They know that the spirit of mammon follows and leads. John Lennon knew it too. Johnny Depp knows it. Ask him. Unless the publicly published reports are false, he has openly stated that he knows that the dark side has been instrumental in his fame and fortune. It's common knowledge in Hollywood and Bollywood, etc. Tom Cruise knows. Steven Spielberg knows. Who, who is high up in Hollywood doesn't know? Who, who is high up in the "pop" music industry doesn't know? Who, who is high up in American politics doesn't know? They all know, and they all know I know. What do you know?

*ane, you don't know what you're doing even though you know what you're doing at the same time.

What you haven't been here is a help to Christ's cause in the world to save it, at least on the side that will see him for real. You have been a help in increasing the division of the goats from the sheep, but you're standing with the goats.

As for having the last word here, well, yes, I have that. You have the last, dead, dark word where you are where you can claim it's light when it isn't. Do you want to open up where I can comment where everyone can see who "knows" you, or will? When you have that place, let me know. I'll come over and leave comments you can deal with if you're able. [sarcasm; read on] If you want to leave it open so that I can comment all I want, do it, since you're suggesting that my having the last word is somehow an evil intention - not logical of you, is it?

[That went over his head. It's illogical to have never-ending interaction with one who evades the points and just wants bickering to drag others down too.]

Some do use their power to have that mundane last-word. I'm not into it. My last word is the Word, the same that John talked in the open of his Gospel that is completely consistent with the Christian Commons that I love and for which I will give up the flesh.

*ane didn't comprehend what I meant by "not logical of you, is it?" in that paragraph above. My phrasing here required this later inserted explanation because I had been giving *ane more credit for maturity than he deserves. I doubt he'll understand even with this explanation. I don't think he'll care either way.

*ane has tried to inject his Facebook link here as if that is enough. So I clarify concerning my statement about a different venue from this one. What I have said here does not mean that I would go onto another person's personal Facebook area and barrage that person (whether or not with conveniently selective, reframed, out-of-context, pseudo-countervailing statements). Facebook is not *ane's personal blog where he can control. Anyone on Facebook may complain to Facebook. I wouldn't do it anyway, not even on a blog *ane completely controls and where he has sign an agreement in blood allowing it.

Typical for his ilk and him, *ane has completely missed the point. This blog is not a wide-open, free-for-all, anarchic, lawless territory and will not become so. This blog is governed not by hedonism or dismantled rules against willful harm.

My point was one of saying to *ane to visualize others coming onto his site where he is serious but where those others can post endless streams of nonsense. Apparently, he can't do that visualizing or doesn't care.

When I started this blog, I left the setting set at allowing all comments to show up immediately without first being moderated. I was unfamiliar with comment spam and other aspects that confront blog owners/administrators. There are numerous people who do not abide by self-restraint. Over time, I reduced spam to near zero but some additional people behind fascist firewalls were also being blocked. I have since found what seems to be the best balance. Dealing with some spam (the vast majority of which comes from sexual perverts; no surprise there), etc., for the sakes of people who might truly want to hear the ultimate solution is workable. I don't even "see" the spam. I automatically delete it. I don't debate it.

I would not reciprocate regardless. I was not and am not extending reciprocity to *ane whereby I will white list his comments so that anything and everything he would care to post here in the comment section will show up immediately and remain. Why would I not do that? Well, his behavior as documented below shows exactly why. *ane does not know how to conduct himself in this regard. He does not know how to behave himself in another person's home where the rules are designed to lead to the Strait Gate and along the Narrow Way.

Of his own choosing, *ane is a creature of the Wide Way that leads to Hell. He is a proselytizer for it and wants this blog to be his forum and is whining without cause that it isn't. He can't have his hellion way here, so he's going around trashing other areas such as my Facebook "Wall."

For those who are unfamiliar, depending upon user-chosen settings, other Facebook users may post on one's profile page. It would be like allowing *ane to do blog posts here. Can you imagine? I'd have to be insane to allow that.

Now, *ane has a penchant for not grasping what I mean, so let me be completely clear here. I will not be engaging in a wild non-debate (no rules; no conviction of the heart upon hearing the truth) with him under any circumstances. I will not engage him because it is clear that he does not know how properly to behave and react when his assertions are shown wrong. To continue engaging with such a one is fruitless. It is vanity. I'm not interested.

This is all why Jesus said the door will finally shut and not be reopened. One either writes the real law on one's heart and abides therefore or never enters. All the crying and gnashing of teeth won't trick the owner.

You don't stand with me. So be it. Go sell what ever it is. People who buy into what you're selling will be with you or below you since you'll make them twice the son of Hell.

I'm not looking for you, *ane. You're lost, but right now, you make yourself not of the fold. When you hear Jesus, let me know. You'll hear me too then. If you think that's setting up myself as God apart from God, think again. It's what Jesus was selling. I'm buying. I love the right-side up pyramid, leveled. I love the first who is the last and vice versa. I love those who will wash my feet and I whose feet I will wash not as what is the same as mere symbolic lip service but as full members of the Christian Commons that does not belong to me alone in total but to every real, fully committed, honest member, together in total.

May God bless you with the truth if you are able to receive it, *ane. You'll have to stop being a "dog-snake" though. You'll have to transform for real. You'll have to line up 100% with Jesus's words and deeds as the whole body. You have said here though that you don't want it, not because I've said what it is. It is what it is whether I came here or not. I haven't made up anything.

You came here to run down that which came out from Jesus. You came to distort. It didn't work. I'm not falling for the temptation you've attempted to present. I reject it. You aren't God. You aren't with the Jesus I know. You're against what he has said. That's obvious to you too.

Put your complaints about me where I can come comment where everyone can openly associate all you've said here with you. Is that tempting? Why do you fear it? Everyone who fears it (standing in the light out of the dark shadows) fears being exposed for the evil he is doing. Of course, then there are those without shame. That's how it is. That's what Jesus said. All Christians believe it and know it without doubt. How many are there, who are they, and where are they? They aren't with you!

Now, I have other things to do along the same line I've done here, that is furthering the Christian Commons you so loathe but that will be in the Highest without you as you are now. Where you'll be exactly is not for me to say. I just know you won't be with me (not my fault) and you won't be with Jesus based upon his own stated standard whether I get there or not. Some people are "smart" enough to say to others, "I'll see you in Hell." I don't want to live there.

[not sarcasm] If you're wondering if you leave another nothing-comment (dark) what I'll do, I won't bother with it. I'm not interested in spinning my wheels, and that doesn't say that I can't handle what you have to say. It simply means that I've heard you and I heard enough. I don't need to hear the same over again from you for me to be true. The door will close. I have that right given to me from the real God, not Satan.

Peace to all,

Tom Usher

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Whom does *ane *llman know who has interacted with me?

      Do you think he'd be willing to publish that here while also clearly, unmistakably identifying himself so you could go interact with him in plain sight out in the light?

    • My dear Tom, why would you want to address those who oppose you in the same manner as they do? Does this not portray you in the same light as them? Besides, is it your calling to help the lost and confused to want to accept what our Heavenly Father actually says is absolutely true or just to put people in their place?

      • Hello Jerry,

        I know yours is the view of many that we are never to use the terms Jesus used, such as "serpent," etc. I believe that if you will look deeper, you will find that I am not reflecting back what *ane is showing us.

        If you take your approach, haven't you told *ane that what I've told him isn't fully right? How does that help? Why do you see me as doing what he's done? I know I haven't.

        I don't understand your question: "...is it your calling to help the lost and confused to want to accept what our Heavenly Father actually says is absolutely true or just to put people in their place?"

        *ane is lost and confused, and I've said what I hold to be absolutely true. How is it that you cast it in with a negative suggestion/context of putting "people in their place?"

        Is that really how you see me?

        Jerry, also speak to *ane here, directly. Why just me? Do you believe *ane hasn't heard you addressing just me?

        I don't retract anything I've said to *ane. I disagree with you. I don't agree with the approach you've suggested, and neither do I accept that I've done anything wrong here.

        It is my calling to speak the truth, and you've suggested that I haven't. However, you haven't said where I am misleading *ane.

        What's your position about homosexuality in the churches and Derek Webb's lyrics? That's a main subject. It's why *ane came here. This post is tied in with it. It's a thread. Did you read/scanned the background? You focused in only against me. However, I don't expect anyone to address everything in just one comment. Nevertheless, you did narrow in, extremely so, to "correct" me and me alone.

        Peace to you, Jerry.

        I look forward to your reply.

        Tom

      • This is a reply to an email from Jerry. I post it here for the edification of others. "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear." (Mark 4:23)

        Anyone can read this as if I'm yelling at the top of my lungs and red in the face with my vain sticking out and spit flying and seeing red, filled with wrath and vengeance; or read it the way I'm right now while writing it: calm but warning.

        "If you would like to post at least parts of this email on your site...." Parts? I'm not asking which parts. Why did you send email rather than putting your whole position in your email in a comment out in the open? What's in the email that requires secrecy? I don't see it. What's in it that you don't want others to see and why?

        By the way Jerry, my email is scanned by the "authorities" of Satan. God knows too, as you know.

        "Shake the dust" is what Jesus said to do. You rebuke him. Don't you see that? You don't like his words applied to those who reject his call to righteousness, which any un-abused child knows homosex is unrighteous. Pasquella over on BlogCatalog knows. http://www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/gays-les... She's just lying to herself.

        Satan can be very "nice" and "pretty." You think that's nice and not ugly. That's the real ugly.

        I don't see you and hear you telling people (souls) how critical it is that they change. You leave Pasquella and her "mate" and Matt Oxley http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/index.php?s=Matt+Oxley&sentence=1" target="_blank"&gt http://;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/index.php?s=Matt+Oxley&sentence=1"" target="_blank">;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/index.php?s=Matt+Oxley&sentence=1" target="_blank"> http://;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/index.php?s=Matt+Oxley&sentence=1" target="_blank">;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/index.php?s=Matt+Oxley&sentence=1 and others with a comfortable feeling (false comfort) that they are welcome unchanged into your eternal habitation, even while you fudge that position.

        You want your cake and to eat it too. You risk their souls with your "nice" that Jesus didn't employ inappropriately as I see you inappropriately applying it – wrong time, wrong place.

        That's not what Jesus tells you to do. They are following Satan away from Heaven. You want to be popular with them, unchanged and unchanging, even digging in their heels. I don't. I'm not. They hate me. They "like" you, you think. Consider it.

        By the way, the very first thing Matt Oxley wanted was a private conversation. Read his first comment on my site. http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2009/01/22/anti-new-world-order-video-almost-right-worth-watching-and-discussing.html#comment-4464" target="_blank"&gt http://;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2009/01/22/anti-new-world-order-video-almost-right-worth-watching-and-discussing.html#comment-4464"" target="_blank">;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2009/01/22/anti-new-world-order-video-almost-right-worth-watching-and-discussing.html#comment-4464" target="_blank"> http://;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2009/01/22/anti-new-world-order-video-almost-right-worth-watching-and-discussing.html#comment-4464" target="_blank">;http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2009/01/22/anti-new-world-order-video-almost-right-worth-watching-and-discussing.html#comment-4464 Understand that I had seen that this was his method elsewhere. It's a mess. It's very telling. It's demons within up to no good. It took him a long time before leaving that comment. He knew I didn't care for unnecessary conversations in the shadows.

        I don't know the spirit that gave you to write what you've written. It's not the voice I hear.

        Do you pray asking God who's right when you read or hear or see others, or do you go with what makes you feel comfortable and pleasant?

        I'm interested in what's right, not being popular. When people care about what's right, I'll be popular with them. That's what signifies with me. All the rest is dead of the Holy Spirit.

        I'm not interested in spinning wheels with you, Jerry. If you want to get at the root cause, I'm interested.

        Bless you, Jerry,

        Tom

    • I would not feed into this person's rants. You have positive contributions and you let him get to you. Consider him as lint and pluck it off. Remember that hurting people, hurt people. Maybe that's is what is going on.

      • Hi Cheryl,

        I can see where you might think *ane got to me. He didn't, and I'm not the least bit bitter. The attacks are as water off a duck's back, really.

        He has to have been hurt somewhere along the line. I hope God and *ane can work it out. It's good of you to have mentioned that aspect. It shows compassion.

        Thank you,

        Tom

    • @Pasquella: There is absolutely not a doubt in my mind that you are

      one of the most sincere people I have ever had the privilege to meet.

      I also do not have a doubt in my mind that you have a wonderful

      relationship with your partner, and this is what makes it so hard.

      For it is just as wrong for you to be in love with her in that way as

      it would be if she was a married man with three small children at

      home. As in regards to Scripture, Romans 1:18-32, 1 Corinthians

      6:9-11 and 1 Timothy 1:8-11 are very clear that homosexuality (even

      that which is practiced as purely as you do) is a sin that needs to be

      repented of, and arguing that those passages were written by the

      Apostle Paul is a moot point. For ALL Scripture came from our

      Heavenly Father to serve as written confirmation of what He wants to

      personally reveal to us. Please, I beg of you, keep listening for His

      voice. For our Heavenly Father is the only One who can convince you

      of what the truth is.

      That was my last response to Pasquella over on Blog Catalog. Would you please tell me where I told her that homosexuality is all right?

      Furthermore, if you had of read those parts of The Crackerhead Chronicles and Bittersweet Refinements that I asked you to, you would have seen that I was very clear about homosexuality being very much not all right. Well, did you bother yourself to read those parts or are you just ignoring them?

      As in regards to me wanting to have private conversations, it was in the hope of avoiding embarrassing things like that for you, but if you don't mind, so be it. For it will be as it should be in the end.

      • Jerry,

        I linked to the thread over on BlogCatalog. Your comment is there.

        I did not say that you said homosexuality is okay. Anyone reading this between us can read between the lines to see what it is that you more than alleged concerning me in your email to me. "Ugly"....

        Now, your message to Pasquella after all of her standing for sin and ignoring many salient, even critical points, which she clearly did, is mixed. It's a mixed signal.

        "...one of the most sincere people I have ever had the privilege to meet."

        Jerry, she's not "one of the most sincere people [you] have ever had the privilege to meet." If she were that, she'd have focused on the truth rather than dodging, which she did (dodge).

        "...a wonderful relationship with your partner...." What kind of words are you using? Does Jesus call it "a wonderful relationship"? Is that what you think? If so, you're lost.

        If it's wonderful within the spiritual context of that whole thread over there on BlogCatalog, it's not sin. Why don't you know that after all this time that you've been "thinking" about Christianity?

        It's not a wonderful relationship. It's evil. It's an evil relationship, per Christian definition, supposedly your own included. They are hurting each other and others. Nothing good comes from it -- not one thing.

        Do you really have any business telling me where I'm wrong and thinking you're schooling me and that you've embarrassed me?

        Furthermore, I told you I would read your links. I told you I did. Now you're here, alleging what concerning that?

        "... did [I] bother [myself] to read those parts...." Now that's "ugly," Jerry. You are telling me right here that you believe that I may have lied to you.

        As for embarrassing, I'm not embarrassed. I have no reason to be. Are you?

        You rebuked me for using Jesus's words verbatim and directly to Pasquella. You challenged me here. It's not the first time. You've asked me to read parts of your site. I did that.

        You want me to agree with you, with your style, with your everything. Well, I don't. I don't agree with not using the word "serpent" and with not telling people that you'll "shake the dust," etc. Unlike you, I am not ashamed of Jesus's choice of words. I've used them in exactly the same position. I have not used them prematurely. What I know you are doing is exactly what I said in my earlier comment.

        You also told me before how highly you thought (and still think) of Matt Oxley, while he's a huge convert to anti-Theism, daily attacking God and Jesus and everything that is holy, in fact.

        You sided with him when he got me banned from Entrecard via his moves against me on this site. He knew what he was doing. He became hostile simply because I had suggested that Entrecard add other categories or subcategories so that unwitting clickers wouldn't be taken to Matt's site thinking they were headed to a Christian site. His blog name, the image thumbnail at the time, and his own handle suggested Christianity while he was in fact doing the bait and switch. That's all. You know that, but rather than stand with me, you sided with the hyper-atheist against a Christian. Do you think Jesus likes that, that you did that?

        So, have you saved my soul here, Jerry, or what?

        Peace,

        Tom

    • Will Hilliard

      Job 31:14-15

      14 what will I do when God confronts me?

      What will I answer when called to account?

      15 Did not he who made me in the womb make them?

      Did not the same one form us both within our mothers?

      Tom, I feel that you have lost sense of what you are trying to preach. The acceptance people speak of in reference to homosexuals is not one of affirmation or damnation. It is simply denying the stigma that homosexuals do not belong in the church. Every man is called to God. If you truly believe that these people are suffering, why would you deny them the chance to receive God's grace? You talk of us being one with your God, but I am starting to think that you believe he truly is your God and no one else's. It is not our place to cast judgment on others. The word of god says we will meet our judgment by his hand and his alone. As sinners, we must accept and love each other. You are trying to form a church of saints. No man is without sin, and sin is all equal in God's eyes. To place another man's sin as "worse than yours" is not your place, nor is it true. Do you feel that you are ready to accept the responsibility of personally judging or selecting Christians? Why do you feel that you are so entitled to cast stones? These are the true questions that must be answered by you alone. It has been made fairly evident that you believe you are better than homosexuals. You are not. Not in God's eyes, nor in mine. I do not know of your personal life, but I do not need to to say that you are a sinner and will be judged by God just as they will.

      • Look Will,

        You don't know me. You don't know what I'm trying to preach, so you don't feel anything about any lost sense of anything concerning me.

        "The acceptance people speak of in reference to homosexuals is not one of affirmation or damnation." What planet are you living on? I've had plenty of encounters with homosexuals and homosexual whatever you want to call them "accepters" who are definitely calling for affirmation. What do you think affirmation means in "accepting and affirming"? What do you think it means that there is an openly practicing homosexual bishop in the Episcopal Church? You're living under a rock. Pull your head out.

        "It is simply denying the stigma that homosexuals do not belong in the church." Unrepentant homosexuals do not belong to the fold, period. They refuse to stop doing what is wrong.

        "Every man is called to God." Every man is not called. Where do you get this junk?

        "If you truly believe that these people are suffering, why would you deny them the chance to receive God's grace?" In no way have I denied anyone a chance to receive God's grace. You are a loose cannon.

        "You talk of us being one with your God, but I am starting to think that you believe he truly is your God and no one else's." Who's the "us." "Us" doesn't include unrepentant homosexuals. If that's how you feel, go away. It's your problem, not mine. I don't talk about people who hate the truth being one with my God. They aren't. My God is not yours, obviously. You don't know my God or you wouldn't be here saying all this junk, and that's what it is – pure trash. Plenty of people have gods that are not my God.

        "It is not our place to cast judgment on others." Are you accusing me of that too? Yes of course you are. That's clear. It's not a mistake to take it that way from you. Do you know what you're saying? Do you know what the word means in the context in which you've used it here? You just told me I'm going to Hell for saying that homosexuality is a sin and that unrepentant homosexuals are not of the body.

        "The word of god says we will meet our judgment by his hand and his alone." Why don't you go find someone who is judging and tell him about it.

        You're judging me a judger. What happens to judges as you've clearly meant it here? Look in the mirror, will you?

        You're an echo chamber for junk theology. You're echoing other people's interpretations. Nothing here is original with you. It's all failed theology. It hasn't worked for hundreds of years. It's why the world is a mess. You're reflecting it.

        You're an apologist for sin. Homosexuality is a disease. It's selfish. It needs to go and will. There will be no unrepentant homosexuals in Heaven – none!

        "As sinners, we must accept and love each other." You have no idea what you're talking about. What I loose here is loosed in my Heaven. I don't authorize homosexual lust. Therefore, it is not loose in my Heaven. When I go there, it won't be waiting for me.

        Jesus hated people. Wake up! He hated his blood relatives. That's right. He hated them. Everyone who followed him closely hated himself. So why don't you learn something before you come here to leave stupid, thoughtless comments that are totally unGodly and anti-Christ?

        There is love and then love. Learn something about semantics rather than spewing.

        "You are trying to form a church of saints." That's the only intelligent thing you've said here. Unfortunately, it isn't to your credit because you think that's bad.

        "No man is without sin...." What was Jesus, a dog?

        "...and sin is all equal in God's eyes." Who the Hell told you that (emphasis on Hell)? Jesus himself said that there are weightier sins. Go read the Bible before you come here preaching. Stop echoing lies. What preachers/denomination drilled that junk into you? You've been conditioned to falsehoods. Wow, have you ever been misled, filled with so many fundamental errors. It's amazing. You don't even come close to knowing the basics of Christianity. I know atheists who can get it better than you've done here.

        "Do you feel that you are ready to accept the responsibility of personally judging or selecting Christians?" I can read. I know who the goats are. Jesus made that very clear and plain. Homosexuality is either iniquity or it is not. If it's iniquity, then they stop or they don't come in. If they fall, they repent again and again and again each time. What the real Church does not do ever is say they don't have to. The church that says come on in and keep right on sinning is of Satan, by definition.

        You're Pauline, aren't you? You sure talk like one. Some Paulines are smarter than others though. Paul said that Christians will judge.

        "Why do you feel that you are so entitled to cast stones?" The truth is a stone to you in this sense. You don't like truth, so leave. I don't want you if you hate the truth. I reject you if you hate the truth. I don't want you in my Heaven if you hate the truth. I don't like you or love you if you hate the truth. I hate you if you hate the truth. I hate evil fruit. I hate the limb that brings it. It changes, or cut it off. If the whole tree brings forth nothing but rotten fruit and won't change, root it out and burn it up.

        You came here preaching when you don't know anything of value on this subject. You should have asked intelligent questions. God loves and hates the same people at the same time. It's the same with Jesus.

        So, you go be with the unrepentant homosexuals. I read several former homosexuals today. I've interacted with them witnessing to how they've changed. There will be more and more. Hallelujah. They're glad that there are people who aren't falling for the garbage that homosexuals can't change, that it isn't a choice, or isn't harmful, etc.

        There are people now beginning to call some the Homosexual Mafia and Fascist Homosexual Movement. There are people linking the Mossad and CIA operatives and certain extremely rich, banker, rip-off artists with the homosexual movement. Of course

        Many homosexuals are all over the place being as loudmouthed as they can be demanding that people who don't affirm them and bless their evil unions be censored without cause. That's fascism. It's becoming rampant.

        I censor for cause. I let people leave comments. I let them have their say, just as I'm letting you. I have comment rules. You didn't follow them.

        There are plenty of serpents who have come here and left comments and failed to abide by the fair and just rules. That's what serpents do. They're out of here. If they don't like it, tell them to take it up with Jesus who cleaned the temple of the liars who wouldn't have an honest conversation looking for real truth.

        "These are the true questions that must be answered by you alone." Not one of your questions is true. You are false-hearted.

        "It has been made fairly evident that you believe you are better than homosexuals." What I know is that I reject homosexuality and unrepentant homosexuals for exactly the reasons that Jesus does, and he does. I know that Jesus is better than the unrepentant homosexuals. You disagree.

        "I do not know of your personal life, but I do not need to to say that you are a sinner." That is an evil statement right out of the mouth of Satan within you. That's Satan talking. You don't call people sinners when you don't have the evidence. That's bearing false witness, fool. That's right. I called you a fool, for cause. You're being extremely foolish.

        Not take your garbage theology and go somewhere else because it's summarily rejected.

        I have no patience for you. You have none of the real peace in you in evidence. Don't come back unless it's to repent of all your falsehood you've spewed here. You aren't welcome here with your evil spirit you shown.

    • Your soul was never mine to save. For only our Heavenly Father can do that, and in regards to all of that other "stuff," twist away.

    • By the way, I plan on posting our back and forth here on AsTheCrackerheadCrumbles unless you object. Be assured that links back to this thread, as well as the Blog Catalog discussion will be well marked. So, do you mind if I do this?

      • Well, if you aren't one with my God, then certainly you can't find anyone who is lost and then help to lead the way to that one's salvation. No one brings anyone to God in your book. We are not fishers of men in your book. Your book doesn't say, "For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it." -- Jesus Christ (Mark 8:35)

        Which life do you think he's talking about there? He's talking about the eternal life of the soul with God. He's talking to me, but not you because you can't read it and then repeat it here. If I lose my life for Jesus's sake and the gospel's, I shall save my soul. You don't like that. I love it. You are soil in which the seed does not take root. The seed is the word of God. "If I lose my life for Jesus's sake and the gospel's, I shall save my soul." That's the word of God, the seed, whether your soil likes it or not.

        All you did was attempt to carry out your plan that was to do what you did before that was to run me down because you cannot eat the Christian Commons. You can't go in and eat, so you are the barking dog in the manger.

        You do not advocate it. You do not help with it. You do nothing save go about putting down that which is righteous and calling it twisted.

        You said you'd defend yourself here. You cannot.

        Many people misbelieve you are a man of good intentions, but you mislead people into not speaking truth to homosexuals but rather going far beyond just avoiding being offensive to God. You build them up in their sin. You do it with mixed words.

        You never addressed the evil of those who came here to fight for sin. You rather attacked the one repeating the very words of Jesus.

        "But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, "Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men."" (Mark 8:33)

        That's you while you suck up and ingratiate yourself. Now, have I gained my brother; or are you still telling me that I'm the one who's wrong here?

        You go with the homosexuals. They're your friends. They're the ones you support against the very words of Jesus.

        So now that I've had two go-arounds with you, Jerry, don't darken my door again unless it's openly to say you were mistaken for supporting the homosexual and atheist attacks against me.

        You've not been Christian here, Jerry. You have failed here to pull me down with you.

        Go do what your god tells you.

    • Wally Elarusi

      Mr. Usher,

      I have attempted to read the entire dialogue that you have had with *ane *llman. I must say that I'm not shocked as to your reaction to his statements. What also doesn't shock me is how you've deleted his responses and refuse to allow him to continue to express himself on this, a public forum. Regardless of whether or not he has a "URL" or a "verifiable twitter account" or whatever, doesn't matter because the fact of the matter is he's not trying to get other people to do anything, he's trying to prevent YOU from misleading others. The fact that you can't even write in complete sentences and choose to deny fact rather than accept, interperet, and attempt to rebuke them also speaks to your level of intelligence. Please don't mistake this as an attack as I do not believe that you are stupid, on the contrary I'm willing to believe that you are smarter than the average person. However, I also believe that you are a tool and that your position on many subjects should remain the position of you and your peers. I realize that it would be hypocritical of me to say that it's "wrong" for you to have an opinion that someone else's opinion is "wrong" but I can say that I don't believe in what you believe. I also believe that nothing you say can sway me to your beliefs as they seem very close-minded and archaic. I don't get online that frequently and so will not be checking this daily as I really don't care that much of what you have to say but for the purposes of others that venture on to this site I leave you this challenge: instead of blindly dismissing other people's opinions, why not dispute them openly? Tell people what you believe, why you believe it, and rebuke their opposition logically and sensibly. When you just dismiss it as "unholy" and "not what Jesus believes in" you sound ignorant and I feel like this is beneath you. Thanks for your time in reading this and let's move forward amicably in a way that everyone can learn and grow from. Try to shed yourself of this close-minded persona. It's not fitting and doesn't serve your purpose well.

      • Wally Elarusi,

        "What also doesn't shock me is how you've deleted his responses...." No statement of his that was showing on this site was deleted. Everything he submitted after the last comment of his that is showing was automatically disapproved before ever showing up publicly and was disapproved in full accordance with the comment rules that I set at my sole discretion as moved by the Holy Spirit. If you don't like that, go away. I don't need you. You are part of the problem, not the solution.

        This statement of yours clearly indicates that you are as part of a hit squad. Your group is obnoxious and even attempts to harass, although I don't fall for it.

        I debate in an ongoing way anyone who will address the issues as presented on this site. Anyone who thinks he or she can pick and choose can go away. This site is about asking, seeking, and knocking for the whole, absolute truth. Your kind and you don't do that.

        This website and its comments are open to the public to read. This site has clearly stated comment rules. Read them. Don't post here again without adhering.

        "...refuse to allow him to continue to express himself...." I set the rules here, not you. If he fails to adhere, he's cut off. He failed. He's cut off. This is not a forum for dodgy advocates of homosexuality. This site is anti-homosexuality. This site shows homosexuals and others dodging and then being cutoff for failing to address the points but rather avoiding so as to mislead.

        "...the fact of the matter is he's not trying to get other people to do anything, he's trying to prevent YOU from misleading others." He's not trying, but he's trying? You consider yourself bright?

        I'm not misleading anyone. Homosexuals and their supporters are misleading everyone into the dark. You're on the dark side. You're with evil. You're with sin. You're working for Satan, by the definition of Jesus Christ. It's my job to say it for righteousness' sake. You hate righteousness. Everyone needs to be told that about you. You like selfish harm. You like caving into wicked, filthy, depraved, harmful lust – what the homosexuals do and want everyone to misbelieve is okay. You refuse to admit that penises and anuses have no business being put together and that it is a bad (evil) choice always and always harmful. You aren't willing to say that the spirit that told you otherwise is the Liar from the Beginning. You have no shame.

        "...you can't even write in complete sentences...." What do you do? Do you put periods on fragments? Grow up.

        You're a troll. You may not be online much, but you came here trolling. It's a matter of degree, but that's what you've done.

        You didn't comprehend a thing. You had an objective. You were sent. You failed.

        "...choose to deny fact...." *ane *llman offered no facts that dispute anything I've said.

        "interperet"? For someone who puts others down for not writing in complete sentences (even though your point on that is wrong anyway), why did you misspell interpret? By the way, your comment is loaded with errors. Take it to an English teacher. Do you want me to work it over with red? That's rhetorical.

        "...and attempt to rebuke them...." You are incapable of being corrected at this point. You don't know a rebuke when you see one. This whole thread going back to the post where *ane came in is a rebuke. I rebuke you and your homosexual garbage.

        "Please don't mistake this as an attack as I do not believe that you are stupid...." If you thought I'm stupid, then it would be alright to call it an attack? Well, you don't think I'm stupid, but I know you are. You're stupid because you think homosexuality is okay. It's dumb to think that homosexuality is okay. "Homosexuals: What they ignore"

        "...I also believe that you are a tool...." The feeling is mutual. You are the tool of Satan. I'm the instrument of God.

        "...I don't believe in what you believe." You're an expert in the obvious.

        "...nothing you say can sway me to your beliefs as they seem very close-minded and archaic." It is you who is closed-minded. You don't care about all the harm homosexuality does. You just want to help the lies. You are closed to God, and call eternal truths "archaic." You're working for evil. You spread lies.

        Homosexuality is a choice, always, and is harmful, always. Nothing good comes from it and never will. Anyone who says otherwise is misled at best.

        "I leave you this challenge: instead of blindly dismissing other people's opinions, why not dispute them openly? Tell people what you believe, why you believe it, and rebuke their opposition logically and sensibly." How much of this site have you read? You even admitted that you didn't read the whole context of the back-and-forth with *ane *llman.

        It is you who is blind. This site is huge. It says exactly what I believe. You're a moron to come saying otherwise. This site clearly and plainly dispute you. Why don't you think before you write? Why don't you read to see whether or not what you're about to write is full of dung or not? What you have written here is dung. You have shown here zero logic, mundane or divine.

        As I said, you're a troll -- an Internet troll.

        Get right with God.

        Don't expect more of the same from you to be approved here.

        May God bless you with the real truth.

    • Nathan Turley

      "1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (Amplified Bible)

      9Do you not know that the unrighteous and the wrongdoers will not inherit or have any share in the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived (misled): neither the impure and immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor those who participate in homosexuality,

      10Nor cheats (swindlers and thieves), nor greedy graspers, nor drunkards, nor foulmouthed revilers and slanderers, nor extortioners and robbers will inherit or have any share in the kingdom of God.

      11And such some of you were [once]. But you were washed clean (purified by a complete atonement for sin and made free from the guilt of sin), and you were consecrated (set apart, hallowed), and you were justified [pronounced righteous, by trusting] in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the [Holy] Spirit of our God."

      Can you show me where the levels of sin are? Cause it sounds like he lumps homosexuals, thieves, and adulterers, cheats, slanderers, and the immoral all at the same level. I don't see a hierarchy of sin. I don't see a scale where some sins are worse than others. In the list of sins homosexuality is listed right in the middle.

      • Hello Nathan Turley,

        Thank you for asking.

        Jesus answered, "Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin." (John 19:11)

        Never make the mistake of going with just Paul.

        Peace,

        Tom Usher

    • Those are homosexual fascists. It's a fact. They don't want anyone to know that there are former homosexuals, just as there are those who used to be addicted to pornography and other sexual problems.

      They are as the banksters who have lied and stolen the inheritance of all.

      They are as the war-mongers who are murdering innocents via predator drones so those fascist homosexuals can terrorize former homosexuals and others right here in the United States.

      Learn the truth. Stand up against the fascists.

      From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts. Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy? (James 4:1-5)

    • Sean Strong

      Why won't you let *ane *llman respond to your post?

      • Sean Strong,

        Your question is moot. He's already responded with everything he had/has, which was nothing. He submitted nothing but more of the same. He wrote that I have the last word. I do if that's what I choose on a case-by-case basis. It's my prerogative. If he gets a site, it will be his on his. That's how it is.

        Read the rules here. They are fair and just. There is no unfair, unjust censorship going on here unlike on Google Blog Search that censored all but three of my posts upon my critique of homosexuality and other matters of huge significance. They couldn't refute, so they deleted thousands of my posts that were already there. That's unfair and unjust censorship. That's the homosexual fascists at work. I've refuted.

        If you have a problem with this, you're a fascist. Go away.

        Even if you disagree with my political/religious views about homosexuality, you should stand with me about that and against the fascist censors who ignore points and want them hidden from the general public. I haven't deleted *llman's existing comments here. I don't remember ever deleting an existing comment on this site. Once approved, I've left them all.

        Peace and blessings to everyone, including *ane *llman,

        Tom

    • The reason I pointed out that *ane was not supplying a URL, which obviously he could have done from the start, was to draw him out to show that he was engaging in Internet trolling, just as he's obviously worse than trolling now (stalking and spamming) on Facebook and here. I didn't make him fall. He was already there.

      I put more weight on requiring *ane to abide by the comment rules of the website. Rules don't matter much to him though, as anyone can readily see.

      In other words since *ane doesn't understand, supplying a URL after-the-fact doesn't satisfy all of the requirements of the comment rules. It's not enough. *ane didn't engage in real conversation. Real conversation is exactly the reason for the rules and the only reason I have the blog. It only happens that the greedy and the violent and the sexually depraved are exposed. It's secondary. It only happens so that I can show the lost fold what's happening to them so they reject it all and turn again to the one, real God, not the usurper, Satan.

      I'm looking for real people (lost or otherwise) to help with the real solution that is the Christian Commons.

      *ane, however, is interested in choosing harmful anatomically incorrect sex for himself and/or others, among other errors. That hasn't changed with him. He danced around unable to follow to the truth. He's lost and may stay that way for an age. That's not up to me. The way he is, he has nothing to contribute of value to the real Christian Commons. He's not a Christian. He doesn't comprehend and doesn't want to.

      By the way, I decided to do printscreens of stalking/spamming *ane. So his stalking, spamming, harassing comments on Facebook are captured in case he deletes them and cries foul.

      He's being reckless, as this is all here for any employer or others to find. Remember, he's desperately trying to link himself here without thought about the content and pattern of his actions here and on Facebook and possibly elsewhere.

      This *ane is the worst so far in this regard. No one has been as persistently reckless (a sign?). It never fails. He needs to repent, or bad things will happen that will not be within my control. They won't be on account of anything I've done, quite the opposite. If he were to have listened....

    • One person commented that they are Christophobes. Christ-haters is more apt.

    • The fact that your *ane has continued to submit comments after being told the rules here shows that he is as a stalker -- harassing, unreasonable, immoral....

        • It appears that I have a stalker (homosexual?). Check it out. He won't take no for an answer on this blog. He won't stop doing friend requests on Facebook. He's now spammed my last 3 links on Facebook. This is part of the slippery slope of lowering social standards. Everyone needs to know that there are homosexual fascists. I know there are homosexuals who are opposed to fascism. Those homosexuals need to rebuke the others in no uncertain terms.

          Can you guess who it is? That's right.

    • I had come here with the intention of using the backwards book you believe in to defend the people you show very un christ like qualitys to. but after reading just alittle of your sire i have no idea how you call yourself christian. much less how you have any followers or readers at all.

      im a person who is very difficult to offend, i mean people hafto really try because im an open and accepting kind of guy. but wow, you amaze me with your veiled hatred of fello humans, and your downright bigoted wordplay. not to evoke godwins law... but wow, the nazi propaganda dept has nothing on you. its truly amazing!

      I want to leave you with a few constructive suggestions. Please re-read your holy book, and try to act more Christ like instead of Christian. And censoring someone who disagrees with you is a sure fire way to show that they're right, or atleast on the right track. if your faith is as strong as you claim it is, alittle debate will do nothing but strengthen it.

      • Just to let everyone know, no further say-nothing comments will be approved on this. If you have some intelligent questions, fine. If you can show where I'm wrong fine. If you want to support the harm that is homosexuality that is a choice always. Then don't bother. If you want to say that I can't write while your own comments are poorly written, don't. If you want to give one-liners, don't. Read the rules before commenting. If it's not important enough to you to do that, that's your problem. I'm not here to entertained people with short attention spans or who are hyper-active or determined to remain selfishly lustful that is homosexual. What this blog is not is a forum for fascist homosexuals. You've shown yourselves. It's enough for others to see what you people are really like.

        • Michael Norman,

          You tell me to be Christlike while you call the Bible "backwards" from which we know what Christlikeness even is. Of course you don't know how I can call myself Christian. You don't know what a Christian is.

          As for veiled hatred, did you read this thread? There's nothing veiled about it. I hate you. I hate myself, those parts that erred, though I'm being made strait, as Jesus was, as he said. I hate everybody except God and those who are one with God. I also love you and myself and everybody except for the dead essence of evil (if you can call that a being). If you will take the time for once in your life to find out how all of this can be, then perhaps you might save yourself, per Christ. It's all explained on this blog and in that book you call "backwards." It does require a high level of comprehension. The intellectuals of Jesus's day hated it that the common people were catching on to their wicked game. Will you rise to even the level of the common people of Jesus's day?

          I am definitely bigoted. So are you. I don't know anyone who isn't. It's not wrong to be bigoted. It's wrong to be bigoted against what is righteous. You are bigoted against what is righteous. Anti-homosexuality is righteous. Pro-homosexuality is unrighteous. That's how it is, and no amount of Big Lie tactics (that Hitler is famous for lauding) from fascist homosexuals is going to change it.

          As for Godwin's Law, I don't subscribe. It's inane to me. As for the Nazis, I'm the anti-fascist here, not you. You're siding with the coercive ones against me.

          "...censoring someone who disagrees with you is a sure fire way to show that they're right, or atleast on the right track." So, you don't censor? I'd hate to be in your home. It must be Hell on Earth. How much pornography do you have? What else do you do? Those are rhetorical questions.

          God censors Satan. You haven't a clue. If you want no censorship, you can go there without me. I'm not interested. I have the rules here that are fair and just and that allow anyone who is seeking truth to converse endlessly.

          The New Commandment written on your heart will be the law to you. Then what comes out of your mouth or that you write will not defile you.

    • Your beliefs aside, you seem to be a child. I'm basing this on your ability to write coherently [you just said my writing is coherent when you meant the opposite; brilliant] and your inability to deal with criticism.

      Ranting and raving on the internet accomplishes less than you hope, especially when you're incompetent at it. [There's competent ranting and raving? Again, brilliant, Chad]

    • Jeremy Frank

      I would also like to mention that what you are doing here could very easily be classified as defamation of character. I am not aware of what *ane has said to you in the first place so I suppose it is possible the same could be said vise-versa . Even if that were the case it still would not justify what you are doing here and nothing will ever justify what you believe in Tom. I'm not here to tell you how to live. If you want to believe that a magical gay hating overlord controls the universe then go right ahead. Why don't you just Leave everyone else alone and keep your virus to yourself.

      • Jeremy Frank,

        That will be your one and only comment along those lines that will be allowed on this site. You've had your say. You've shown your wickedness. Go your way, and pray to God to exorcise the demons within you.

        As for "defamation of character," the statements would have to be false and in this case, the person's identity would have to have been publicly made known first by me. I still have not identified him anywhere. The only way others can know who he is, is by his actions and/or by their digging to find out how he has revealed himself elsewhere. I haven't said which *ane *llman is which.

        I don't even know that all the comment submissions came from one person or even several who are actually named *ane *llman or even the *ane *llman who is laying claim to them. I certainly don't know. The submissions are from inconsistent IP addresses, with inconsistent email addresses, with inconsistent names, and I'm not interested in pursuing it. I'm not interested in the *ane *llman who spammed my Facebook wall. He's his own worst enemy defaming himself by his own actions. It's mental masochism.

        What an "offended" person doesn't get away with is taking correspondence where his identity is not known, publishing it in the newspaper, and then whining that the author defamed him. If you don't understand that, too bad. Intelligent lawyers do and so too do the courts.

        A *ane is one in a mad scramble to associate himself with all of this what I wrote imagining that frantically getting as many people as possible to join in without saying anything of substance, such as what you've done, will help him. There is no help in the end for what he's doing. Your kind is tearing down the fabric of society such as it was, which isn't much.

        "I'm not here to tell you how to live.... Why don't you just Leave everyone else alone and keep your virus to yourself." You're tedious from the start.

        This is stupid, Jeremy. You are not telling me how to live while you come here and presume to instruct me on how to live.

        It is homosexuality that is harmful. It is homosexuals who are lying about it spreading that virus that harms those who fall for the lie. Why don't the homosexuals stop lying instead, then I won't have anything to point out to the world about it. What else that's harmful should I not speak out about in your book: war, thieving bankers, land grabbers.... Grow up. It's all from lust. Check yours.

        "If you want to believe that a magical gay hating overlord controls the universe..." I don't believe in magic, never have. You don't know the difference between magic and what God does? Of course you don't. What's "gay"? You mean homosexual. God doesn't hate people who are gay. I'm often gay, but I'm never homosexual.

        I didn't go to your site to rail on violating the clearly stated comment rules. You came here. Why didn't you leave me alone. You don't practice what you preach. You're a hypocrite. So, why don't you start practicing what you preach? Don't go on any site anywhere where the owner disagrees to say anything. Then you'll be doing what you claim I should be doing.

        You talk about defaming while you defame God even while God provides for you, ingrate.

        If you see the light, let me know.

    • Someone's comment was deleted unintentionally and before it ever showed up here. I don't have it to recover. It's completely gone from the server.

      You said I ignore parts of the Bible. You asked whether that's not censoring.

      I don't ignore parts of the Bible.

      Let me remind you that I said, "If you have some intelligent questions, fine." Your question was not intelligent.

      I answer this time, which is my prerogative. I will not answer any further unintelligent questions from you.

      I still wish you the blessings of God, which necessarily includes the truth if you are willing.

      Peace,

      Tom

    • Jeremy Frank

      How convenient for you to delete my previous statement. I can see that by using this means of censorship you can avoid conflict and being proven wrong by your own words. It is the way of simple minded people such as yourself. Things that you do not wish to discuss you simple delete and proceed with the insults. This will probably be my last comment here because I can see that trying to discuss anything at all with you is absolutely pointless.

      • Why be a whiner? Your comment was accidentally deleted. I didn't have to inform you of that or supply the answer that I did. It was graciousness.

        I'll explain for the benefit of others.

        Your question in the deleted comment was not intelligent, and this final comment of yours is even less so. You come into someone else's house and call him a liar without a shred of evidence.

        Only a self-centered, insensitive person would think that it was convenient that your comment was deleted and that I would then inform you. That's not convenient. That put me in an awkward position because of obtuse people. Everyone with sense will readily see it. You are your own worst publicist.

        People are getting fed up with your type. I've been seeing it building. I'm very serious about that. You're going to feel a backlash with the way you're going.

        Your Movement is going way too far. It started out with "tolerating" and then became condoning and now is promoting homosexuality while oppressing those you originally ask to tolerate you.

        Your Movement has little idea of what civil libertarianism really is.

        It was people like me who said to not coerce homosexuals, and now you are turning around against me saying that I have no right.... Then you'll wonder when it all backfires on you. You are not being bright at all.

        You're being about as bright as the Zionists who had the sympathy of people but who have lost huge swaths because they just don't know when to quit.

        As it is, I stated your question. Nothing was lost.

        In addition, you mentioned defamation in an earlier comment. You should be aware that you just libeled me. Also, you attacked me here on my own blog and then requested that I friend you on Facebook and then returned here and called me a liar in writing out in the open. Your name is here. I have your email address and your IP addresses used for your comments, the last of which I rescued from spam. Because your group is slow on the uptake, let me clarify that this is not a threat. This is just telling you to slowdown and think. If I have that information, then other bloggers, etc., will have like information, even more. I do have more than that, but I'm not interested in digging it out of the verbose logs.

        Now, if you have a personal connection with *ane *llman or anyone else here who does, it begins to look like a conspiracy: an Internet trolling hit squad.

        Others using the shared anti-spam have sent your comments to spam. That's the most likely explanation for why your first was not spam and your next two were. I didn't send your second two comments to spam. So, are you building your reputation as a troll?

        Fortunately for you, I'm not vindictive. Some will be though if you persist in attempting to antagonize. The last thing you want is to have people turn on you in real anger with cause. You'll scream and not understand while they beat the Hell out of you for being a major imposition and not because they are intolerant in the original sense your Movement claimed it wanted. They'll also get off any criminal charges that you might try to level against them, and your Movement will be set way back and rightly so. Why do you think there was a closet? You think that wrath can't come back? Think again. If I wanted to see that, I wouldn't inform you.

        So, now we are done. I've been as fair as fair can be with you while remaining true.

      • abuse [at] sbcglobal.net

        Organizations have ways for people to report harassment, comment spam, stalking, persecution, etc. Many of them take a very dim view of it and can and do mete out discipline. They don't want people in their ranks who use their facilities and equipment whether on or off duty to engage in such behavior. An organization's General Counsel will take very seriously any report that an employee of the organization is in violation of any law or regulation.

        Don't be stupid.

        I don't have to be the one to report it. There are anti-homosexuals who are not Christians. I encourage people to turn the other cheek, but there are those who will report criminal tactics while naming names and exact locations and regardless of what a Christian might say to them about doing that. Also, people who go out of there way to attach themselves to their direct, persistent, personal harassment can find themselves in trouble not only from the mundane field but also from the spiritual realm.

        If you doubt me that there are others who will, I tell you that before I converted to pacifism, I had no problem stepping in between a fascist and a pacifist or some other person being attacked without cause.

        There are only two comments on this site with the author name of "*ane *llman." After only one additional comment submission (even before that really), he was informed that no further submissions would be approved short of adhering to the comment rules here; however, there are 19 log entries (that didn't go directly to spam). Only 1 is from an IP range outside a particular university. He has spammed my site for 9 days after being informed that his rule-violating comment submissions will not be welcome.

        Is it enough evidence when combined with his multiple rejected "friend" requests on Facebook over several days before I had to block him and also when combined with his spamming of my Facebook Links page? I suggest to you that it certainly is. I have the notifications from Facebook. There are also many witnesses to the spamming. Two people commented on them. The spam is still sitting there in fact; and I have the screen shots, since at this point, I don't have any reason to trust that particular *ane *llman to be sensible.

        Anyone reading this would think that I have the patience of a saint in that I have not reported *ane *llman. Even God has his limits where he allows the tormenters to have one of their own to punish though.

        Don't be a psychological masochist. It only makes things worse.

        I have done the best I believe anyone can do to speak the truth about homosexual fascism while also affording others every reasonable opportunity to repent of it. I have not coerced *ane *llman to do the right thing. I have cleans my house, which is my divine right that no one can take from me because it comes directly from God, not man.

        I have taken other steps in an attempt to aid this *ane *llman in breaking off his apparent obsessive-compulsive acts toward me. Has he no friends who will work with him to keep him from harming himself?

        If he persists, I reserve the right to make it known to whomever.

        The more steps I have to take to get harassment to end where the other party doesn't just break it off, the worse it could go for that other party through no fault of mine.

        This site is not secular, public property. *ane *llman doesn't own it or have the rights and privileges of membership here. I'm not advocating making him starve or homeless, etc.; but he and I are separated by the Holy Spirit. His god is not mine. We do not acknowledge the same spiritual father. His spiritual father is not mine. He doesn't know that mine is the real. That's my religion. He doesn't like it. I don't force him, but he wants me to be forced by the coercive democracy that is most often demoncracy. Check the word roots. They come from the same root.