I’m Not Who You Think I Am…

I have to get this off my chest.  Many of my readers seem to be under the false impression that I am a Republican pundit conservative.  I’m really sick of that.  I have absolutely no respect for either the GOP or the DNC.  The only political party I can relate to in any way is the Libertarian party, but I don’t agree with them on every point either.  I have a simple rule that works for me: I severely distrust all politicians all the time… always, every single one.

For those who wish to put me in a political right wing corner, who ask me to speak at political functions, who want me to join the tea party movement — stop.  You really don’t know me.  I’m not who you think I am.  So, let me update you on a few things.

I’ve just written and directed a feature film about two beautiful girls who fall in love in the post apocalyptic aftermath of a cellular apocalypse and who make a baby just by kissing.  Yes, it’s a lesbian film and I am one of those people who believes consenting adults should be able to marry each other regardless of sexual affiliation.

Whoops, there goes a bunch of support.  Lets see, what can we bring up next?  Oh yeah, as an artist I once wrote a journal called Onelovestory where I claimed the drummer from my favorite rock and roll band was the Messiah and that I was the Paraclete (aka the Holy Ghost).  That was a conceptual work of performance art.  Just Google it and I promise you will have a new opinion of me.  If some people think it was real, let them believe it.  That was the whole point — to mix up reality with fantasy and never let the audience know if you were taking the piss, or losing your mind.  Bwahahaha…

Oops, there goes a bunch of other readers.  Let’s alienate a few more people.

I don’t believe the official 911 story and I don’t trust the Government at all in that regard.

I think drugs should be legalized along with prostitution, all forms of gambling and driving while talking on your cell phone.  Meat helmets and scribes should also be back in vogue, but I’ll let Dr. Evil work that crowd.

Back when George Bush was President, I wrote a blog called “Citizenspook” (aka citizen spy) where I regularly argued that Bush administration officials should have been prosecuted under the Espionage Act for Treason by outing our own spys in the Plame affair.  I was very disappointed that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald didn’t go the whole nine yards.  At that time, I  also wrote an article about the power of a “sitting” Federal Grand Jury to issue presentments which would bring illegal government activity to trial.

I don’t recall any democratic bloggers having a problem with that argument when Bush was President… but they sure do now.  Hypocrites abound.  I also believed that Plame and her husband helped out her own network when she went on Vanity Fair and put a face to the name thereby endangering field agents even more.  Non-partisan paranoid freak, that’s me. My Citizenspook blog was hacked on or about January 13, 2009 and I have no way of getting back into that blog.

When a bunch of freakers thought they could form their own grand jury lynch mobs to prosecute anyone they liked, I was blamed.  But it’s not my fault people didn’t read what I actually wrote.  The Constitutional power of presentment is only available to a grand jury that has already been impaneled by a US Federal Court.  When I wrote the article in 2005, it was hyped at Democratic Underground.  Yup, I was a darling blogger of that forum during my Treasongate infatuation when Bush was President.  Now the Dem blogs want to hang me for putting their guy through the same scrutiny.  Hypocrites abound, man.  Seriously.  Who do you think you are kidding?  Surely, not the Paraclete.  I got Holy Ghost power goin’ on here in mutant overload.

The Sex Pistols changed my life.  I am a punk rocker who distrusts everything “official”.  I sued to stop both John McCain and Obama from being President.   One was born in Panama and the other admits  his birth status was governed by the United Kingdom.  Since the most direct United States Supreme Court decision on this issue – Minor v. Happersett – states that a “natural born citizen” is one born in the US of parents who were citizens, I believed Obama not to be eligible and I petitioned the courts to review the issue… as to both candidates… prior to the election, before we knew who would win.  Non-partisan distrustful freak of nature… that’s me.

I’m not who you think I am.

While I do believe in Jesus with all of my heart, I don’t think you go to hell if you don’t believe in him… as long as you do believe in love.  If you’re in love, you’re in the stream.  And it’s not important to the source of the stream that you know who the source really is.  Just be in the stream of love.  But that’s not easy.  And it requires that you love your enemies.  I love mine.  I pray for them all the time.  I pray for Satan as well.  That’s probably why he hates me so much.

More readers gone?  Yup.

So, if you’re still reading… let me tell you this.  As for Obama, I don’t see his evils as being any greater than the evil doers residing in the White House before him.  They all suck to me.

The SCOTUS doesn’t care about Obama’s eligibility issue so the precedent now appears to be that a natural born citizen is one born in the US to at least one citizen parent.  I hope that goalpost does not move further to accommodate Rubio or Jindal, neither of whom had even one citizen parent at the time of their birth.

There goes a few more readers.  Please come back!

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that, despite Obama’s wacky weird and freaky birth document scans (cause that’s all he’s really provided – see what happens if you try to present a scan for a passport), I have always believed he was born in Hawaii and still do.  Ooops, there goes a bunch of readers again.

As it stands right now… as long as Obama doesn’t try to change the Constitution by running for a third term… and he doesn’t try to give US sovereignty away to world Government, or take my favorite rock drummer’s thrown as da Messiah… I do not care about this issue anymore.  I am moving on.  The issue is known and unknown.  But now I sound like Rumsfeld.

Bwahahahahaha…..

with love, Leo Donofrio (aka…  your Paraclete :)

PS:  After having taken off from poker in 2010, my return to the tables (in order to finish financing my film) is off to a good start, having just won event #10 at the Delaware Poker Classic.  I also came in 19th out of 544 players in event #2 for a modest $460 win,  Check out the Old testament beard shot… yowza!

About these ads

73 Responses to “I’m Not Who You Think I Am…”

  1. JinOhio Says:

    Leo, thank you again for defending our Constitution for the United States. You are a true patriot. Congratulations on your continuing success in poker. Still praying for your health, safety, and – yes – your salvation.

    What about the Chrysler case — Did you get an appeal hearing scheduled?
    Sincerely.

    ed. More on the Chrysler case soon… and it doesn’t look good at all. Thank you for the prayers. – leo

  2. Frankly, Mr. Finitely, I don’t give a damn who you are, because you are not Commander-I’n-Chief. Hope I didn’t hurt your feelings. It’s not about you, it’s about this Rrpublic.

  3. Sorry for the mis-spelling. It’s my IPOD correcting.

  4. Thomas Morato Says:

    Leo,

    I never really gave thought to who you were… only your point of view on the eligibility subject. For what it’s worth, what you have revealed about yourself doesn’t mean jack to me. I’m a “As long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else… ” kind of guy.

    As for all your detractors, the only problem with bringing attention to yourself, is unfortunately the equal negative attention that ultimately follows.

    Thank you for all your efforts! I don’t blame you for dropping the issue, as stopping the constitutional train wreck known as Obama would have needed to start over a 100 years ago.

    The deck was stacked in his favor the whole time.

    Peace

  5. Tychicus Says:

    Leo,
    I never thought of you politically as anything but a Libertarian.

    I have no problems with Libertarians.

    I was more worried about you being a black flag anarchist.

    But as I read your posts, it was obvious that you were not.

    I really appreciate your excellent work and your site.

    This is America. We should be able to have dialogue about our different beliefs.

    Peace.

    In Christ,
    Tychicus

  6. borderraven Says:

    Leo,

    I appreciate your openness and honesty.

    Thanks for the update.

    I watch Poker After Dark, 2AM here. I thought Phil Laak “The UNIBOMBER” was you in disguise, until I looked him up.

    Anyway, thanks for providing a venue for sane discussion about Obama and the laws. It’s in the courts and out of my control, so I’ll wait to see what happens.

  7. Dear Leo,
    There was little new (for me) in what I just read in your bold self-expose. Your courage to so, however, only serves to increase my already considerable admiration of you. The phenomenal work you have done these past three years have provided more than my mere “Thank You” can begin to cover. Your (mostly solitary) work here is Brilliant!!! Godspeed. I wish you well.
    Most respectfully yours,
    Robare

  8. Ben Kank Says:

    You are simultaneously my greatest hope and my greatest disappointment. You have had and continue to have an enormous impact on the eligibility debate. Unlike most of the advocates surrounding this issue you have been calm and rational. You have made clear that this debate ought to be about legal and not conspiracy theories. You have demonstrated through your personal actions and commentary that this issue transcends party and ideology. Most importantly you have argued eloquently for the rule of law.

    Now, you are brooding because your ideas have been drowned out by opponents with larger soap boxes and louder megaphones. The irrational ideologues on both sides of the aisle are slowly eroding the rule of law. This is because its easier for the truly impartial to withdraw from society, to an island of self imposed rationality, than it is to put up with the floggings of the ideologues. Eventually we will reach a point of no return where hopelessness becomes expressed as violence and the national character of this country will be changed forever.

    My question to you is how long do you think it will be before your vacation from reality will be intruded upon by those that wish to control everything including your private thoughts? One side is going to win this battle eventually and when they do there will be no where left to retreat to.

    ed. I have been told by the Federal courts, “do not enter, we dont want to hear from you.” There is no point in petitioning them any longer for me. My research is here for others who want to try. As for civil liberties being taken away, we will cross that bridge when we come to it, but I don’t see the current administration any differently than the recent previous ones. Obama lost the House and much of the Senate. The people are speaking and controlling with checks and balances. If the Constitution is under attack on another issue, then we’ll see what’s up. I have a life to live and Im moving on. My research is here… – Leo

  9. Actually. You’re exactly who i thought you were. A free thinker who isn’t afraid to speak his truth and dearly loves his country & the Constitution. Keep being you Leo. We love you for it.

  10. witch_wyzwurd Says:

    I could kick your ass in poker any day of the week! We can even listen to California Uber Alles as you watch your winnings be drained.

    ed. I saw TDK’s at the The World Theater in NYC back in 1985 with DOA and Agnostic Front… that theater was an illegal firehazard. I saw my 2d fav band of all time there as well… they hit the stage at 3:30 AM… Jesus and Mary Chain. They were the best live band ever. – Leo

  11. For me the issue is the message, not the messenger. Your correct when you say the things that you said about yourself; namely, that a number of your readers will drift away. I personally would have preferred that you had kept quiet about who you are and what you believe. For me, having an Allie in the battle against govt. corruption and constitutional disregard was the main reason for following this blog. As for all the rest of the stuff that you find solace and peace in, you are probably 180 degrees out of phase with me but those are political battles which can and should be fought in the legislative arena of a constitutional republic, not by executive fiat nor judicial activism. Finally, love is definitely the answer but one which tends to elude even the best of us.

  12. Patriotny Says:

    George Washington longed to retire to his fields at Mount Vernon. But he soon realized that the Nation under its Articles of Confederation was not functioning well, so he became a prime mover in the steps leading to the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia in 1787.

    On April 30, 1789, Washington, standing on the balcony of Federal Hall on Wall Street in New York, took his oath of office as the first President of the United States.

    from – http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/georgewashington

    Some of us aren’t allowed to just walk away Leo. What was it Michael said in GFIII…. “Just when I thought I was out… they pull me back in.”

    Take care.

    ed. I just dont think the issue has anywhere to go. The Courts have made it clear… they are avoiding the issue. If the Constitution comes under a serious attack, perhaps they will stop avoiding the issue. At least the research is there if they ever want it. My battles are now spiritual… I am a foul mouthed flower child. Amma start wearing sandals and a white cloak to go with my beard and tulips in my hair.- leo

  13. You’re funny!

    Match made in heaven: you and Ann Barnhardt…just kidding (sort of).

    Thanks for sharing your great legal mind these past several years. It’s been obvious to me from reading your posts who you are–no surprises for me, just more details.

    PS: Led Zeppelin is way better than the Sex Pistols…

    ed. Love the Zep too…but they didnt turn me into the freak I am. That’s a pure punk rock offspring. – Leo

  14. Leo,

    Thanks a mil for all your all brilliant work for the love of country and Constitution. I always thought you were a libertarian but at times, and in this post too, you talk like you’re hitting on something that gives your psyche a kick into a state of imaginary superpower. In Christian theology The Paraclete is the third person of the Holy Trinity and is also known as the Holy Spirit. And that definitely is not you! Self-deification is blasphemy and, as Jesus Christ says, all sins against the Son of Man are forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. And yes, St. Paul Apostle of Jesus Christ, in Romans, condemns homosexuality and lesbianism. So did God when He obliterated Sodomy and Gomorrah from the face of the earth. It looks like your off on the wrong track Leo. I still love you and will pray for you.

    ed. I don’t know of any Bible verses that condemn lesbians. But here’s more fodder for loss of readers… I don’t believe every word in the Bible is from God. Man has had his hands too involved. I try to make sense of it best I can. For example, I don’t buy into Job at all. Also, when Jesus mentions the Paraclete, he speaks of a “he”… not some ethereal character. I think The Paraclete is with me though, cause I believe in Love. And if we could all just learn to one another, I’m certain Jesus would appreciate our effort. I don’t see him as having any ego at all. Like I said, be in the stream of love and then see who comes calling. The source will make itself known if you are in the stream with total purity. That’s when the guesswork ends, total surrender to love. – leo

  15. However, Dr. Corsi and his world wide forensic expert will be filing criminal charges with the FBI this week. If you listen to the video you will hear that Dr, Corsi has a mole inside the DOH who told him on Feb 24th that the DOH had put the forged document in the DOH archives.

  16. Janet Laird Says:

    Leo:

    This is what needs and justice is coming. Pray the chaplet.

    http://thedivinemercy.org/message/devotions/chaplet.php

  17. Janet Laird Says:

    Leo:

    It should have read: This is what the world needs and after His mercy His justice.

    http://thedivinemercy.org/message/devotions/chaplet.php

    Sorry for the error.

  18. My Brotha from Anotha Motha!! Another cynical, borderline-anarchist, punk-rock Christian…I thought I was alone in the world!

  19. Kevin J Says:

    Leo,
    Much props to you!!! You ain’t losing me with any of what you posted. I’m all about learning what the true and correct interpretation of the Constitution is vis-a-vis Pres. eligibility. And you have enlightened me to where I feel very confident in my assertion that “natural-born citizen” = born in the USA to two US citizen parents. We all have to let everyone we know during this election cycle that Jindal, Rubio and Obama all “ain’t” eligible.

    My biggest concern is that this blog –an amazing collection of un-challenged research– too will disappear or be hacked. What are the chances you could PDF/Zip the entire thing and make it available for download? That way it’s widely distributed in the event it’s hacked?

    Good luck bro!

    ed. I have always stated that the blog may be republished for non-commercial purposes… so everyone is free to preserve it as they see fit. Thanks to all for the kind words… – Leo

  20. Interested Says:

    I, for one, would like to understand your reasons for discounting Job.

    Your logic and intuitive discernment would provide great insight.

    Thanks for what you have done.

    ed. I just dont see that shit goin down between God and Satan as described… furthermore, there are genuine historical issues of authenticity involved and a good part of the book is a poem… I dont believe God unleashes Satan on people as it happened in the book. I dont buy it at all. And in fact, my faith became much stronger when I let that book go. It really messed with my mind for a long time and caused me to doubt God. Jesus said that if something causes you to sin then cut it out of your life. The book of Job caused me to doubt God so I cut it out of my life. – Leo

  21. UP4LIberty Says:

    I don’t care who or what or why you are. I am thankful for your ability to concisely communicate the serious challenges our nation and our civilization face.

    I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors and that the sun shines on your path from this point henceforth.

  22. Well Leo, I never asked myself the question of who you are. I came wanting knowledge and you provided.
    Rest and peace to you, and may the Lord bless you and keep you.

  23. Thanks for all the hard & ground breaking work, Leo.
    It saddens me to know that you are stepping away from it, but I understand it.
    I’m reminded of the old joke:
    Q. “Why do you bang your head against the wall?”
    A. “Because it feels so good when I stop.”
    I hope the cards come your way.
    Peace -

    ed. Thanks bro. I will publish again on this blog, I’m just sick of this issue and the birth certificate thing really worked as a smokescreen. people in general are sick of this whole birther circus. Obama got to be President and now anyone who was born a dual citizen will be eligible. I just hope that the country sees fit to demand at least one citizen parent at birth. If we escape this with that being the precedent, I think my work here will have mattered. If no citizen parents are required then none of this will have mattered. Furthermore, Obama will be somewhat curtailed in pushing Constitutional boundaries with this issue in the air… if he starts to look too much like an internationalist and US sovereignty comes under attack, the two citizen parent requirement could suddenly become important to the people. I think just having the argument in the air is a sort of check and balance on his power to push the Constitution and change it. Thanks for the cool words and l dig your pic!!! -Leo

  24. Faithful Sentinel Says:

    Leo, I’ve discovered a caveat. As I watched the taped proceedings of Orly/Gary’s hearing (9th Circuit Court of Appeals,) the judge made clear, by process of elimination, that the only person who would have “standing” (prior to the inauguration) would be a current candidate in a current race; and only Congress after the inauguration. So, hypothetically speaking, a candidate in the 2012 race would have legal “standing.” We could essentially run a candidate for the sole purpose of challenging eligibility. That candidate would have “legal” standing and have the opportunity to seek full discovery “prior” to the end of the election. We may not be able to remove Obama, but we could very well disqualify him in 2012. Of course, nobody will consider this option. I’m told there’s no “money,” it was all spent on billboards, full page ads, investigatory trips to Hawaii/Kenya, Grand Jury conventions, full page ads, private eyes, ad nauseum… And besides, this election is “too important.” Although, I’m not quite sure what could be more important than preventing the powers that be from singlehandedly amending the Constitution.

    Ah, Leo… I’ve been a reader since the beginning. I waited patiently for you to file a Petition for Writ in first Cort’s case, and then your own. I watched those cases die a slow death in “pending mode.” I watched your research get misinterpreted to the ending result of LTC Lakins’ courtmartial and imprisonment. I’ve shared your research far and wide – even though I find it to be absolutely incomprehensible to a great many – I continue to water the seeds that you have so painstakingly planted. You will be missed. However, I believe that you will be back; just as I keep coming back – This is an issue that takes deep root and infects the conscience. Go win lots of money. Have fun. Tour your band. Relax. I’ll be here, impatiently waiting.

  25. Leo, what a great combination for a human being a punk rocker flower child, in my opinion that is a good balance. As for “I am not who you think I am.” You are so wrong. You are exactly who I think you are, and that would be an individual who loves his country, loves his fellow man, loves music, loves to teach, and loves Jesus. Notice a pattern there. In John 15:17 Jesus said “love each other as I have loved you that is what I am commanding you to do.” there are several versions of this in various bibles. I would call that “love stream.” There is no love of others, in politics. A house is nothing but timber and plaster. It is people that make it a home. Ditto for a country. And because of that “love stream”
    you’ll be back. Why, because for people in the stream, this matter is like a sticker from a cactus that has been there such a long time, that it is embedded very deeply. In order to to get rid of that sticker a big chunk of you will have to go with it. Peace, Love and good luck at the tables.

  26. stand up and fight Says:

    I think this is the second time you have stated you are walking away from this table .You are a poker player.Poker players like to bluff .You will be back at this table once again.So let it be written so let it be done.

  27. Hey, Leo!….We are not who you think we are!

    Leo, I don’t give a crap if you are a freakin’ Martian alien….What matters is you were doing the right thing by exposing the REAL ineligibility of both 2008 presidential candidates…Good luck to you.

  28. naturalborncitizen Says:

    thanks for all the kind words, everyone.

  29. Fitting….Enjoy!

  30. Thanks Leo… all in the name of love… and non-partisan paranoid freaks… Amen.

  31. Robert Laity Says:

    Obama has never BEEN POTUS:
    http://www.americangrandjury.org/public/
    http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/17/there-is-no-president-obama/

    ed. I do not agree with either the so called American grand Jury or that Obama is not President. I dont see any Constitutional allegation of power to citizen grand juries. If one is on a Federal Grand Jury one has the power to issue presentments despite the will of the US Attorney, but people can’t go off starting their own grand juries and expect them to be legally enforced. As an intellectual exercise, a sort of play or theater to expose some activity you feel is wrong, sure… rent a theater and do some performance art if that helps you vent, but it’s not a real grand jury. Furthermore, If Obama were ever found ineligible by the SCOTUS or by Quo Warranto in the DC District Court, his Presidency would be voided, but until that happens he is President and saying otherwise is just freaky fringe blustering. This is what got Lakin thrown in jail. You don’t protect the Constitution by shredding it. Just my two cents. – leo

  32. lightyourcandle12 Says:

    Leo, we love you anyway you are….

  33. YeahRight Says:

    And??? So what!

    If folks thought the same way as our Founding Fathers the USA would never have been born. Our country was founded as a constitutional republic based on laws of the people, by the people and for the people — not some damn hack of corporated political parties or a persons beliefs…

    Press on and keep supporting those that follow you and for the loosers — And??? So What!!!

  34. Why in the world would a brilliant guy like you believe Soetoro was born in Hawaii? It’s hard to fathom that you wouldn’t have done the research… There’s no way Hawaiian officials would run all this interference if “Harrison” was actually born there.

    As for all your revelations – glad to hear you’re human! God loves Him some variety :-).

  35. humbless Says:

    General Leo, you have fought valiantly, but the battle was lost. Take your R & R, because you deserve the rest.

    We are still at war, so when you are ready, come back with your guns blazing, we will still be here, fighting.

    Never give in–never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
    Sir Winston Churchill

  36. da verg Says:

    mccain and palin blew it, they were the only ones who have true standing, there is no way the supreme court would have turned them down.

    so far none of the courts have issued a ruling on the merits of the case, in no case has obama ever said he is a natural born citizen. Not a single one does he state it anywhere.

  37. da verg Says:

    St. Paul was also filled with the Holy Spirit, read his letters to the Corinthians.

  38. SissySue Says:

    Interesting that you pray for Satan.

    I’m not sure how that would play out…what would you pray? That he see God as Sovereign? And if he did, who would be the fall guy then?

  39. IceTrey Says:

    I think your fears are well founded. If you’ve ever read the Dr. Conspiracy blog you know that the Obots absolutely believe people like Rubio and Jindal are eligible. I suspect a lot of the Rethuglicans also agree because they keep putting their names out there to run.

  40. Damn. Dude, you were the one who never bowed out. Damn.

    ed. I said I was thought with the eligibility thing. I didnt say I was through with the truth. The courts will not allow me to enter. What do you want me to do? – leo

  41. BlackSunshine84 Says:

    Why not a class action suit? Wouldn’t that eliminate the argument of standing?

    ed. Please. If I enter the courts, I will be sanctioned. It’s that simple. In a way, they’ve freed me from ever having to step into one of their courts…willingly… – leo

  42. Bystander Says:

    With all due respect, you may not be who YOU think you are. You’ve been slapped around, dealt a bad hand, the game was fixed, the dice were loaded, and so you’re “moving on”. There is actually something worse than the deep, widespread corruption, you speak of. Worse is if good people like yourself fail to stand up to this evil. From what I’ve read on this blog for the past 2 years, you’re one of the finest legal minds in the world. And, if you stop and think about it, life called out to you on this matter. I sincerely wish you might reconsider the “moving on”, because I believe God gave you the mind you have, to be used in this fight to save our republic. Either way, thank you very much for the education you’ve given us all.

    ed. i didnt think the govt would inspire me to head back in so fast… but this 2d circuit sanction crap has motivated me again and I have a number of posts planned in the days ahead. I really just wanted to get on with my life, but they keep inspiring me to fight. so we fight. watch this space… – Leo

  43. Leo,

    God love ya, thanks for this post!

    I never really cared where your political beliefs lay. I just know a brilliant mind when I see (or read the work of) one. You were never left or right to me, you were and are CORRECT. You write some of the best and most thoroughly researched arguments; it is a joy to watch others try to debate you and go down in flames!! ((Not to mention one hell of a dry sense of humor that has had me laughing out loud with my eyes wide open in astonishment more than a few times))

    Just be you, and suck it up buttercup. You are a mentor to many, like it or not!

    Have a fantastic weekend, and may lady luck be sitting in your lap at the Poker table! (no pun intended…. well mostly… ;) )

    ed. awe… shucks :) – Leo

    Dianna

  44. Stay true.

    Everyone I know, and that includes well connected former Federal judges, lawyers ant the like know that it is a scam that is underway. As they have explained with no political winner no one will take up the cause at this point. In fact it could turn the entire Washington establishment into losers. And that is the problem. It took the press 2 years to catch on to Watergate. And they hated Nixon. But it still took 2 years. No one wants to pull on Superman’s cape. Even John Roberts or Mitch McConnell.

    Somebody inside the media or a politician will have to make this a front page issue if it is to gain traction.

    Bobby Jindal would be ideal. He could announce he will not run for President and clearly state why he is not running – he is not an nbC. I found his release of the his BC somewhat interesting. Was it a way to get the nbC issue out of the way? Or was it threat to Obama on the issue? I wish the later, but likely more the former.

    So a lot of people know. And they do care. But they do not know what to do. They wrote their Congressmen and got nowhere. They watch the courts fail. They watched frustrated people do silly legal things and get tossed aside. They know but they have no voice.

  45. Leo,

    God bless you and keep you in the palm of His hand! Elated that you have turned around 180 to get back into the fight for our beloved America and the Constitution! I’ve been following you since before 2008, legal action against Jersey’s sec of state, your two trips to the US Supreme Court, the Hawaiian DOH, and the Chrysler agents vs the perverted obama admin and the corrupt judges’ who have persecuted you rather than deal with the abominator in the White House. I told you a long time ago that you cannot turn your back on the Constitutional NBC issue, and hide away in poker kingdom—it would burn your insides out!

    Leo, I truly believe, as Bystander above says, God gave you a brilliant intellect, a great legal mind with outstanding research skills, and the courage to put your life on the line in your love for God, in the pursuit of Truth and love of country. I do not have a doubt in my mind that Jesus is well pleased with your fight for Truth and Justice because He IS the Way, the Truth and the Life. And, I also believe Jesus is very pleased the way you come back after you are knocked down and renew the battle with the obamarxian party of death which will take any means and pervert the judicial system to destroy anyone who opposes them.

    Leo, you have been chosen for this great task to preserve the Constitution and the very foundations of our great nation. There is no one of high stature who has the courage or the “fire in belly” to take up arms and fight the good fight, but the thousands of “little people” who continue to support and encourage you as our best and greatest hope. It is a great responsibility that has been handed you, but have faith and trust that Jesus is with you in this fight and it is He who will give you the grace to continue the battle and all that is necessary to win the victory. I suggest you forget the film thing—I don’t think Jesus approves. God bless you Leo, with His peace, joy and love.

  46. I have a couple of things I wanted to comment on:

    1) If you believe in Jesus then you should believe what he says: “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.”

    2) What is your definition of “love?” (Mine is that it is the poetic representation of the speed of light.)

    3) The Song of Solomon: “Your children will commit themselves to you, O Jerusalem, just as a young man commits himself to his bride. Then God will rejoice over you as a bridegroom rejoices over his bride.” This and other statements in the New Testament using the “bride/bridegroom” relationship with believers contradicts your idea that the Source doesn’t care if you know who he is…just the opposite.

    We can either believe in an abstract, impersonal “Source” or an intimate and very personal one. I think it’s latter and that would also be my preference.

    SOL: source of life, source of love, source of light, source of laughter…


    ed. My point is this… and if you take me for a heretic for it, than so be it… but if all of the peoples on the Earth could get to the same meeting point… that we shall love each other and not kill each other over the meaning of God’s words or anything else… if we could all reach out together as one people under love, then in my opinion, the Source would be more pleased and happy with us than ever before and perhaps that would be the happiest day in the life of the Source. And I believe that if we ever get to that point, the Source will be so overjoyed that the source will make itself known and the big wedding between the Brides and the Bridegroom will take place at the same time. I am a dreamer and this is my dream. Let’s get to the point where we are all in the stream and perhaps the source will reveal itself to all at once. – Leo

  47. Larry the Grunt Says:

    Leo, there is one final option. It is the only option the courts will allow. The Political Question option. Educate the masses. Go make the speeches, shake the hands, spread the word. Get face to face. Train others to do the same. and LET’S GET THAT FRAUD VOTED OUT!!!

    You feel mostly affiliated to Libertarians? So do most independent voters! The only reason I am registered Republican is because I have always felt the Libertarians didn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning an election. I am sick of the Repub. power brokers promising things they never deliver on. Demo’s are even worse with their tyranny of laws that take Liberty away. Ron Paul is our best hope for a Libertarian voted into office. If ever there was a chance for a Lib. to win, this is it!

    Humble grunt that I am, I have stood before small crowds and spoken truth to power. I don’t like it. I have always had severe stage fright, but it is what must be done. Your legal research, and that of others like you, has helped me greatly in that regard.

    Remember when it was exposed that Dr. Martin Luther King accepted money from Communists? He readily admitted it! He responded that liberty and freedom were so important that he would accept money from whomever would help him in his cause. If King could take money from Communists to save our Republic from the tyranny of racism, you can go talk to right-wing conservatives to save our Republic from the destruction of our most important document – the Constitution.

    In the spirit of Dr. King, please go do the same. Go speak to whoever will hear the truth and take action upon it.

    God bless ya, Bro.

  48. PS: And from the song Angel Eyes: “…excuse me while I disappear…” (which I did, on one occasion…and re-entry was a bitch).

    ed. I know exactly how you feel. And it was a bitch indeed… a freaky moment in Leo history.

  49. themadjewess Says:

    I just thought you were a short, fat, Italian mobster.. You sure as hell proved ME wrong!!

    Everyone thinks I am a Talmud-toting, Orthodox Jewish devil, part of the ZOG conspiracy of evil Zio-Nazis coming to eat all non-Jewish children.

    They better just watch it, I just MIGHT BE. :D

    Blessings on your endeavors.

  50. Garrett Papit Says:

    Leo, as a staunchly conservative Christian who is against gay marriage, I could care less about your personal life. I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense, but in an accepting sense.

    ed. Just to keep the record straight- I’m straight. I simply made a film about two girls who fall in love at the end of the world… -Leo

    True Christians love everyone, although I do disagree that love is sufficient to get into Heaven (Jesus himself stated this very clearly, but we’ll leave that for a religious conversation which isn’t appropriate here). Jesus was also opposed to gay marriage

    ed. do you have a citation? I don’t think you just made an accurate statement about Jesus. – The Old Testament has some issues about men with men, but I have found nothing in the Bible, Old or New Testament, which says anything bad about woman with woman. I think if we all loved each other, than we would all be following Jesus most important teaching, “Love one another.” Let’s get to that point first, then we shall see what God has to say. – Leo

    but I digress…lol. Jesus is truth and truth is all that matters, both in religion and politics. You could be the anti-Christ himself and I would still listen to any factual information you present that I can’t find elsewhere. I would think most conservatives feel the same way…including the ones who invite you to speak at Tea Party events, etc.. I think the idea that conservative Christians are bigots is a myth. The only thing you brought up in this column that bothers me, in fact, is the assertion that I might not like you because of your personal life. Having said that, don’t advertise the punk rocker thing too much…lol. While I love punk rock, I think it might hurt your credibility among the more stuffy left-wing media who are looking for anything to discredit you. ;)

    ed. Hurt my credibility? All that matters is the words and the law and the cases and truth… the messenger is not important, credible or not. I dont care about credibility. I care about truth. The things I report here are not anything anyone has to take my word on… either the law exists or it does not. A case exists or i does not. A citation exists or it does not. Nobody has to take my word on anything written here, verify verify verify… that just takes the ability to read and think. I am more credible without hiding any bit of who I am than if I hide it. Peace and Love. – Leo

  51. Garrett Papit Says:

    BTW, aren’t Libertarians and Constitutionalists also part of the Tea Party movement? Why would it embarrass you to be affiliated with a movement whose main aim is smaller government and less taxation?

    ed. some libertarians are so associated… but the tea party is also socially conservative and I am not. People should be free to do what they like… to ingest what they like, to marry who who they like…as long as they are not endangering anyone else… that’s not a tea party platform. I also do not believe in war and I do not believe we are safer because we have military all over the world. bring the troops home… from all over the world… let the world work its shit out… and if another Hitler comes forward, we fight… otherwise tell the world to take care of their own shit and we’ll take care of ours… and if anyone wants to start a fight with us after we’ve expressed our intentions to be a peaceful nation minding our own business than we can show some power to such a nation. this is not a tea party platform… I am not a tea party person. less government, hell yeah… we agree on that. – Leo

  52. Garrett Papit Says:

    I wasn’t going to delve into religion, but I see that you willingly discussed it in previous responses. I understand that God said if something causes you to sin, cut it out of your life….but how can you be certain that it was the actual book of Job that caused your doubt and not your interpretation of it or Satan himself?

    ed. I was certain. That’s good enough for me. – Leo

    Pain and suffering could be reasonably said to cause doubt in God, from someone who doesn’t rightly understand the Curse, but how could you go about cutting that from your life? Also, where do you stop in determining which books of the Bible make you comfortable?

    ed. God gave me a brain. I use it. Much of the Bible is the revealed word of God… as edited by men and translators. I do not trust men. I do not trust the Vatican men. I trust Jesus for this reason and this reason alone… the crucifixion is a fact of history. And as such it stands like a neon sign across eons… I can see that sign and I know that man dies to shine that sign. He put his life where his mouth was. As a Christian, I am concerned with the words that came from his mouth. And when I read them, I hear things some people dont seem to hear. For example, I don’t believe in the Holy Spirit as some ethereal essence… no. Jesus said he would send the Paraclete and Jesus said the Paraclete was another like him…Jesus referred to the Paraclete as a “He”. Therefore, the Paraclete was to be a man. At least according to the words Jesus spoke. I suppose you could say that, with regard to Jesus, I am a strict constructionist. Jesus was preparing us for the Paraclete to come before his return… he was telling us about a man. But those passages have been mis-interpreted by creation of the concept of the Holy Spirit as a mist and not a man… and I don’t believe it. – Leo

    With all due respect, how can you claim to love Jesus but seemingly be in disagreement with him? He clearly states that belief in him is necessary for salvation and also states that marriage is between one man and one woman.

    ed. Please give your citations about one man and one woman being the only possible marriage? Furthermore, without conceding the point, but moving on to another… Correct me if I’m wrong… but there was a New covenant, right? God changed his mind once, he may have done it again and he may be testing us… love one another… amma try that. Let’s everyone try that and then see what happens. Maybe God will surprise us. – Leo

    I understand your argument about man’s hands being involved in terms of translations through the ages…but that’s the beauty of the Bible. Because it was so well protected through the ages we have more original manuscripts from close to the time of original authorship than we have for any book currently in existence. And they all have the same meaning with only minor translational differences for the most part.

    ed. But how do we know which books are the revealed word of God and which are not? Who decides? Men. I dont trust men all that much. – Leo

    I fear that you’ve let some New Age ideas creep into your Christian beliefs.

    ed. Bullshit… I am not a new ager. I am a Christian. Don’t hang that spiritualist/theosophical luciferian dogma on my ass… no way. Jesus is Messiah, Lord and Savior. – Leo

    Love is indeed paramount, but isn’t sufficient for salvation.

    ed. You don’t know that, you simply have faith that it’s true. I believe you are wrong. And certainly don’t believe the human race has ever loved each other as Jesus asked us to. Some have, many have not. Let’s do what he asked of us towards each other first, and then we’ll see what happens.

    Love is the stream of God.

    If everyone would get in the stream, the Source will be pleased. And perhaps we can have a unanimous faith. But it’s not so easy to really be in the stream. We must pray for our enemies. I pray for Obama and for Satan. Sometimes I hate my enemies and I don’t pray for them, but then I realize I am not doing what Jesus asked of me. I don’t think many of my readers are praying for Obama, and certainly not Satan. Try it sometime… – Leo

    Jesus himself said that one had to believe in him for salvation. Having said that, you obviously believe in Christ and are therefore saved…so this is all an exercise in soterological analysis really.

    ed. I also believe that Jesus is both the source and the stream… so if one believes in the stream but not the source… if the source and the stream are one, then the person does believe in Jesus and he just doesn’t know it. Stop, reread… think.

    This is the parable of the source and the stream. I have written this parable into my movie. I believe it to be true. If Jesus is both the source and the stream, and Jesus has asked us to believe in him… then if we believe in the stream of love, and we swim only in that stream and no other, than we are also swimming in the source…and believing in the source. Perhaps this is the riddle of faith.

    Let’s all get in the stream of Love and believe in the stream of Love… then, Jesus – being both the source and the stream – will have what he asked for and we will all have salvation. Therefore, if you truly do believe that Jesus is both the source and the stream… you should acknowledge that those persons who live on this Earth and who genuinely spread Love but who do not believe in Jesus as the Messiah, are themselves believing in Jesus… they just don’t know it.

    Jesus is both the source and the stream… of love. If you are in the stream (for real) then you are in the source. If you follow the stream, you follow the source. If you are floating in the river then you do not need to see the source… the river is proof the source exists. Not knowing the source does not stop the source from flowing. Get in the stream. Believe in the stream… believe in Love and you will be with Jesus even if you do not believe the Bible. The “teachings” of Jesus are actually more important than knowledge of him personally. This is because Love can be non-denominational whereas dogmatic faith is not. Let’s all get in the stream and stop killing each other and hating each other… then we may all see the source as well, together in rapture.

    It is my opinion that if one is completely moral and loving of humanity and following the stream of Love… that person does believe in Jesus, but the person just doesn’t realize it…yet.

    I challenge you, Garrett… do you believe Jesus is both the source and the stream of love?

    If you say yes, then isn’t it true that if one believes in Love, they believe in Jesus? If you believe that, then you should understand why I believe those who do not believe in Jesus, but who do believe in Love (and who practice Love, not just preach it) are therefore saved. I shall call this SERENDIPITOUS CHRISTIANITY.- Leo

  53. Garrett Papit Says:

    Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24 – Note it doesn’t say a man should be joined with his husband or a woman with her wife. I assume you still accept Genesis?

    ed. But it does not say they shall go to hell either. Taking it the way you have stated it, the man and the man will not be one flesh. It does not say they go to hell. People who don’t get married don’t become one flesh with another person either. That doesn’t mean they go to hell. – Leo

    You shall not lie with ra male as with a woman. It is an abomination. Leviticus 18:22 – I’m sure this is one of the passages that you assume man’s hands were in.

    ed. There is no similar passage relating to women lying together. Leviticus does not say two men shall not Love each other as men and women do. It simply states that the sexual act of a male with a male is an abomination. I take this to mean that it is anatomically unnatural and I think any physician would be hard pressed to testify otherwise. The same is not said about women with women… I believe the Bible is silent on that point because women are not confronted by the same anatomical anomaly. Some of those things listed in Leviticus are worse than others, sacrificing ones children to Molech, mating with animals… these are absolutely against God’s will.

    But God also developed a new Covenant and new mercy for us… and I do not believe that God will banish to hell Gay men or women. Furthermore, the passage only condemns the sexual act stated… nothing else. Falling in love, etc. So, it’s not as clear cut as it is made out to be.- Leo

    Interesting that the passages you think involve changes are those opposed to your view. And please don’t think I say this in a spirit of mockery or hate…just elucidation.

    “Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. Mark 10:5-8. This is a quote from Jesus affirming the earlier quote from Genesis.

    ed. Again, as I said previously, all that can be said about this passage is that two males will not become one flesh. It does not say a gay couple will go to hell, cannot receive salvation. You are reading something into what Jesus said which is not there. – leo

    For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. Romans 1:26-27. This one DOES directly reference lesbianism.

    ed. No it does not reference lesbianism. You are adding your own words into the Bible. God used the words “men with men”, he doesn’t use the words “women with women”. The unnatural acts here as to women appear to relate back to Leviticus. For example, Leviticus 23, “…nor shall a woman set herself in front of an animal to mate with it; such things are abhorrent.” Leviticus 19, “You shall not approach a woman to have intercourse with her while she she is unclean from menstruation.” There is nothing in Leviticus (or the rest of the Bible) which uses the term “woman with woman” in the same way the Bible uses the term “men with men”. Romans and Leviticus 19-23 should be read together. You are reading more into them than is there.

    God is concerned with endangering ones anatomy and health… he says nothing about two men falling in love to be evil. But he does not appreciate acts which are physically against the health of ones anatomy. I believe my analysis here shows God not to be the harsh judge, but rather the parent concerned with the health of his children. A man loving another man may not bind him as one flesh, but I do not see anything which causes damnation. The act of a man lying with a man is obviously not what was intended anatomically… even if one is an atheist, one can see that the anatomy is being used in a way for which nature did not intend it. And that statement is equally true for an atheist or a Christian… and certainly for a medical doctor. Other than that act, I do not see where two men loving each other is condemned by God. Love is never condemned by God.

    You stated that Romans applies to women with women but that is not supported by the scripture. Please don’t be like those who read the 14th Amendment and Wong Kim Ark and refuse to acknowledge that the words “natural born” were not used. If the framers wanted to place into the 14th amendment the words “natural born”, they would have. But they didnt. Therefore, the 14th Amendment does not eradicate the nbc clause of Article 2 Section 1. If Justice Gray and the majority in Wong Kim Ark wanted to state in the holding that Wong Kim Ark was a natural born Citizen, then that’s what the holding would say, but it doesn’t. Give them credit for knowing they had the power to include those words… but chose not to.

    Now do the same for God… if God wanted to condemn lesbianism, God would have included the words directly “women with women”, but NOWHERE in the Bible can those words be found. Do you honestly believe God overlooked those words… that he forgot to insert them somewhere in the Bible? Do you believe he was trying to be coy? If God wanted that phrase in the Bible, then God would have used the same words he used as to men, but he didn’t. – Leo

    Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

    ed. Again the words “women with women” are not in the Bible and furthermore, I would really need to examine the translations of this passage to understand the ancient word used for “homosexual”…for what that word meant back them… the actual word used in the scripture, not the modern English translation we use today and what that word means today… there’s no proof at all that this refers to “women with women”… And again, recognizing that God’s mercy evolved… he canceled out the Old Covenant and gave us a new one through Jesus. – Leo

    knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 1 Timothy 1:9-10

    ed. Again, nothing about “women with women”. I believe that fornication only refers to intercourse of some sort. – Leo

    I’m not judging you or your beliefs…just sharing the many references to this issue that are within the Bible and all display total internal consistency.

    ed. The words “women with women” are not in the Bible. Furthermore, these passages speak in the same way to straight people or couples who do these acts… so being gay really has nothing to do with most of it. The only reference to an act that the Bible condems which is strictly related to gay people is “man lying with another man” from Leviticus and the similar passage from Romans… the rest of what you have cited applies to all people, gay or straight. And the words “women with women” do not appear in the Bible.

    The Bible is consistent, your interpretation of it is not. – Leo

  54. Leo,

    Yes, yes, yes, You did my heart good, you hit it right smack on the head when you said, ” ….bring the troops home… from all over the world… let the world work its shit out… and if another Hitler comes forward, we fight… otherwise tell the world to take care of their own shit and we’ll take care of ours… “.

    Bush got us into two wars and now, obmarxist is putting our military in the killing business in Libya while he is dismantling the foundations of our beloved America, piece by piece. Our guys are spilling their blood and guts for some bullshit dictators who hate us and we are paying for it while the economy is tanking! It’s freaking insanity!

    On another matter you asked “ed. do you have a citation? I don’t think you just made an accurate statement about Jesus.” – concerning homosexuals and lesbians. You must know, St. Paul the Apostle, in the book of Acts, was knocked off his horse by the blinding light of Jesus. After Paul was healed of his blindness, he was taught by Jesus Himself that He was the Messiah, was crucified, died and was buried and rose from the grave on that first Easter Sunday. Jesus gave Paul a mission to preach the Good News to the known world in the Mediterranean. Paul quoted the teachings of Jesus with regard to homosexuality and lesbianism in the book of Romans,

    “1:26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,
    1:27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.
    1:28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. and following, ” (New American Bible)

    I apologize for the long quote but I must answer to the Truth. Jesus concecrated men as apostles to proclaim His Truth to the world through the Catholic-Christian Church which He founded on the Rock, St. Peter. Jesus promised He would be with His Church until the end of the world with His Holy Spirit. Jesus is still with His Church today and forever until the end of the world. God bless you Leo, with His peace, love, and Truth.

    ed. Please see my analysis of these passages here. Jesus did not say these things either. Keep that in mind. Paul is a complicated cat… Jesus not so much. – leo

  55. naturalborncitizen Says:

    If Christianity would just live by the teachings of Jesus and not worry about the rest of the Bible… the world would be so much closer to Christ. Anyone care to take issue with that statement?

  56. borderraven Says:

    naturalborncitizen Says:
    June 2, 2011 at 6:47 PM
    “If Christianity would just live by the teachings of Jesus and not worry about the rest of the Bible…” the world would be so much closer to Christ. Anyone care to take issue with that statement?

    There’s a bumpersticker and a tee shirt, and don’t forget to include it in your book of quotes due out next year.

  57. BlackSunshine84 Says:

    In regards to the TEA Party, if we are going to win this, we’re going to have to forget our differences for a time, focus on our common goals, as the socialists, globalists, radical muslims, etc… are doing.

  58. Leo,

    Please read Romans 1:16-32, emphasis on v 26-27. God’s word is clear on homosexuality, male and female. He did not make them this way; by choice in their sin, he gave them up to their lusts and depravity.

    ed. I have read and analyzed it here.

    I challenge you to give more weight to the actual words of Jesus than to the rest of the Bible. He was the New Covenant. The other parts of the Bible which expound upon his words are not as important as the actual words spoken by Jesus. The opinions of other men are not the Law. Jesus words are the Law. And where God had spoken, there are Old Testament Commandments and then there are other things God said. But Jesus had the authority of God to make a New Covenant. And in that Covenant there were new Commandments. Let us Love on another as Jesus loved us and that includes all people, including all gay people, and even our enemies.

    Jesus said:

    “I give you a new commandment: “Love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. 35 This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”

    A new Commandment. Are you obeying this Commandment with regard to people who are gay? Please note that while this was not a previous Commandment, it was important to God. And do you know where it was previously stated by God? Leviticus 18, just before Leviticus 19-24 which has been suggested as a total ban of all things gay, which it is not, as I discussed in the link provided above. Leviticus 18 states:

    “Take no revenge and cherish no grudge against your fellow countrymen. You shall love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.”

    In John 13:34-35 we see Jesus asserting himself as the equivalent of God by elevating Leviticus 18 to apply as a Commandment of Law. Furthermore, the Commandment is expanded to apply not just to your fellow countrymen but to everyone.

    Jesus reiterated it in John 15:12-14:

    “This is my commandment: love one another as I love you. 13 No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command you.”

    If we could all follow Jesus in John 13:34-35 and John 15:12-14, the world would be a much better place. Do you love gay people as Jesus loved them? Are you really so sure, when you read the words of Jesus, that you know Him, and his teachings, as well as you think you do? – Leo

  59. Jesus himself declared that he came to fulfill the law, not abolish it. The Bible is a timeline from creation to the end of time, with Jesus as the redeemer of his people. Question: If women-women sexual relationships are ok, is it ok for a mother and her daughter to lie together? Does the Bible speak against it? If not, then it must be ok?

    Is incest forbidden?

    [Brick Testament] Incest
    18:7 The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

    ed. Incest is clearly condemned in the Bible…for example: Leviticus 18:6 “None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD.”
    Leviticus 18:7 “Don’t uncover the nakedness of any of your relatives or neighbors. Just ask them to keep their clothes on while you are around.”

    What is your point? I do not understand how this changes anything with regard to there not being a single passage in the Bible that states specifically that woman shall not be with a women in a sensuous way. There is nothing. God’s condemnation of incest is not a bar to all sex. I think you were trying to make the point that God doesn’t have to include a passage which says “no woman with woman” because he has said incest is wrong. In that case, he would not have had to specifically condemn men with men, but he did. Your point is misguided. – Leo

    Just curious where you have found the parable of the source and the stream?

    ed. I did not find it, it found me. A moment of satori inspired by Jesus. It hit me softly like a ton of bricks. And I spoke it onto my cell phone. Then one day while editing my movie, my phone just started playing it by accident on speakerphone. I then put the exact recording into my movie…so the first time I said the words “parable of the Source and the Stream” are actually in the movie as a voice over… I was just thinking about Love, but yesterday it hit me that Jesus isn’t just the Source, he’s also the Stream… and if we believe in the Stream, we believe in the Source whether we know they are the same or not. As an attorney, I saw an immediate route to salvation for those who believe in the Stream with all their heart even though they do not recognize the Source since the Stream and the Source are one in the same. I can see how this may be a problem for many Christians, but I know it is true. If one believes in the Stream with all their heart, one is saved. – Leo

  60. Leo,

    I think you should put an end to disputing about what the Bible says or don’t say about homosexuality and lesbianism—it is nothing more than an exercise in futility. It can go on ad infinitum and no one will accept the interpretation of the other.

    ed. We don’t need to agree on everything. All we need to agree on is Love. And I believe that is possible. Just might take a different approach then has been taken till now. – Leo

    You can have 1000 people to interpret the Bible and you will get 1000 interpretations which they will declare as infallible. That is the reason Christianity is split into thousands of faith communities declaring that they have THE correct interpretation of the Bible! Before anyone can put forth an interpretation of a particular verse of the Bible, it is absolutely necessary to have an understanding of the history of who wrote it and how did these particular books came down to the modern day after 2000 years. And, who put the books of the Bible together and declare that these were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

    It is important to remember, as so many fundamentalists do not, the Bible just did not drop down out of Heaven. The Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, inspired men, (take note Leo, Jesus wrote not one word) the Hebrews of the Old Testament and the New Testament, by the apostles and disciples of the Christian church, to write down the books and letters of the Bible.

    Leo, your distrust for the words of men in the Bible is illogical because the entire Bible was written by men and has been preserved by men of the Church who were guided by the promised Holy Spirit who is to be with the Church until the end of the world. We must remember too, there was no New Testament with the present canon of books before 382 AD–that was accomplished through a man, Pope Damasus I. It’s all there in the facts of history. It cannot be denied.

    ed. I don’t believe in canons. I believe in Jesus. I believe in the stream of Love, which is Jesus. When everyone gets in the Stream, everyone will know the Source. But until Christianity recognizes that, they stand in the way of the flow of Love. Too judgmental, not enough Love. The Commandment, “Love one another” is the most important. Let’s focus on doing that and see what happens. – Leo

    Leo, you have great skills in your historidal research and teaching of the law and a love for the truth. I suggest you study the history of how the Bible, as it is today, came down to us after 2000 years. And let us all remember this: The Christian/Catholic Church was founded 30 years before the first book was written, circa 50 AD, by Paul the Great Apostle, 1 Thessalonians of the New Testament. The last book, by John the Apostle, Revelation, circa 100 Ad. Unless we have the true, historical facts about the Bible, we will beat the air and each other black and blue with no end of conflict.

    God bless you with His peace, love and joy.

    ed. And the same to you, brother. But Paul wasn’t the person who Jesus built his Church upon. That was Peter. And I don’t believe the idea that Jesus saw churches in the same way as the Catholic church views itself. Pope’s are not infallible as to anything. Where did Jesus ever say that? I follow the words of Jesus and am not part of any organized church.

    All we need is the Stream of Jesus’ love and teachings about Love… we have them from more than one source. The things which are common to them are the most reliable and to those we should focus. But really, it’s down to that “new Commandment”… it is the New Covenant stripped to the bare essentials, “Love one another.” If we can’t love one another, we can’t be saved. If you love Jesus but hate your fellow man, you are not in the Stream… it’s not enough to pray to Jesus, you must follow his law. “Love your enemy as yourself.” His law does not command you to know that you are following HIS law, only that you do it… only that you Love one Another. Do that and you will be saved according to what Jesus said. Get in the Stream and you will be in the Source. – leo

  61. The doctrine of creation would preclude God’s giving women over to their lusts for other men OR other women. The account of creation gives us our example of conjugal love and marriage. It defines it as between a man and a woman. Doctrinally, and for thousands of years, Christians have understood that outside of marriage, there is no place for any type of conjugal love. This is why Paul urged those who could not resist their burning desire for one another (man to woman) to be married! I respect your right to disagree with this but that doesn’t make your point true. God is holy and righteous. I realize there are many references on the internet to giving a pass to lesbians from Romans 1 but this is foolish thinking. Just as the whole of God’s word, based upon presupposition, is believed to be true, we must strive to believe as doctrine would follow in matters where God’s intention is clear, even if his words are few.

    ed. Until Christians stop throwing the first stone and take the plank out of their own eyes, they will never be in the Stream of love.

    As far as legalization of marriage is concerned, religion should not have any say. What happens if your religion loses enough elections? Then you will be forced to accept the law of the prevailing religion.

    As far as Jesus is concerned, don’t worry about who other people are falling in love with or having sex with. Teach your children what you believe is right, and let everyone else be. When the world of Christendom realizes that they have failed to follow the most important Commandment, “Love one another”, it may be too late.

    As for the Bible and Lesbianism, Paul’s words do not specifically mention women with women… that is your interpretation that they do. But know this, it is not stated in the Old Testament, nor is it stated by Jesus. So Paul would be placing words into the mouth of God which there is no record of God/Jesus saying. Therefore, verily, I say unto you, a person will be saved if he follow’s Jesus words and teachings and never reads a word of Paul. Do you agree or disagree? – Leo

  62. Garrett Papit Says:

    Leo,

    First off, I want to thank you for the in-depth responses to my posts. For some reason I find religious, and political for that matter, debate stimulating. If any of it came across preachy…I apologize. Truth is I come from a family of ministers, myself excluded, so it’s just in the genes I guess…lol.

    I also need to clarify a couple things because I wasn’t completely clear on my main point. I did know you weren’t gay…or assumed, for whatever reason…lol. Maybe it’s the beard? What self-respecting… (ed. snip, your joke on my ugly beard :) could perhaps be misinterpreted as a stereotype so I snipped it…but we are cool no worries, I know you meant it as a joke on my look, not anyone else, just the way you worded it I have problem with- Leo) JK When I said I could care less I was trying to convey that, as a conservative Christian, the things you mentioned (ie. pro-gay marriage, filmmaking with lesbian themes, etc..) don’t bother me…meaning I don’t think less of you or judge you because of it. Rereading it, I see how I could have made the impression that I thought you were gay. Next, I wasn’t suggesting that being gay automatically means you go to hell. From my interpretation of God’s gift of salvation, via Jesus, anyone who believes will be saved…gay or straight. I was basically just explaining why I am opposed to gay marriage and why I think it’s a Biblical view. I gave my Biblical evidence, as I interpret it, but didn’t explain my overarching point. My position could be summed up as “love the sinner, hate the sin”. I assume as a Libertarian, and not an anarchist, and not to mention a lawyer, you agree that some laws are necessary for a civilized society. My contention is, as a Judeo-Christian nation our laws are all based on the morality of the Bible. The law against murder comes right from the 10 Commandments, as does anti-theft laws…on down the line. To my mind, marriage is a religious institution first and a legal institution second.

    ed. It is a legal institution and we are a legal nation. Marriage confers legal benefits… your view tries to deny the same legal benefits and protections as you receive from gay couples, based upon religion. That is wrong. Furthermore, we have a democracy, but what happens if enough people from another faith win enough elections and displace the Christian majority? Then you will be forced to live under that religion’s laws. I do not want religion in the law. I do not care, and God does not care, if the words “In God We Trust” are stripped from the money supply. Putting “God” on the money is an insult to him as it is an endorsement in that money. Money is the root of much evil. Why would God agree to endorse that product?

    Jesus said, “give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar’s, and give unto God what is God’s.” The money is not God’s, it is Satan’s.

    Our country was formed as a democratic republic. If Religion is allowed to be part of the law, then the religion involved in the law depends on the majority of voters and the religion they hold. If your religion loses enough elections… you may end up living under Sharia law or Satanic law… or atheist law… or where some anti-Christ is pushed before you as world leader and you are forced to worship him. We don’t need religion in the law… the law protects against murder, theft, rape etc…it deals with contracts, personal injury, fraud…and that’s all we really need the law for. – Leo


    For that reason, I’m forced to take the Bible’s view of marriage…both from the Old Testament and from Jesus himself when quoting the definition in Genesis.

    ed. The Bible does not specifically prohibit gay marriage. It only prohibits a certain act between males… You have failed to discuss my analysis of the fact that Jesus simply stated that a man and a woman will be bound as one flesh… it does not say that two males will not be bound as one flesh, but assuming only a man and woman will be so bound in Heaven, that does not mean Jesus would support a ban on gay marriage considering that Jesus “is” Love (both the Source and Stream thereof) and two males may love each other spiritually as a man and a woman do without breaking any of God’s laws should they refrain from the act mentioned in Leviticus.

    You are taking the view of the Bible that you have been taught is correct. But that doesn’t mean it is correct and that there are no other possible views allowed by God. You and your teachers are fallible and perhaps have not got it exactly right. I believe God intended man and women to be bound as two separate halves of a whole that is the most incredible Love possible. The science of anatomy, nerves, reproduction, etc… leads me to believe that is what God intended… But it’s possible that God’s plan includes some anomalies of Love as it does anomalies of health, physique, intelligence, talent, genius etc. Perhaps sexual orientation, like a photographic memory or very crooked teeth… is a result of God’s fickle challenges to us. Let God judge gay people and let us grant equal protection under the law despite race, sexual orientation, age or whatever.

    Christians should speak the gospel of Christ to whomever will listen, but Christians should not be imposing their religious faith on those who do not follow it. Equal protection under the law is what this nation is based upon. Equal protection should not be limited in any way, for if it is, then one day it may be limited as to your right to marry a woman. Think about it… what if gay people overtook the Government and outlawed straight marriage… if they won a majority of seats they could accomplish such a law. Perhaps the odds are against it, but it is a remote possibility and then you would be in their shoes now. I think it’s a hypothetical that bears thought.

    Where did Jesus specifically tell you to ban gay marriage? Those are not his words. That is your interpretation of his words. I am a strict constructionist when it comes to the words spoken by Jesus. His words relate to the Spiritual world and the REWARDS of marriage between a man and a woman. Please cite where Jesus or God states there will be a penalty for those gay couples who marry. And please, leave sex out of it. Plenty of couples who are married either do not, or cannot have sex… there is such a thing as pure platonic love. Marriage is for better or for worse… I imagine there to be some gay male couples who love each other, but who also read Leviticus and believe it to be God’s law… if that gay couple refrains from that act so to obey God’s law, I see no law which prevents that couple from being in love and from getting married.

    Where in the Bible does it say that two people of the same sex who love each other should be banned under human law from getting married? Seriously, your view of the Bible is not based upon scripture, it is based upon your limited view and understanding of the scripture. – Leo

    Having said that, to many modern people marriage is primarily a legal union. The anti-gay marriage argument is much harder to make from a legal perspective as it seems antiquated and bigoted to someone on the other side of the issue…namely gay people. I’m certainly not suggesting that an anti-gay marriage stance is necessary for salvation or that you can’t get into Heaven if you are a homosexual. You agree that Jesus sets the standard, and as accepting of individual sinners as Jesus was, I’m hard pressed to believe he would endorse gay marriage were he here to respond in person now. I completely agree with your position of loving and praying for your enemies…Obama and Satan included…lol. Further, I agree that we come nowhere near the standard of love exemplified by Christ…and don’t think we ever will as fallen, fallible beings. The points where we do disagree are the issue of belief vs. love as a salvational prerequisite…and the interpretation of the Holy Spirit. I’ll address those, and your comments to me related to those subject, in another post as this is getting long. :-)

  63. Garrett Papit Says:

    On a sidebar, I forgot to address the Libertarian issues. I actually find myself sharing many beliefs with Libertarians, but I can’t get on-board with the drug legalization aspects…marijuana is the only debateable one in my opinion. And that comes from someone who, as a typical preacher’s kid, had a very rebellious childhood/young adulthood. Some really rough times including a bad meth habit and some more comical ones, like a hydro-garden in my closet in college. My problem is that hard drugs like crack, herion, meth and cocaine are dangerous. I don’t so much mind if someone kills themselves, but I think that legalizing it will encourage the behaviour and contribute to at least a minimal societal decline….just my opinion.

    ed. The drug cartels are too powerful and much to evil to be allowed to continue their reign. Alcohol is legal and people can kill while drunk… alcohol inhibits ones powers of perception in a very very dangerous way… drugs are here and they always will be. Too many people are in jail for having a disease of drug addiction. As a Christian, those people need help, not prison. The prison system is so massive because of the illegal drug laws. People are going to get what they want… make dangerous meth labs,etc. If we legalize drugs we can make our world a much safer place and we can tax it and the revenue can create positive aspects for recovery. Smoking is the most dangerous drug there is… but it’s legal. – Leo

  64. Garrett Papit Says:

    Before the other issues, I do still disagree with your interpretation of Romans 1:26-27..although I will admit I hadn’t considered your view before. To me, the context is the deciding factor. First it states that women exchanged what was natural for what was against nature. The very next sentence starts with LIKEWISE, to my mind linking the concept of the previous sentence with that of the next…the next being men burning in their lusts for one another. In addition, it states that men left the NATURAL use of the woman…which further links it back to the previous thought where women were said to do what was UNNATURAL also.

    ed. If God wanted the Bible to say what you think it does, then God would have SPECIFICALLY stated as much. But he didn’t. You seem to agree that one can read it both ways, right? So, if you are truly trying to construe this passage in order to find the truth – and not a pre-determined conclusion – then you really should go to the Old Testament passage where this issue was first discussed by God. Go back to Leviticus (start at Leviticus 18 for good measure and review “Love one another”)… then go to Leviticus 19 -24 and you will see that while God does list unclean forbidden acts that females should not take part in, women lying with women is not listed. Give God credit for being able to make clear his law. The very fact that the Romans passage may lead to two separate conclusions is evidence that it may not mean exactly what you have interpreted it to mean. God does not have issues with communication. We do. But, this is also not Jesus speaking, and not God. This is Paul. While Paul was such a strong force in spreading the Gospel, he is also not infallible. He was a man. Perhaps this was his interpretation of Leviticus 19… that does not mean it is a perfect statement on his part. Regardless, Paul’s statement is, at best, unclear. As such, is it not wise to return to God’s words? Neither Jesus nor God has ever asked us to accept the words of men without thinking them through, be they men filled with the spirit of prophecy or not. Men are human and they make mistakes. Sainthood means nothing to me. It is a status granted to men by other men. I love those men who truly earned the respect a saint gets, but all glory and power for the miraculous comes from God/Jesus, not men. – Leo

    But all of that aside, the argument to prove lesbianism is a sin is much simpler than that. According to the Bible, sex is a pleasure reserved for marriage, so any sex outsid of marriage is technically a sin. Premarital sex is technically adultery.

    ed. There are sins, and then there are mortal sins. Simple sex is not a mortal sin. It is sin in that God wants us to appreciate it as the incredible gift that it is… celibacy until marriage creates the conditions by which the awe and wonder and miracle of sex can best be experienced. It also keeps us safe from disease and from creating children where true love is not present. It is a naughty sin, but it is not on the same level as murder, violence, rape etc. What’s your definition of sex? Aren’t you speaking of intercourse? Do you believe kissing and petting are sins? I do not. Let’s face it, very few of us will get into Heaven if physical sensuality is a sin. With just their pure anatomy, women are not capable of intercourse, so if sex = intercourse then your concept of why lesbianism is a sin is not justified. – Leo

  65. Garrett Papit Says:

    To me belief in Jesus is the single most important aspect of Christianity and the only requirement for salvation…so the assertion that love will suffice I can’t agree with. It sounds more like a Beatles song than a religious tenet. Stated another way…you’ve been doing too much Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds if you think All We Need is Love…lol. Sorry, couldn’t resist. ;-) Here are the verses I think support my view:

    ed. I don’t appreciate the joke, Garrett. I don’t do drugs. I play mental sports, poker, chess and golf. I am very skilled at them. I am not a child anymore. Not cool, bro. Low blow. Furthermore, you didn’t address the parable. I agree that Jesus is the only way to salvation. But it is possible to believe and follow Him with all your heart without knowing you are doing so. That is the teaching of the parable of the Source and the Stream.

    Do you agree that Jesus is the true Source and Stream of Love?

    Or, do you believe that love exists without Jesus/God?

    If one follows the teachings of Jesus and is a pure loving human soul… that person is in the Stream of Love… and if that person is in the Stream of Love then that person is also in the Source… even if that person does not recognize the Source.

    If Jesus is both the Source and the Stream of Love, then a person who believes in the Stream with all their heart also believes in the Source even if they don’t realize it. Therefore, those persons who believe in Love with all their hearts are saved because they do believe in Jesus with all their hearts, they just don’t know it. Please address the parable this time, Garret. – Leo

    But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God. John 1:12

    “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16

    Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. John 14:6

    Let it be known to you therefore, brothers, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you, and by him everyone who believes is freed from everything from which you could not be freed by the law of Moses. Acts 13:38-39

    For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. Romans 1:16

    because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Romans 10:9-13

    In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. Eph 1:13-14

    For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Eph 2:8-9 (And before you say it…I don’t consider belief a work)

    Though you have not seen him, you love him. Though you do not now see him, you believe in him and rejoice with joy that is inexpressible and filled with glory, obtaining the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls. 1 Peter 1:8-9

    If there was one thing I thought the Bible was clear on…it was that…which makes sense because it’s of ultimate importance. I guess I’m just puzzled how someone with the obvious intellect of yourself could come to the conclusion you do concerning the sufficiency of love alone.

    ed. Jesus stated that the only path to salvation was to believe in Him… but he did not say one must know his name. What is a name? He was God’s purest Love and Power in human form. What does the name matter? What matters is that you believe in the Stream of his Love, for he is the Stream of Love and not knowing his name does not stop that Stream from being real and eternal. Jesus never said it was required for one to use the name “Jesus” to be saved… Jesus simply required that you believe in Him with all your heart. What is he? Is he a “name”? No, “He” is not a name, he is the Power and the Glory of Love and his teachings are the Stream of the Love… if you are in the Stream, you are in the Source.

    Jesus did state that if you prayed in His name, God would answer your prayers. (But he doesn’t answer them all the time with what you ask for, only what you need.) And he wanted those who believed in him to say his name and to spread his message. But he did not say you could not be saved without uttering his name. Show me the passage, uttered from the mouth of Jesus, where he says you must say his name to be saved. Of course, saying his name if you believe in his name makes him happy and it binds you to him and you know him and he Loves that.

    But he does not require, according to his words, that one must state his name to be saved. Please restrict your answer to the Gospel according to Christ. I believe with all of my heart that a person can be saved by simply following the actual words of Christ even if one never reads or knows anything else of the Bible.

    Do you believe a person can be saved by following the words of Christ alone? On this you must answer yes, or no. I answer, “yes”. What say you?

    Jesus said in John 15:7-14:


    7If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you will, and it shall be done for you. 8 By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be my disciples. 9 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in my love. 10 If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love. 11 These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full. 12 This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command you.

    In order to be a friend of Jesus, you must Love one another. He kept the Commandments of God and we must keep his Commandments. This was a new Commandment, “Love one another.” Here, Jesus elevated God’s words in Leviticus 18 to a New Commandment. Jesus was exercising his power of God. That single Commandment is a perfect recipe for Salvation. If His words abide in a person, that person is saved. I do not see how you can, or would even want to, argue against it. The words are what mean everything, the name is not important to Jesus. Give him some credit for not being so trite. He died to show you the path of BEHAVIOR… not to say his name.

    Do you honestly believe a person who follow HIS path will not be saved because he doesn’t invoke the name “Jesus”? You are mistaking bland ritual for true Loving behavior. And you find my point of view perplexing? My view is simple and sure to bring Love and peace to humanity… your view is dogmatic, ritualistic and exponentially complex…Transubstantiation of the Host? That is ritual and nowhere is it a requirement of Salvation. When Jesus said take this bread and eat it… he was speaking of his Love not bread and wine and I see nothing in his words which give a man, a priest, the supernatural power to turn bread and wine into real flesh and blood.

    Those who don’t believe the Priest have such supernatural power are heretics according to the Catholic Church. Those who don’t believe they are eating real flesh and drinking real blood are heretics according to the Catholic church. The host is not a metaphor in that church, it is real and you are not allowed to believe it is metaphorical. Where did Jesus grant these supernatural powers? At the Last Supper? I don’t see Jesus granting such power to anyone there.

    These are rituals… but Jesus spoke in parables and metaphors. He said he offered living water. His Love is the bread of life and the blood of eternal salvation. All that is needed for Salvation is for a person to abide the Commandments… of God and of Jesus. These are the blood and water of eternal life… not Earthly food and alcohol.

    Jesus took Leviticus 18 and turned it into a Commandment… If one simply obeys that one Commandment with no exception – then one will never disobey any of the other Commandments… Therefore, “Love One Another” as Jesus loved you and you will be in obedience to the other Commandments automatically because one cannot Love one another with thy heart while breaking God’s Commandments… so, The Beatles did perfectly construe the words of Jesus… whether they knew they were doing it or not. “Love is all we need.” Not sex. Not fake love. True brotherly love… where you love your neighbor as thyself. WE AREN’T EVEN CLOSE TO DOING THAT…ALMOST NONE OF US. You know it and I know it. We continue to let Jesus down.

    All we need is Love. But people keep telling the world that Love is not enough.

    The world will not know if it’s enough, until the world tries it. But as long as people keep preaching that Love is not the answer, then we will remain in a perpetual state of war, hatred and frustration. This is not what God wants for us. This is not what Jesus wants for us.

    God puts us to the test in so many ways. He riddles us and Jesus taught through riddles. Perhaps the division of humanity upon various faiths is a riddle set by God… a test of faith. Consider the parable of the Source and the Stream. I will be happy to discuss it with you as long as you like, right here. This is my faith in Christ. I stake my soul and eternal life on this being what Jesus wants me to believe and to preach. You may say whatever you like to challenge this concept. I am here to discuss it. -Leo

  66. As a saved sinner and follower of Christ I must believe that the Holy Bible is the inerrant, infallible, inspired word of God. That includes the Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles, who also recorded Jesus’ words. Perhaps this may better express what I am trying to articulate in perspective.
    http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Apologetics/Presuppositional-Apologetics/

    ed. You have not discussed what I have written. I am here to discuss it. If you feel you can disprove something I have said, please quote what I have said and state your refutation. I ask you a question and I hope you will answer it:

    Can a person be saved simply by following the words and teachings of Christ in the Bible without knowing of any other books in the Bible? -Leo

  67. Garrett Papit Says:

    In terms of the Parakletos issue….again it’s not essential to salvation. My main concern with your interpretation of a corporal man yet to come, and not a spiritual entity already within us, is the potential possiblity of mistaking the anti-christ for the Counselor.

    My belief is He (HS/Parakletos) is already here within each believer. A Gift from the Father because of the prayer request of the Son for a helper for man. He is a true personality and a personal being. He indwells every believer. As the “Spirit of Truth,” the Holy Spirit illumines the Word of God so believers may understand it. He leads us in that truth of God’s Word. He uses the Word of truth to guide us into the will and the work of God.

    I believe the evidence, without quoting particular scripture…mainly because I’m dizzy at this point…lol…starts with the rapid conversion of souls and believers following Jesus’ asencion. I think it was the HS coming as requested to help the weakly man when Jesus wasn’t there for guidance. I believe he first appeared in the New Testament as a dove when Jesus was baptized by JTB, which I believe is further evidence that he is not a corporal man but something else. Also, I believe it was the HS who descended onto the people at the Feast of the Pentecost, causing them to speak in foreign langueges of the people there, although they had never studied the language. Some people interpret it as unknown tongues to anyone..which leads to modern speaking in tongues…but I disagree with that premise, which really has nothing to do with this…lmao. Anyway, thanks again for the discussion.

    ed. When you study the words of Jesus as to the Paraclete… the Greek word has been translated in various ways, one is advocate in the sense of a defense attorney, and that is the secular use of the word in Greek terminology… who is also a comforter, but mainly an intercessor on behalf of humanity, and… Jesus said that the Paraclete will explain the teachings of Jesus and glorify him thereby. Most translations use the masculiine, “he”… But most important is that Jesus says he will send “another”… It’s a mystery. If it is a man, as it stands today, with the virtual unanimous opinion in Christendom – that the Paraclete is an ethereal mist not a man – then the prophecy by Jesus that the world can’t see him will be true. How can you not see a “him”? You can’t see “him” if he is a man because you are not looking for a man. But I do not want to continue with this issue. Suffice it to say that the Paraclete is mysterious and elusive, according to Christ. – leo

  68. Presuppositional apologetics and Romans 1:18-21
    http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/NTeSources/NTArticles/GTJ-NT/Turner-Rom1-GTJ-81.pdf

    ed. If you wan to quote a part of this and post it, I will respond. – Leo

  69. naturalborncitizen Says:

    Listening to an interview with Steve Pidgeon (my law partner in the Chrysler case) from yesterday. Steve claims he found a record for a name change from “Barak Mounir Ubayd” to “Barack Hussein Obama” on October 14th 1982 in Skookumchuck, British Columbia.

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/06/attorney-stephen-pidgeon-found-record.html

    I don’t know what that means as I suppose the name Barack HUssein Obama is fairly common to Islamic families. I haven’t discussed it with Steve.

    Let me make a few things clear about my relationship with Steve.

    1. Steve is a very skilled litigation attorney
    2. I am proud of the work he did with me on the Chrysler case
    3. Steve and I are good friends who have bonded over music…I am a musician and Steve is also a musician…he is a very very talented piano player (seriously), guitarist songwriter, composer

    4. Steve is a devout Christian as am I

    5. Steve and I do NOT agree on certain things:

    I believe gay marriage should be legalized.
    Steve has lobbied against it

    Steve believes Malcom X is Obama’s father.
    I believe Obama’s father is Obama Sr.

    Steve’s motivations are to protect the Constitution. He is a good man, excellent attorney and a wonderful father. He has been a positive influence in my life… but we just don’t agree on the things listed above.

    Leo Donofrio

  70. Thanks, I very much appreciate your response.

    Keep up the great work.

  71. Garrett Papit Says:

    Leo,

    I apologize for the Beatles joke…I honestly meant no disrespect, or to suggest you actually did drugs. It was simply an artistic attempt to be cute…the sentence came to me and I couldn’t resist writing it. I’m certainly not trying to make light of your view of love and salvation as everyone is entitled to their interpretation.

    Personally, I think the other joke was harmless enough…but ultimately this site reflects on you so it’s obviously your decision and not mine. I know none of the gay people that I’m friends with would have found it offensive. BTW, I’m often more scraggly than that picture…so I didn’t intend anything disrespectful in that sense either.

    I’ll respond to the parable when I have some more time.

    ed. It’s the power of suggestion… There’s no room for it here. I have enough to deal with. I’m sure you understand. Im also very serious about these things and this is not some intellectual exercise on theology….I believe what I’m saying to be true. I believe it with all of my heart. – Leo

  72. Garrett Papit Says:

    Starting with the lesbian topic. I never suggested lesbianism was a mortal sin. To my mind there is only one unforgiveable sin, and that isn’t it. You contend that God would have specifically said as much, but it’s only your interpretation that suggests he didn’t.

    ed. It’s not my interpretation, it’s the language of the Bible. He chose his words as to men, didn’t say the same as to women. Tis was “specifically” forbidden, that was not. One thing he made perfectly clear, and the other he did not. Do not put words in His mouth. – Leo

    To me, between the verse that we disagree on, and the logical case of premarital sex being a sin….the issue has been specifically addressed. I could likewise say that God would have specifically condoned lesbianism if he deemed it a “natural” and sinless practice.

    ed. God doesn’t specifically condone many things, but many things not specifically condoned are righteous. Your words are not convincing here. YOU are the one who states it is a sin, not God. And you are treading on very dangerous waters when you seek to put words in His mouth which he did not utter. – Leo

    As you said, God doesn’t have a communication problem…we do. So, as the ones with the communication/understanding problem, neither of us can factually assert that God did or didn’t already cover a topic…it’s merely our understanding and opinion that he did or didn’t.

    ed. Not true. He does not say anywhere in the Bible that which you seem to believe is a sin. It’s just not there no matter how much you try to parse it in. – Leo

    I agree that sex can be defined differently by different people. Also, I think that there are levels of activity that are innocent enough to not constitute sex (ie. kissing and petting, etc..). I’m confused by your statement “very few of us will get into Heaven if physical sensuality is a sin”. We don’t get into Heaven because we don’t sin, we get into Heaven DESPITE our sins by the gift of salvation through Christ.

    ed. Don’t play footsy with me. You know what I meant. Taking your logic here then why even discuss it. We can just sin at will, then ask for salvation and it is ours, right? So why do you care at all what people do? Why fight gay marriage or rail against gay sex? It’s all good as long as we ask Jesus for forgiveness, right? I mean, that is your point, isn’t it? – Leo

    Ultimately, mankinds definition of sex is inconsequential though. God can see what is in our hearts so I think it’s more an issue of when something stops becoming about love and starts becoming about lust or pleasure.

    ed. What’s wrong with pleasure? It’s intensified by love, is it not? – Leo

    We can debate what the definition of IS is, but I think that a person’s conscience (or the HS in my way of understanding Him) can help each individual understand when the line is being crossed…we just have to listen. Having said that, my opinion is that anything that causes an orgasm, or is intended to cause an orgasm, would certainly be sexual activity. According to the Bible, that pleasure was intended for man and wife only.

    ed. Well that’s certainly your opinion, but there’s no proof it’s God’s opinion and certainly there’s nothing in the Bible to secure that point. – Leo

    I agree that men make mistakes and I could also care less about the human designation “Saint”. You won’t find me defend any practices of the Catholic church…other than the preservation of the Bible through the ages. But I can’t take the leap from that position to one of questioning the validity of any portion of the Bible not directly spoken by Jesus himself. Firstly, Jesus’ words were recorded and past on to us by fallible human beings also. By your own logic then, how are we to trust that these are even his words.

    ed. His words make sense to me and they ring with truth. They are enough for any person to gain salvation. But nice dodging the issue. I will ask it again – can a person obtain salvation by just following the words of Christ as stated in the gospels? Answer the question, please. – Leo

    Secondly, the authors of the Bible, as you have alluded to already, were supposedly guided by Parakletos while recording it. I’m not suggesting that means all of the books purported to be part of the Bible were actually written by men who were inspired of the Spirit. But it does point to the fact that God has ordained other parts of Scripture as being true…apart from the direct words of Jesus only.

    ed. I ask you again, can a person reach salvation by following only the words of Jesus in the Gospels without paying any attention to the rest of the Bible? Your reply should be yes, or no. Here I will give you my answer, “Yes”. If you feel comfortable publishing the answer as “no”, then be heard as such. It is not a complicated question at all. Please don’t answer like a politician. – Leo

  73. I got very curious about all this…according to the article linked below, there is only one place in the Bible that mentions it (see second sentence below):

    26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another.

    The complete passage here:
    Romans 1:21-27

    What Does the Bible Say About..Lesbian Relationships?
    http://www.minuteswithmessiah.com/question/lesbian.html

    You could say that there is a precendent in natural behavior for physical intimacy between a female and another female at birth when a baby suckles on the breast of the mother (as does, of course, a son) and, of course, there is no such precedent for the physical intimacy between a male and another male…but beyond infancy, milk–human or otherwise–is very dangerous for adults:

    http://www.notmilk.com/kradjian.html

    ed.I believe with all my heart that a person may gain salvation by following the teachings of Jesus even if they never read any of the rest of the Bible. His teachings and his love are all anyone needs to be saved. Follow his new Commandment, “Love One Another as I have loved you.” It will be enough. – Leo

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: