Nick Matzke posted Entry 2653 on October 19, 2006 12:51 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/2647

The latest on the Hovind trial: Workers testify in ‘Dr. Dino’ trial. That should be “‘Dr.’ Dino”, of course.

Apparently he has sued the IRS at least 3 times. Not exactly the best way to get them on your good side…

Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.

Comment #140352

Posted by Warren on October 19, 2006 1:12 PM (e)

Every so often the utter absurdity of Hovindesque buffoonery strikes me full in the face and I find myself shocked, once again, at the depths of ignorance to which humans can descend.

More depressing is that such ignorance is usually self-imposed.

Comment #140359

Posted by Dwimr on October 19, 2006 1:54 PM (e)

Check this out for a good chuckle.

http://yecheadquarters.org/catalog2.0.html4.0.html

Comment #140366

Posted by Warren on October 19, 2006 2:17 PM (e)

Wow, living proof of my thesis. I feel humbled.

Comment #140371

Posted by Dwimr on October 19, 2006 2:28 PM (e)

Methinks Dr. Dino will soon be starting a prison ministry.

Comment #140377

Posted by Coin on October 19, 2006 3:03 PM (e)

Dwimr wrote:

Check this out for a good chuckle.

http://yecheadquarters.org/catalog2.0.html4.0.ht…

yecheadquarters.org wrote:

I have noticed that websites and forums put up stuff to, more or less, attack someone. In one forum someone brought up a very good question that was over looked which got me to thinking: Does anyone check on the fruits of a particular ministry before bad mouthing it?

Heh

Comment #140379

Posted by pearl on October 19, 2006 3:34 PM (e)

yec.headquarters.org wrote:

“Being able to bare good fruit is God’s sign of approval.”

Isn’t baring your fruit sinful?

Comment #140389

Posted by brightmoon on October 19, 2006 4:36 PM (e)

hovind’s a fool…but we knew that already shrugs >

Comment #140390

Posted by minusRusty on October 19, 2006 4:42 PM (e)

Isn’t baring your fruit sinful?

Not if it’s good fruit!

Comment #140400

Posted by Ken Baggaley on October 19, 2006 5:20 PM (e)

Isn’t baring your fruit sinful?

Not if it’s good fruit!

“Have we done Raspberries yet?”

“yes…”

“Black AND red?”

Comment #140413

Posted by Corey Schlueter on October 19, 2006 6:25 PM (e)

From that yecheadquarters site:
Hovind may sue for slander!

I guess the ACLU, Stephen Gould and others should Hovind for slander too.

Comment #140421

Posted by pough on October 19, 2006 7:07 PM (e)

I guess the ACLU, Stephen Gould and others should Hovind for slander too.

Hovind is now a verb!

I would so totally hovind Rosario Dawson…

Comment #140571

Posted by Jason Spaceman on October 20, 2006 3:10 AM (e)

Day Three:

Christian College leader says taxes are part of religion
Hovind argues God’s workers are exempt

Angela Fail

A local Christian leader on Thursday testified against Pensacola evangelist Kent Hovind, explaining the Bible does not condone tax evasion.

Rebekah Horton, Pensacola Christian College’s longtime senior vice president, took the stand during the second day of testimony at the federal trial.

Comment #140647

Posted by antony on October 20, 2006 9:00 AM (e)

Lest we forget:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1053

Comment #140669

Posted by J-Dog on October 20, 2006 9:47 AM (e)

Antony - Thanks for the link - funny, funny stuff, DaveTard in all his glory! His defense of Hovind is a beautiful thing to behold.

Yep, I am looking forward to this, almost as much as Dover. Obviously the stakes are smaller, but could be just as much fun. I think he takes off and becomes fugitive… Anyone else have ideas on the outcome?

Comment #140705

Posted by MarkP on October 20, 2006 12:06 PM (e)

OMG, the YECheadquarters site is hysterical. Take this tasty morsel:

A theory is a set of believable variables that look and sound great. Question is, how many unprovable ideas does it take to make an absolute truth? Absolute truth is one word…

Theories are made up of variables? “Absolute truth” is one word?

As for the middle statement, I defer to the YECers as the experts of making unprovable ideas into absolute truth. Yet another group that defeats itself merely by talking.

Comment #140771

Posted by improvius on October 20, 2006 4:37 PM (e)

He’s more con artist than fool. Ken Ham is cut from the same cloth, but he seems a lot smarter and better at it than Hovind.

It kills me that so many people are still taken in by his con, even now that his fraudulent nature is completely exposed. The vast majority of the YEC community still seems to be behind him. It’s just sick.

Yes folks, Trouble with a capital T and that rhymes with E and that stands for Evilution!

Comment #140855

Posted by Ted McMillan on October 20, 2006 10:19 PM (e)

The actual problem is you strange people. Jesus said to pay taxes, but He was talking about just taxes. What is the definition of that? You can find out from the intent of the American forefathers.

The purpose of the IRS is to fund illegal global escapades ultimately for the destruction of all liberty, and also to put America under debt so it can fall. Part of the global escapades is to fund the purchase of WMDs for both America and Russia which will ultimately be used against the American people.

We have always been oppressed by high taxes. Our leaders then tell us we must not be ISOLATIONISTS, but must involve ourselves in other countries. We then have wars. Infiltrators then put our constitutional soldiers on the front lines specifically to have them poorly protected and killed off. The soldiers that remain now hate us and our liberties, and now our national leaders have, with their brothers the communists, unrestricted use of nuclear weapons we paid for. They will use those nuclear weapons to depopulate us and the rest of the world with the communists.

http://www.seventh-dayadventism.com/AC/AppealChapIntro5.htm

Comment #140881

Posted by Wheels on October 20, 2006 11:56 PM (e)

Wow, it’s been so long since anybody’s invoked “Communists” as anything other than a metaphor I was starting to think the fear was dead.

Comment #140884

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 21, 2006 12:23 AM (e)

http://www.seventh-dayadventism.com/AC/AppealCha…

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA AH AH AHA HA HA HA AHA HA HA HA HA HA AHA H A HA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comment #140885

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 21, 2006 12:25 AM (e)

Hey Ted, tell us about the black helicopters.

(snicker) (giggle)

Comment #140896

Posted by Jason Spaceman on October 21, 2006 1:53 AM (e)

Day Four, when we learn about Pope Kent the I:

Lawyer: Hovind detailed actions
Evangelist said he ‘beat the system’

Michael Stewart

A Florida attorney testified Friday that Pensacola evangelist Kent Hovind disputed the government’s right to tax him and likened his ministry’s powers to that of a foreign embassy.

“He tried to stress to me that he was like the pope and this was like the Vatican,” Seminole attorney David Charles Gibbs testified at Hovind’s trial before U.S. District Judge Casey Rodgers.

Comment #140973

Posted by MarkP on October 21, 2006 9:01 AM (e)

You know, Hovind’s legal position might be more formidable than it first appears. There was a homeless guy here in Dallas that had the courts tied in knots for years over tax issues with the defense that he was not an American citizen, but was a citizen of The Kingdo of God, and other such goofy sounding nonsense. Apparently he was able to find all sorts of obscure legal precedents for what he was doing.

Judge Jones’ notwithstanding, I do not have the greatest confidence in the courts. Recall OJ, and the $3 USFL award.

Comment #140977

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 21, 2006 9:13 AM (e)

You know, Hovind’s legal position might be more formidable than it first appears. There was a homeless guy here in Dallas that had the courts tied in knots for years over tax issues with the defense that he was not an American citizen, but was a citizen of The Kingdo of God, and other such goofy sounding nonsense. Apparently he was able to find all sorts of obscure legal precedents for what he was doing.

Hovind is not doing anything new. He’s parroting the same standard “arguments” that the loony-right militia-type nutters have been using for decades now. All of his arguments have been dealt with before, and everyone who made them in the past ended up in jail.

Hovind doesn’t have a prayer.

Pardon the pun.

Comment #141138

Posted by Anton Mates on October 22, 2006 1:01 AM (e)

MarkP wrote:

Judge Jones’ notwithstanding, I do not have the greatest confidence in the courts. Recall OJ, and the $3 USFL award.

The OJ case was soured by police misconduct, though. In this case the IRS seems to have been moving very slowly and carefully against Hovind–hopefully that means their behavior’s been completely by-the-book.

Comment #141254

Posted by mrs. bush on October 22, 2006 3:00 PM (e)

Most americans have several credit cards and use those plastic cards to buy material things to satisfy their needs and desires…. BUT NOT ALL CREDIT CARD HOLDERS CAN PAY THEIR CREDIT CARD BILLS AND THOSE BILLS ACCUMULATE OVER THE YEARS… THEN THEY APPLY FOR BANKRUPTCY… THEN THE COURT NODS AND APPROVES THEIR APPLICATION FOR BANKRUPTCY AFTER SPENDING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS AND NOT BEING ABLE TO PAY UP!
WAKE UP AMERICA!!! THE IRS IS BEING MANIPULATED BY SPIRITUAL FORCES EVEN BEYOND the constitutionally mandated laws!
Dr. KENT HOVIND AND HIS WIFE WERE HARRASSED, MANHANDLED, AND INDICTED NOT BECAUSE OF TAX-EVASION! Dr. KENT HOVIND AND HIS WIFE WERE HARRASSED, MANHANDLED, AND INDICTED BECAUSE THEY ARE WORKING FOR THE PROPAGATION OF CREATION SCIENCE!!!
Dr. “Dino” Hovind is a bankrupt evangelist/missionary/preacher/God’s co-worker vs. satan’s atheists/evolutionists/non-Bible believing servants!!!
What is the difference between a tax evader and a bankrupt missionary? A tax evader earns money from his profession/business and spends 100% of it on his materials needs and lusts and evades the IRS. A bankrupt missionary conducts FREE seminars on “GOD AS THE ALMIGHTY CREATOR OF MAN AND THE WHOLE UNIVERSE” and never get paid, never earn a penny, and spends his time, money, and life on PREACHING “GOD AS THE ALMIGHTY CREATOR OF MAN AND THE WHOLE UNIVERSE”.
DR. KENT HOVIND IS INNOCENT ! WAKE UP AMERICA ! DR. HOVIND IS A PROPHET IN YOUR MIDST ! COME JUDGMENT DAY, ALL OF YOU WHO SCOFF AT DR. HOVIND’S TEACHINGS SHALL FACE THE JUDGMENT SEAT OF CHRIST AND AMONG THOSE WHO WILL RULE WITH CHRIST WILL BE PREACHERS AND PROPHETS OF GOD LIKE DR. KENT HOVIND.

Comment #141261

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 22, 2006 3:43 PM (e)

Apparently the mere mention of the name “Hovind” brings all the nutters out of the woodwork.

Comment #141276

Posted by Steve T on October 22, 2006 6:22 PM (e)

Up to this point, I was willing to be generous and consider Hovind to be just a whackjob con artist. But the more I read responses like mrs bush’s, the more I think he’s a cultist interested less in the kingdom of god in heaven than in the kingdom of Hovind on earth. If I were one of the authorities responsible for public protection where this guy lives, I’d be keeping my eyes open for suspiciously large purchases of Kool-aid.

Comment #141319

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 23, 2006 10:00 AM (e)

In the interests of historical accuracy I point out that the Jonestown massacre involved Flavor-Aid, not Kool-Aid. People make this mistake all the time. I suspect a vicious, underground, anti-Kool-Aid conspiracy, probably funded by the world-wide Flavor-Aid Hegemony. My evidence for this is the total lack of evidence for this. Obviously, a world-wide conspiracy of any power would be able to completely eradicate evidence of it’s existence. Thus, the lack of evidence precisely conforms to the expected evidence of the conspiracy’s existence. If there was evidence of the conspiracy, we would have to conclude that the conspiracy did not exist.

This post brought to you in Hovind-o-vision! Hovind-o-vision: bringing you the best in irrational conspiracy theory arguments since 1989.

Comment #141325

Posted by ben on October 23, 2006 11:07 AM (e)

Most americans have several credit cards… [snip]…PROPHETS OF GOD LIKE DR. KENT HOVIND.

Normally when I’m subjected to such a withering stream of nonsense, I am at least also presented with the opportunity to purchase illegal Viagra, a fake Rolex, or the stock of a company that has already filed for bankruptcy. What’s the upside supposed to be here?

Comment #141349

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 23, 2006 8:08 PM (e)

I think the guy should have used more exclamation points.

And heck, he didn’t even mention the black helicopters.

Comment #141356

Posted by Doc Bill on October 23, 2006 9:54 PM (e)

I agree!!!!

“Dr.” Hovind is a PROFITEER IN OUR MISTS!!!!

Comment #141445

Posted by Moses on October 24, 2006 3:29 PM (e)

Comment #140973

Posted by MarkP on October 21, 2006 9:01 AM (e)

You know, Hovind’s legal position might be more formidable than it first appears. There was a homeless guy here in Dallas that had the courts tied in knots for years over tax issues with the defense that he was not an American citizen, but was a citizen of The Kingdo of God, and other such goofy sounding nonsense. Apparently he was able to find all sorts of obscure legal precedents for what he was doing.

Hovind doesn’t have a case. Neither did the homeless guy. Like many people, you’re confusing the time it takes to go through a number of frivolous lawsuits, motions and postponements to the actual time the Court spends on the the case.

Hovind is a big case because it’s a HUGE fraud case and the Government is going to make sure they get the conviction of an active, fraudulent tax protester. So, they just take their time and close all the loopholes.

Hovind will lose. He’ll appeal. He’ll lose again. He’ll appeal again. It won’t be taken by the Supreme Court. And then he’ll go to jail.

Comment #141447

Posted by Flint on October 24, 2006 3:53 PM (e)

Like many people, you’re confusing the time it takes to go through a number of frivolous lawsuits, motions and postponements to the actual time the Court spends on the the case.

Hovind is a big case because it’s a HUGE fraud case and the Government is going to make sure they get the conviction of an active, fraudulent tax protester. So, they just take their time and close all the loopholes.

Hovind will lose. He’ll appeal. He’ll lose again. He’ll appeal again. It won’t be taken by the Supreme Court. And then he’ll go to jail.

And this will all require about how long? Like many people, I’m confusing time NOT spent in jail and fines NOT paid, with, uh, time not spent in jail and fines not paid. Were it not for the pending, eventual, grind-exceeding-fine wheels of justice sure to actually DO something someday, the distinction would be truly subtle. Personally, I wouldn’t particularly care how many frivolous motions, failures to show up, and other delaying tactics it takes, if we’re talking decades here. At which point perhaps I could change my name to Bent Bovine and move to Georgia, where I could carry on normally, and the government could “fail to locate me” for another decade or two.

No arguments about what the law says or how it works. But I seem to recall an aphorism about justice delayed…

Comment #141448

Posted by Flint on October 24, 2006 3:58 PM (e)

And along these same lines, if anyone is wondering how Hovind’s trial has been coming along this week, well, surprisingly enough there’s been a delay. Hovind’s wife’s lawyer has been feeling poorly, it seems…

Comment #141477

Posted by brendan on October 24, 2006 10:13 PM (e)

“explaining the Bible does not condone tax evasion”

u fool, why would they want to write that in?

wake up.

Comment #141495

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 25, 2006 10:00 AM (e)

The Bible not only doesn’t condone tax evasion, Jesus condemns it (“Render unto Ceasar…” etc. was a specific response to a question of taxes).

Hovind is, thus, a heretic, and must be stoned to death. What are the best rocks for stoning?

Comment #141502

Posted by Doc Bill on October 25, 2006 11:26 AM (e)

Considering how slippery Hovind is, we’d have to use soap stone.

Comment #141530

Posted by Moses on October 25, 2006 7:06 PM (e)

And this will all require about how long? Like many people, I’m confusing time NOT spent in jail and fines NOT paid, with, uh, time not spent in jail and fines not paid. Were it not for the pending, eventual, grind-exceeding-fine wheels of justice sure to actually DO something someday, the distinction would be truly subtle. Personally, I wouldn’t particularly care how many frivolous motions, failures to show up, and other delaying tactics it takes, if we’re talking decades here. At which point perhaps I could change my name to Bent Bovine and move to Georgia, where I could carry on normally, and the government could “fail to locate me” for another decade or two.

No arguments about what the law says or how it works. But I seem to recall an aphorism about justice delayed…

Well, lets put it this way, this is my area of expertise. I practice before the IRS. I deal with this all the time. And pretty much everything you’ve put forth about some nutty protester in a newspaper consists shoddy journalism and embellishments to the point of urban legend.

Fraud investigations take a lot of time. I have a client who’s a material witness to one. We’ve been dealing with CID for nearly two years. CID didn’t even contact my client until 6 months after the raid.

The criminal case hasn’t even been filed, though we’ve met with the CID agent recently and all indications are that the indictment will be handed down soon. And this case is SIMPLE compared to Hovind’s because it’s about a fraudulent tax preparer.

All the protesting and diversion is inconsequential and, frankly, helps build the fraud case. It doesn’t, in anyway , significantly impair the case and the government puts up with it because even tax protestors have rights. When the protester abuses the rights, they get taken away. The delay will be, considering there is no statute of limitations on prosecuting fraud cases, immaterial.

Comment #141532

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 25, 2006 7:10 PM (e)

I’ll stock up on chard rocks. It’s my Christian duty.

Comment #141581

Posted by mapagkunwaring mga kano on October 26, 2006 8:00 AM (e)

Evolutionists wana hang MR. KENT HOVIND AND HIS WIFE.

Aren’t you evolutionists ever scared of life after death? Huh? Who am I kidding?

Evolutionists’ dead, decomposing cadavers will evolve into microscopic worms which will eventually evolve into millions of monkeys,apes,orangutans,etc. then into thousands of charles darwinS.

IN THEIR DARWINIAN WORLD OF FANTASY!

Hey Pensacola Community, why bother reading that super biased news journal ?

Hey panda bloggers, it is not an impossible probability in your darwinian fantasy of fanciful life forms,that your teeny-weeny brains failed to evolve !

Comment #141583

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 26, 2006 8:15 AM (e)

No, no, no! We’re not talking about hanging Hovind. Pay attention! We’re talking about stoning him for rejecting Jesus. That is the proper punishment for heresy, isn’t it? I mean, sure, hanging him would kill him and all, but it’s not the Biblical punishment for his crimes.

Wait, are you saying we shouldn’t invoke Biblical law on Hovind? That makes you a heretic as well!

Man, I’m going to need more rocks.

Comment #141586

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 26, 2006 8:34 AM (e)

No, no no, pay attention!

We’re not going to hang Kent Hovind, we’re going to stone him! That is the recommended punishment for heretics, right? I mean, he is defying God’s law of paying his taxes, so he must be stoned to death.

Wait, you aren’t asking us to defy God’s law, are you?

Man, I’m gonna need more rocks.

Comment #141587

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 26, 2006 8:36 AM (e)

I reloaded repeatedly to see if my comment was going to show up for over fifteen minutes… then I repost and suddenly it does. SUCH FUN!

Comment #141593

Posted by demallien on October 26, 2006 9:27 AM (e)

Good grief, wherever did “mapagkunwaring mga kano” come from? I don’t suppose we could round up a collection to pay him/her to stick around could we? As far as trolls go, this one is bewdiful!

Comment #141594

Posted by Flint on October 26, 2006 9:33 AM (e)

Moses:

All the protesting and diversion is inconsequential and, frankly, helps build the fraud case. It doesn’t, in anyway , significantly impair the case and the government puts up with it because even tax protestors have rights. When the protester abuses the rights, they get taken away. The delay will be, considering there is no statute of limitations on prosecuting fraud cases, immaterial.

Yes, I understand. These things take time. When they are complicated, they take a LOT of time. Cases are slow to build, yada yada. But at least to me, delay is not immaterial, it is absolutely critical. Delay is the difference between me being in jail now, and me NOT being in jail now.

So I’m asking for your expertise here. I’d like to know:
1) What penalty will Hovind *actually suffer*. Not what sentence he will be given (though that would be interesting), but what sentence he will actually pay.
2) What will be the form this sentence takes? Here’s a f’rinstance: Hovind’s lifestyle is funded through limited access to church funds, which are also used for many other purposes. How does the government impose and collect a fine? Impound the church’s funds?
3) When will Hovind start experiencing any inconvenience to his activities as a result of this certain conviction?

Comment #141595

Posted by Flint on October 26, 2006 9:52 AM (e)

Michael:

Andrea Bottaro showed me the secret: Post something. Get an error. Reload the page. Nothing there. Reload the main page - nope, not there either. So initiate another post (I just type x in the box), then hit preview. Preview always shows whether your prior post went through. If it did, just back out of the new dummy post.

Yes, great fun.

Comment #141599

Posted by J-Dog on October 26, 2006 11:15 AM (e)

Moses: I got questions too!

Seeing as how Hovind is a long-time con-artist and crook, I think he is a “flight-risk”. What systems are in place to keep him from taking off, like now? He would have almost a week’s head-start before he would be missed, as he and Mrs. Con-man are not due back in court again till Monday Oct 30.

He has reportedly taken in over $5 mil over the last couple of years, which is quite a nest egg for the little cheat. Please tell me I am worrying needlessly, and that the IRA / FBI has things under control!

Comment #141611

Posted by lolly popsy cle on October 26, 2006 1:13 PM (e)

suttkus MIAKEL u wana blog at www.pandumbs.com

u r welkam. LOL!

… from amoeba … from rocks … from apes …

u r d missin link….

Kent H told u, it’s not so!
u tot kent wrong! so u hate kent … ‘coz ur … from amoeba … from rocks … from apes …

u r d missin link….

LOL!!!

Comment #141612

Posted by lolly popsy cle on October 26, 2006 1:13 PM (e)

suttkus MIAKEL u wana blog at www.pandumbs.com

u r welkam. LOL!

… from amoeba … from rocks … from apes …

u r d missin link….

Kent H told u, it’s not so!
u tot kent wrong! so u hate kent … ‘coz ur … from amoeba … from rocks … from apes …

u r d missin link….

LOL!!!

Comment #141613

Posted by lolly popsy cle on October 26, 2006 1:44 PM (e)

Psalm 14
1The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3They are all gone aside, they are all

Comment #141615

Posted by mapagpaimbabaw na mga kano on October 26, 2006 1:54 PM (e)

After discussing the “punishment” for an evangelist who obeyed the constitutional mandate of separation of church and state, let us now discuss the “punishment” of non-Bible believing pro-darwinian atheists who scoff at Dr. Hovind and the words of God.

Read the Book of Thessalonians:

8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Comment #141616

Posted by rebecca on October 26, 2006 1:56 PM (e)

After discussing the “punishment” for an evangelist who obeyed the constitutional mandate of separation of church and state, let us now discuss the “punishment” of non-Bible believing pro-darwinian atheists who scoff at Dr. Hovind and the words of God.

Read the Book of Thessalonians:

8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Comment #141621

Posted by ben on October 26, 2006 2:20 PM (e)

suttkus MIAKEL u wana blog at www.pandumbs.comu r welkam. LOL! etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., and seek God.3They are all gone aside, they are all

Excuse me sir or madam, but you seem to have accidentally wandered onto a site for the intelligent, educated segment of the culture. I wouldn’t want you to be attacked.

I believe you’re looking for the site for the unintelligent, uneducated segment of the culture.

Don’t let reality hit you in the a$$ on your way out.

Comment #141626

Posted by GuyeFaux on October 26, 2006 3:41 PM (e)

Read the Book of Thessalonians:

Psalm 14

You knew it was only a matter of time before these started pouring in. I always wonder, how do people find which sections are relevant to the debate at hand?

Comment #141627

Posted by Anton Mates on October 26, 2006 4:45 PM (e)

mapagpaimbabaw na mga kano wrote:

Read the Book of Thessalonians:

8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Hmm. Nope, still doesn’t sound as scary as the IRS.

Comment #141633

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 26, 2006 6:09 PM (e)

Evolutionists’ dead, decomposing cadavers

I always know that a particular tack of mine is painfully jabbing the fundies whenever they start trying to use it themselves.

They always do a piss-poor job of it.

Comment #141636

Posted by mk on October 26, 2006 6:19 PM (e)

I see mostly negative comments on these postings. My question to each of you would be: Have you listened completely to what Dr. Hovind is saying; and Have you compared it with the US Constitution.
I am not saying innocent or guilty. I don’t have all the facts, however, I know all I have ever heard him say is completely backed by the Bible.

Comment #141640

Posted by Richard Simons on October 26, 2006 6:39 PM (e)

8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Comments like these always remind me of a rant I heard years ago from a British comedian -
“The Lord will punch you in the face and cast you into a pit of vipers (in his infinite mercy). He will take vegeance on you by burning you in everlasting fire. (Praise the mercy of the Lord.)” And so on at great length.

Comment #141653

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 26, 2006 7:08 PM (e)

I know all I have ever heard him say is completely backed by the Bible.

The Bible is not the law of the land.

The IRS tax code, is.

Sorry if you don’t like that. (shrug)

Comment #141663

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 26, 2006 9:19 PM (e)

I’ve listened to what Hovind has to say. Whether it’s backed by “The” Bible or not is dependent on how you read the Bible. Certainly his tax position isn’t.

His arguments aren’t remotely backed by reality. He’s outright paranoid. One of the questions on his FAQ confirms that the government could be watching you through your television! Of course, you can plant a bug in anything (televisions being no more special than blenders, lamps, walls), except for being especially stupid. (Try looking at people watching television. You will never find a more boring time to watch a person.)

His arguments against evolution are equally unsupportable. From the surreal (the Loch Ness monster disproves evolution, what the huh?), to the just plain preposterous (Darwin’s theory caused the Trail of Tears, nevermind that it occured a decade before he published, it’s Darwin’s fault!), Hovind has never let facts stand in the way of a heartfelt but brainless rant.

I’d sooner take tax advice from a dead weasel.

Comment #141675

Posted by Anton Mates on October 27, 2006 1:39 AM (e)

GuyeFaux wrote:

Read the Book of Thessalonians:

Psalm 14

You knew it was only a matter of time before these started pouring in. I always wonder, how do people find which sections are relevant to the debate at hand?

By always saying the same exact thing no matter what the debate is, of course. It’s amazing how relevant “You’re all stupid evil atheists and you’ll burn in hellfire!” is to almost any conversation.

Then there’s all that “filler” in there like Ecclesiastes and the Sermon on the Mount, but no one needs to talk about that stuff, right?

Comment #141676

Posted by Anton Mates on October 27, 2006 1:54 AM (e)

mk wrote:

I don’t have all the facts, however, I know all I have ever heard him say is completely backed by the Bible.

What, like pay your taxes, don’t pray in public, don’t inflict the death penalty on anyone unless you’re sinless yourself, turn the other cheek to your enemy, and sell all you have and give the money to the poor? Because it kind of sounds like Kent Hovind says and does some rather different things than that, what with the gun-stockpiling and the tax evasion and the huge profits and the random lawsuits and the pushing school prayer and all.

But maybe he just subscribes to the Carol Clouser school of literalism.

Comment #141707

Posted by kent fan on October 27, 2006 9:30 AM (e)

Scoffers
You know, the Bible warned us that was going to happen. In II Peter chapter 3 it says, “Knowing this first, there shall come in the last days scoffers.” Did you know there are people that scoff at the Bible? I deal with them on a regular basis. I attract them like a magnet! Scoffers.

Why They Scoff

And it says they are going to walk after their own lusts. See, the reason they scoff at this Book is because of their sin, not because of their science. There is no scientific reason to reject the Bible. But they don’t like this Bible because it chaps their hide. Well, get some Vaseline, man, you are going to need it! Because we’re going to be judged according to this book—whether you like it or not.

What They Scoff

But the scoffers walk after their own lusts and they’re going to say, “where’s the promise of His coming, for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” [2 Peter 3:4] That’s an extremely important phrase. The scoffers are going to teach something in the last days that means ‘the way things are happening now is the way they’ve always been happening—long, slow, gradual processes called Uniformitarianism.’ The Bible warned us in 2 Peter that the scoffers are going to teach the way things are happening now is the way they’ve always been happening. The problem with that is, the scoffers are willingly ignorant. It says in the next verse, they are “willingly ignorant.” In the Greek, that means ‘dumb on purpose.’

Comment #141708

Posted by sugo ng Dios on October 27, 2006 9:31 AM (e)

The Creation. The scoffers are willingly ignorant of how God made the heavens (and heaven is plural. There is more than one heaven; we talk about that in videotape number one. There is more than one heaven.) They’re ignorant of how God made the heavens and the earth and how it was standing out of the water and in the water. The earth when God first made it was a lot different than it is today. It used to have water above the atmosphere and more water under the crust of the earth and we talk about all that on videotape number one and on videotape number six. But the scoffers are ignorant about the creation and they’re also ignorant of the flood.
The Flood. The next verse tells us, “whereby the world then was, being overflowed with water perished.” The world was destroyed by a flood. You see, the scoffers don’t want to admit God created the world because that means God owns it. And that means there might be some rules. You know, like “thou shalt not…” And they don’t want those rules so they scoff at the Bible. Rather than change their lifestyle and get right with God, they try to eliminate the thing that’s bothering them, which is God’s word. They’re also ignorant of the flood. They don’t want to admit that there was a flood because if there was a worldwide flood, that means God has a right to judge His creation. And He does by the way; this is His world. He can wreck it if He wants.

Comment #141713

Posted by kelly harly on October 27, 2006 9:47 AM (e)

from kh:

Where Darwin Went Wrong

While he sailed around on that voyage, he brought with him some books to read. He brought his Bible (he had just gotten out of Bible College) and he brought with him this book, Principles of Geology. As Charles Darwin read this book, Principles of Geology, it absolutely changed his life forever. Later in life he said, “Lyell one of my favorite authors, has made a profound influence on my life.” As he read that book, Charles Darwin began to doubt the Bible and began to think the earth is millions and millions of years old. That’s the book that changed his life. Studying about Geology. And it’s amazing how many kids go through seventh or eighth grade in regular public school and they are taught in their earth science book that the earth is millions of years old and it destroys their faith in the Bible and they don’t even realize it. It undermines it. Cuts it right out from under them. That’s where it all starts.
Later in life Darwin said, “Disbelief crept over me very slowly. I felt no distress.” By the way, he did not repent on his deathbed. His wife started the rumor that he did and that rumor still circulates today. But the best research says he did not repent on his deathbed. He remained loyal to his atheism right up to the end. But that is the book that changed Charles Darwin’s life.

Comment #141714

Posted by kelly harly on October 27, 2006 9:49 AM (e)

Where Darwin Went Wrong

While he sailed around on that voyage, he brought with him some books to read. He brought his Bible (he had just gotten out of Bible College) and he brought with him this book, Principles of Geology. As Charles Darwin read this book, Principles of Geology, it absolutely changed his life forever. Later in life he said, “Lyell one of my favorite authors, has made a profound influence on my life.” As he read that book, Charles Darwin began to doubt the Bible and began to think the earth is millions and millions of years old. That’s the book that changed his life. Studying about Geology. And it’s amazing how many kids go through seventh or eighth grade in regular public school and they are taught in their earth science book that the earth is millions of years old and it destroys their faith in the Bible and they don’t even realize it. It undermines it. Cuts it right out from under them. That’s where it all starts.
Later in life Darwin said, “Disbelief crept over me very slowly. I felt no distress.” By the way, he did not repent on his deathbed. His wife started the rumor that he did and that rumor still circulates today. But the best research says he did not repent on his deathbed. He remained loyal to his atheism right up to the end. But that is the book that changed Charles Darwin’s life.

Comment #141726

Posted by GuyeFaux on October 27, 2006 10:31 AM (e)

‘the way things are happening now is the way they’ve always been happening—long, slow, gradual processes called Uniformitarianism.’

Actually, you’re correct there. That is a ground rule of science.

More importantly, though, it’s the reason you don’t stick your hand in the fire today, having been burnt by it yesterday. Believing in some flood 6000 years ago actually goes against this basic principal.

Comment #141730

Posted by Glen Davidson on October 27, 2006 11:15 AM (e)

You missed the point at which Darwin went wrong, Kelly. Where was it?

And remember, show your work.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/b8ykm

Comment #141732

Posted by Henry J on October 27, 2006 11:25 AM (e)

Re “(Try looking at people watching television. You will never find a more boring time to watch a person.)”

I resemble that remark! :)

Comment #141741

Posted by GuyeFaux on October 27, 2006 12:05 PM (e)

He remained loyal to his atheism right up to the end.

How does one become a loyal atheist?

Comment #141746

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 27, 2006 12:58 PM (e)

kelly harly wrote:

from kh:

Where Darwin Went Wrong

An essay you wrote yourself or stole from someone without credit?

checks Google

http://www.kent-hovind.com/evolution/evolution.htm

As I thought, stolen, without a word to indicate the author was someone else. Creationists, especially hovind-heads, have no respect for the laws of God or man.

This particular bit of blithering is stolen from Bent Hovind himself. Let’s see how it stacks up to reality!

kelly harly “doctor” Kent Hovind wrote:

While he sailed around on that voyage, he brought with him some books to read.

For shame! Reading! Is that where he went wrong, actually learning about the world rather than just plugging his ears, closing his eyes, and humming “The Bible is right, thinking is bad” to himself over and over?

kelly harly “I AM SO A DOCTOR” Kent Hovind wrote:

He brought his Bible (he had just gotten out of Bible College) and he brought with him this book, Principles of Geology. As Charles Darwin read this book, Principles of Geology, it absolutely changed his life forever.

I was right. Where Charles Darwin went wrong was listening to facts, well reasoned arguments, and paying attention to evidence. Oh, if only he had kept his mind closed and listened to creationist lies!

kelly harly “I’m a doctor and I have the receipt to prove it” Kent Hovind wrote:

Later in life he said, “Lyell one of my favorite authors, has made a profound influence on my life.” As he read that book, Charles Darwin began to doubt the Bible and began to think the earth is millions and millions of years old.

So did everyone else. In fact, modern YEC had been abandoned long before when the sorting of the fossil record showed that there was no way to account for the patterns with a single flood event. They began postulating that the Flood was only the most recent of a long series of divine destructions of the Earth that just weren’t mentioned in the Bible. YEC was already regarded as backward and ignorant by creationists in 1800.

kelly harly Kent “Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster prove YEC!” Hovind wrote:

That’s the book that changed his life. Studying about Geology. And it’s amazing how many kids go through seventh or eighth grade in regular public school and they are taught in their earth science book that the earth is millions of years old and it destroys their faith in the Bible and they don’t even realize it.

Faith in the Bible is called Bibliolatry. It’s a heresy. You could be stoned for it in the middle ages. See, they knew that “the” Bible was the work of humans, not God, so faith in it was faith in human authors, chosen by other humans, with no guarantee of divine accuracy. That’s why there’s more than one Bible around, you see, different humans choosing different “obviously correct” texts as “THE” definitive article. Most creationists are unaware that the KJV selection of books isn’t the only selection of books, and not even the first. Where was divine guidance on all the previous versions, oh creationists? Why do you have faith in Martin Luthor’s selection and not the earlier selections?

kelly harly Kent “The government is watching you through your television!” Hovind wrote:

It undermines it. Cuts it right out from under them. That’s where it all starts.

Open minds, facts, evidence, OH THE HORROR!

kelly harly Kent “All my money belongs to God, He let’s me use his many luxury cars” Hovind wrote:

Later in life Darwin said, “Disbelief crept over me very slowly. I felt no distress.” By the way, he did not repent on his deathbed. His wife started the rumor that he did and that rumor still circulates today.

Lie! It was started by a fundamentalist nut job named Lady Hope. Darwin’s wife refuted it and called her out as a liar. Kent Hovind has no understanding of the truth and can’t be bothered to actually look anything up.

kelly harly Kent “And then a really big comet hit the earth, which wasn’t super-hot because ice is cold, please ignore all the laws of physics that reveal this as silly.” Hovind wrote:

But the best research says he did not repent on his deathbed. He remained loyal to his atheism right up to the end. But that is the book that changed Charles Darwin’s life.

Darwin wasn’t an atheist. He was agnostic. Again, Hovind lies from stupidity.

Well, creationists, one last chance. Please explain fossil sorting. Until you deal with the evidence against creationism, you will never convince people who have actually *gasp* read books besides the Bible that creationism makes sense. Please go to Hovind’s website and find an explanation for fossil sorting that deals with the examples in the article I’ve linked to above. Quickly now! Hurry hurry! I’m sure Hovind has an explanation for how mangroves got sorted to the top…

Comment #141747

Posted by GuyeFaux on October 27, 2006 12:59 PM (e)

Where Darwin Went Wrong

So your point is that Darwin’s mistake was reading?

Comment #141750

Posted by Michael Suttkus, II on October 27, 2006 1:04 PM (e)

GuyeFaux wrote:

How does one become a loyal atheist?

One attends the atheist churches creationists have assured me exist in secret in every city. Being Christian, I don’t know where they are, but I’m sure one of the local atheists can let you in on the secret if your renounce your soul to Satan like they have.

Comment #141760

Posted by Steviepinhead on October 27, 2006 2:40 PM (e)

Comment #141593
demallien:
Good grief, wherever did “mapagkunwaring mga kano” come from? I don’t suppose we could round up a collection to pay him/her to stick around could we? As far as trolls go, this one is bewdiful!

For some reason, I’m betting that this is one troll that Nurse Bettinke won’t claim.

On the ohter hand, she’s so busy running in circles after her first few escapees that we may never know…

Comment #141764

Posted by David B. Benson on October 27, 2006 3:36 PM (e)

Stevie — Tagalog dialect from the Philippines…

Comment #141765

Posted by Henry J on October 27, 2006 3:37 PM (e)

Re “How does one become a loyal atheist?”

And for that matter, loyal to who or what?

Comment #141771

Posted by Steviepinhead on October 27, 2006 4:23 PM (e)

Given Nurse Bettinke’s apparent Nordic connection, maybe that firms up my prediction…

But, then, not all her escaped admittees have had that Nordic angle, so…maybe we’ll just have to wait until the nurse can catch her breath and let us know.

Comment #141773

Posted by Henry J on October 27, 2006 4:35 PM (e)

Test

Comment #141780

Posted by Sir_Toejam on October 27, 2006 5:22 PM (e)

I wonder if the Hovind Trolls will deny him three times when the taxman comes for them?

Comment #141781

Posted by Sir_Toejam on October 27, 2006 5:25 PM (e)

The problem with that is, the scoffers are willingly ignorant. It says in the next verse, they are “willingly ignorant.” In the Greek, that means ‘dumb on purpose.’

nice bit of projection there.

ahh projection, the first and last defense of the fundy nutter.

Comment #141784

Posted by Steviepinhead on October 27, 2006 5:49 PM (e)

Comment #141765
Henry J:

Re “How does one become a loyal atheist?”

And for that matter, loyal to who or what?

Why to the “secular humanist agenda,” of course!

…Whatever the heck that is!?!

Probably sicko pinko stuff about saving the environment, upholding the Constitution, teaching science in science class…

Comment #141820

Posted by kelly harly on October 28, 2006 6:42 AM (e)

from kh:
Scoffers and Their Ignorance
Now the Bible warned us in the last days, scoffers would come, who would scoff at the Bible. “Knowing this first, there shall come in the last days scoffers.” [2 Peter 3:3] There are scoffers in this world, folks; there are people who do not like the Bible. How many have ever met a scoffer before? I deal with them on a regular basis; I attract them like a magnet. Said they are going to walk after their own lust.

Ignorant Because of Lifestyle
By the way they scoff at the Bible is because of their lifestyle, not because of their science. There is no scientific reason to reject the Bible, but some people do not like that Book because it chaps their heart. Well, get some Vaseline, man: you are going to need it, because we are going to be judged according to that Book. So they are going to scoff because of their lust, they do not want God telling them what to do. Next verse says they are going to say, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.” [2 Peter 3:4] That is a very important phrase, we will talk about that on videotape number four. Why did they say that? The way things are happening now, is the way they have always been happening. Uniformitarianism-do not miss tape 4 on that one. There are 7 in the whole series by the way if you do not get them all, you are welcomed to copy them by the way, and send them back and get your money back. You can not beat a deal like that!

Ignorant on Purpose
Next verse says, “For this they willingly are ignorant of.” [2 Peter 3:5] “Willingly ignorant.” In the Greek, that means “dumb on purpose.” Ignorance is bliss; they are having a blizzard, leave them alone. The scoffers are willingly ignorant of how God made the heavens. Notice the word heaven is plural, heavens, more than one. There is more than one heaven, and we will talk about that in just a minute. Secondly, it says, “And the earth was standing out of the water and in the water.” How can the earth be out of the water and in the water at the same time? Well, we will talk about that in just a minute also. But basically what this is saying is, the scoffers are willingly ignorant of how God made the heavens and the earth. They are ignorant of the Creation. They do not want to admit God created the world because that means God owns it. There might be some rules, and there are, and He does! The second thing they are ignorant of, the next verse says, “Whereby the world to them was being overflowed with water perish.” [2 Peter 3:6] This world was destroyed by a flood. The scoffers do not want to admit God flooded the world because that means God has the right to judge His creation, and He does by the way. This is His world; He can wreck it if He wants. The next verse in II Peter [says], He’s coming to judge it again. There is a coming judgment folks. It is coming soon! Scoffers are willingly ignorant of the Creation, the Flood, and the coming judgment. I saw a bumper sticker that said, Jesus is coming, and boy is He mad! I thought, Man, that will preach—that is the truth! He is coming soon and He is upset about what is going on.

Comment #141821

Posted by kelly harly on October 28, 2006 6:57 AM (e)

from kh:

Well, let’s talk about the Creation. We sure do not want to be ignorant of the Creation like the scoffers are. Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” If you skip down to verse five and it says, “The evening and the morning were the first day.” Notice the word the—T-H-E. In English that is called the definite article: the first day. Now this is from the King James Version of the Bible, which I use, and I think you would be smart to use if you speak English. Many of the newer translations have made some serious changes. I would just be real cautious if I was you. I used to say (I do collect Bibles—versions of Bibles), I used to say I am not afraid of them. The more I study this, the more afraid I am getting folks. They have made thousands of changes in some of these, some of them very serious. Now, if you do not read Greek or Hebrew, you might want to stick with the King James if all you can read is English, which is all I can read. Here is the Reviled Substandard Perversion - I was reading through my Bibles to see how they treated the Creation story, and I came to the RSV. They said, “And there was evening and there was morning one day.” What happened to the first day? Well, now it is just one day. Down in verse 8 instead of saying “the second day”, they said it was “a second day”. Why did they do that? Well, the reason these guys did that, they do not believe in a literal six day creation. They believe in what is called the Gap Theory.

The Gap Theory
How many have ever heard of the Gap Theory before? The Gap Theory was invented in 1814 by a Scottish preacher named Chaulmers, probably a well-meaning guy who just wanted to stick millions of years into the Bible, that is all! Because everybody was teaching the earth is millions of years old and Chaulmers thought, “you know the Bible is going to be left out, unless we can figure out a way to make the Bible say the earth is billions of years old.” So, he invented a gap between verse one and verse two. The Gap Theory teaches between the first two verses of Genesis, there is ample scope for all the geologic eras. They say that is where the pre-Adamite rebellion took place and a judgment of Lucifer happened. The Gap Theory is unscriptural, it is unscientific and it unnecessary. The world is not billions of years old and you do not need to stick a gap in there.

Comment #141824

Posted by Richard Simons on October 28, 2006 8:15 AM (e)

Kelly,

We’ve all heard twaddle like that many times before. But there is a question your kind have great difficulty in answering. Why do the earth and the rest of the universe have many, many signs of great age? Is it because your god is a devious trickster?

Comment #141826

Posted by chris on October 28, 2006 8:58 AM (e)

for flank,benson,pinhead,sutkus,jam,etc:

from: The Anatomy of a School Shooting

…Harris married his deceitfulness with a total lack of remorse or empathy—another distinctive quality of the psychopath. Fuselier was finally convinced of his diagnosis when he read Harris’ response to being punished after being caught breaking into a van. Klebold and Harris had avoided prosecution for the robbery by participating in a “diversion program” that involved counseling and community service. Both killers feigned regret to obtain an early release, but Harris had relished the opportunity to perform. He wrote an ingratiating letter to his victim offering empathy, rather than just apologies. Fuselier remembers that it was packed with statements like Jeez, I understand now how you feel and I understand what this did to you.

“But he wrote that strictly for effect,” Fuselier said. “That was complete manipulation. At almost the exact same time, he wrote down his real feelings in his journal: ‘Isn’t America supposed to be the land of the free? How come, if I’m free, I can’t deprive a stupid f—ing dumbshit from his possessions if he leaves them sitting in the front seat of his f—ing van out in plain sight and in the middle of f—ing nowhere on a Frif—ingday night. NATURAL SELECTION. F—er should be shot.’ “

Harris’ pattern of grandiosity, glibness, contempt, lack of empathy, and superiority read like the bullet points on Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist and convinced Fuselier and the other leading psychiatrists close to the case that Harris was a psychopath.

Darwin’s Evolution is the religion of satan!

Book of John, “The Holy Bible”

44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Comment #141827

Posted by chris on October 28, 2006 9:00 AM (e)

for jam,sutkus,pinhed,benson,etc:

from: The Anatomy of a School Shooting

…Harris married his deceitfulness with a total lack of remorse or empathy—another distinctive quality of the psychopath. Fuselier was finally convinced of his diagnosis when he read Harris’ response to being punished after being caught breaking into a van. Klebold and Harris had avoided prosecution for the robbery by participating in a “diversion program” that involved counseling and community service. Both killers feigned regret to obtain an early release, but Harris had relished the opportunity to perform. He wrote an ingratiating letter to his victim offering empathy, rather than just apologies. Fuselier remembers that it was packed with statements like Jeez, I understand now how you feel and I understand what this did to you.

“But he wrote that strictly for effect,” Fuselier said. “That was complete manipulation. At almost the exact same time, he wrote down his real feelings in his journal: ‘Isn’t America supposed to be the land of the free? How come, if I’m free, I can’t deprive a stupid f—ing dumbshit from his possessions if he leaves them sitting in the front seat of his f—ing van out in plain sight and in the middle of f—ing nowhere on a Frif—ingday night. NATURAL SELECTION. F—er should be shot.’ “

Harris’ pattern of grandiosity, glibness, contempt, lack of empathy, and superiority read like the bullet points on Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist and convinced Fuselier and the other leading psychiatrists close to the case that Harris was a psychopath.

Darwin’s Evolution is the religion of satan!

Book of John, “The Holy Bible”

44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Comment #141828

Posted by john on October 28, 2006 9:03 AM (e)

for dave benson, etc:

from: The Anatomy of a School Shooting

…Harris married his deceitfulness with a total lack of remorse or empathy—another distinctive quality of the psychopath. Fuselier was finally convinced of his diagnosis when he read Harris’ response to being punished after being caught breaking into a van. Klebold and Harris had avoided prosecution for the robbery by participating in a “diversion program” that involved counseling and community service. Both killers feigned regret to obtain an early release, but Harris had relished the opportunity to perform. He wrote an ingratiating letter to his victim offering empathy, rather than just apologies. Fuselier remembers that it was packed with statements like Jeez, I understand now how you feel and I understand what this did to you.

“But he wrote that strictly for effect,” Fuselier said. “That was complete manipulation. At almost the exact same time, he wrote down his real feelings in his journal: ‘Isn’t America supposed to be the land of the free? How come, if I’m free, I can’t deprive a stupid f—ing dumbshit from his possessions if he leaves them sitting in the front seat of his f—ing van out in plain sight and in the middle of f—ing nowhere on a Frif—ingday night. NATURAL SELECTION. F—er should be shot.’ “

Harris’ pattern of grandiosity, glibness, contempt, lack of empathy, and superiority read like the bullet points on Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist and convinced Fuselier and the other leading psychiatrists close to the case that Harris was a psychopath.

Darwin’s Evolution is the religion of satan!

Book of John, “The Holy Bible”

44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Comment #141835

Posted by Torbjörn Larsson on October 28, 2006 1:35 PM (e)

“Infiltrators then put our constitutional soldiers on the front lines specifically to have them poorly protected and killed off.”

Aren’t US and Israeli troops those with the eminently fewest causalities of all, due to the investments in expertice, training and materials? That is paid for by those pesky taxes…

“the communists”

Communism is dead, long live communism!

“Hovind doesn’t have a prayer.”

The only sure things in life is death and taxes. And I’m not so sure about death anymore…

“And then he’ll go to jail.”

And the he’ll go to hell. Or so they tell me.

“brains failed to evolve”

My ancestors were selected for brains. How about yours?

“maybe we’ll just have to wait until the nurse can catch her breath”

Meanwhile we will wait distractedly while observing her heaving breast.

“in the last days, scoffers would come”

Sorry, but scoffers have always been around. Perhaps you have put your fingers in your ears. If christian beliefs were so perfect, why did islam later arise out of abraham’s god?

Comment #141837

Posted by Torbjörn Larsson on October 28, 2006 1:56 PM (e)

“If christian beliefs were so perfect, why did islam later arise out of abraham’s god?”

I didn’t finish: If that isn’t scoffage, I don’t know that it should be.

Comment #141841

Posted by Sir_Toejam on October 28, 2006 4:49 PM (e)

why did islam later arise out of abraham’s god?

why, we can blame that on “Darwinism”, of course!

didn’t you catch the gist of the repeated tub-thumping by “my name is legion”?

we can even blame “the fall” on darwinism. duh….and of course we can blame chris/john/? on a lack of meds.

Comment #141843

Posted by Sir_Toejam on October 28, 2006 4:54 PM (e)

Syntax Error: mismatched tag 'quotes'

Comment #141844

Posted by Anton Mates on October 28, 2006 5:42 PM (e)

Probably the same Hovind worshipper as all the others wrote:

“But he wrote that strictly for effect,” Fuselier said. “That was complete manipulation. At almost the exact same time, he wrote down his real feelings in his journal: ‘Isn’t America supposed to be the land of the free? How come, if I’m free, I can’t deprive a stupid f—ing dumbshit from his possessions if he leaves them sitting in the front seat of his f—ing van out in plain sight and in the middle of f—ing nowhere on a Frif—ingday night. NATURAL SELECTION. F—er should be shot.’ “

Clearly, his belief that “America is supposed to be the land of the free” led Harris to kill. The Bill of Rights was written by Satan!

Comment #141849

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 28, 2006 8:20 PM (e)

Some questions for our Hovind cheerleader:

*ahem*

Do you think supernatural witches exist? And if so, do you think they should be killed?

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that “Democracy is evil and contrary to God’s law”?

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that the Federal Government blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City so it could blame the militias? Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that the US Government blew up the World Trade Center so it could impose the New World Order?

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that AIDS and SARS are bioweapons engineered by the US Government?

I want to see just how nutty you really are…. .

Comment #141854

Posted by chris on October 29, 2006 12:17 AM (e)

Darwin’s Evolution is the religion of satan!

Book of John, “The Holy Bible”

44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

Some evolutionists claim to be atheists. In reality, evolutionists (atheist or not), believe in god… but not the Almighty God the Creator of man and the universe!

Who is your god toe jam? Your god is the god of this world! (2Corinth4:4)

Comment #141855

Posted by chris on October 29, 2006 12:21 AM (e)

“THE HOLY BIBLE”
BOOK OF JOHN, CHAPTER 5:
42But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

43I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

44How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

45Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

46For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

47But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Comment #141857

Posted by milli on October 29, 2006 12:25 AM (e)

The Holy Bible, Book of John, chapter 5:

42But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

43I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

44How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

45Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

46For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

47But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Jesus Christ, the son of God the Creator of man and the universe

Comment #141858

Posted by milli on October 29, 2006 12:26 AM (e)

The Holy Bible, Book of John, chapter 5:

42But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

43I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

44How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

45Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

46For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

47But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Jesus Christ, the son of God the Creator of man and the universe

Comment #141859

Posted by milli on October 29, 2006 12:28 AM (e)

The Holy Bible, Book of John, chapter 5:

42But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

43I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

44How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

45Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

46For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

47But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Jesus Christ, the son of God the Creator of man and the universe

Comment #141860

Posted by Torbjörn Larsson on October 29, 2006 1:30 AM (e)

“we can blame that on “Darwinism”, of course!”

Ooops! I forgot about the source of all evil, a pious man studying nature all his life. (Nature must be the reason he dropped his faith - acquaintance with other cultures and his daughter’s death has nothing to do with that.)

“Darwin’s Evolution is the religion of satan!”

When did science become a religion? Not by your say-so in any case.

OTOH citing an old religious text ad infinitum instead of making an argument is not only stupid but pretty evil - it means you are dismissing all our intellects instead of respecting your fellows and tolerating their views.

If you feel insecure I recommend you to go suck your thumb instead of suck at Panda’s Thumb.

Comment #141862

Posted by Sir_Toejam on October 29, 2006 3:21 AM (e)

hey it’s milli vanilli!

more fakes come to the party.

Who is your god toe jam[sic]? Your god is the god of this world! (2Corinth4:4)

“this world” being the private little world that exists only in your fevered tiny brain?

meds. take em.

*sigh* this is the worst kind of troll - the literal God-Bothering Tub-Thumper.

boooorrrrrriiiinnngggg.

Comment #141864

Posted by milli on October 29, 2006 4:19 AM (e)

tor larson,fill your head with this med:
Book of matthews, Chapter 23:
27Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.

28Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

29Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.

31Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.

32Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.

33Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

34Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

36Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Comment #141869

Posted by jess chris on October 29, 2006 4:42 AM (e)

hear ye toejamjew,larsonjew,etc.

You’ll remember this final message on that final day when you’re facing God Almighty the Creator of man and the whole universe.

Book of John, chapter 8:

42Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”

Comment #141875

Posted by ruth on October 29, 2006 6:54 AM (e)

for leni flunk :

THE SINKING OF THE TITANIC

When we think of events that have transpired in history over the last one hundred to two hundred years, there are certain events that stand out as ones of great horror, great surprise and great sadness. Of the many that come to mind the most devastating have been the destruction of the the World Trade Center in New York City and the sinking of the Titanic.

The greatest tragedies in the last two hundred years can be traced to the Jesuits. We will now show that the Jesuits planned and carried out the sinking of the Titanic, and we will show why they did it.

Since the early 1830’s, America did not have a central bank. The Jesuits desperately wanted another central bank in America so that they would have a bottomless reservoir from which to draw money for their many wars and other hideous schemes around the world.

In 1910, seven men met on Jekyll Island just off the coast of Georgia to establish a central bank, which they called the Federal Reserve Bank. These men were Nelson Aldrich and Frank Vanderlip, both representing the Rockefeller financial empire; Henry Davison, Charles Norton, and Benjamin Strong, representing J.P. Morgan; and Paul Warburg, representing the Rothschild banking dynasty of Europe. We have already seen that the Rothschilds were the banking agents for the papacy’s Jesuits, holding “the key to the wealth of the Roman Catholic Church.”

The Morgans were friendly competitors with the Rothschilds and became socially close to them. Morgan’s London-based firm was saved from financial ruin in 1857 by the Bank of England over which the Rothschilds held great influence. Thereafter, Morgan appears to have served as a Rothschild financial agent and went to great length to appear totally American….

His [Rockefeller’s] entry into the field was not welcomed by Morgan, and they became fierce competitors. Eventually, they decided to minimize their competition by entering into joint ventures. In the end, they worked together to create a national banking cartel called the Federal Reserve System. — G. Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island, American Opinion Publishing, p. 209. (Emphasis supplied).

These three financial families, the Rothschilds, Morgans, and Rockefellers all do the bidding of the Jesuit Order because of Jesuit infiltration in their organizations. They do whatever is necessary to destroy constitutional liberty in America and to bring the pope to world domination. As we look back over the 20th century, we see how successful the Jesuits have been. They have continued to squander the wealth of America and continually attack its great constitution and civil liberties. Daily, the power of the pope in Vatican City increases. One day they will achieve total power again.

The building of the Titanic began in 1909 at a shipyard in Belfast, the capitol of Northern Ireland. Belfast was a Protestant haven and was hated by the Jesuits. World War One began just a few years later.

The Titanic was one of a fleet of ships owned by the White Star Line, an international shipping company.

Banking was not the only business in which Morgan had a strong financial interest. Using his control over the nation’s railroads as financial leverage, he had created an international shipping trust which included Germany’s two largest lines plus one of the two in England, the White Star Lines. — Ibid, p. 246.

There were a number of very rich and powerful men who made it abundantly clear that they were not in favor of the Federal Reserve System. J.P. Morgan was ordered by the Jesuits to build the Titanic. This ‘unsinkable’ ship would serve as the death ship for those who opposed the Jesuits’ plan for a Federal Reserve system.

These rich and powerful men would have been able to block the establishment of the Federal Reserve, and their power and fortunes had to be taken out of their hands. They had to be destroyed by a means so preposterous that no one would suspect that they were murdered, and no one would suspect the Jesuits. The Titanic was the vehicle of their destruction. In order to further shield the papacy and the Jesuits from suspicion, many Irish, French, and Italian Roman Catholics immigrating to the New World were aboard. They were people who were expendable. Protestants from Belfast who wanted to immigrate to the United States were also invited on board.

All the wealthy and powerful men the Jesuits wanted to get rid of were invited to take the cruise. Three of the richest and most important of these were Benjamin Guggenheim, Isador Strauss, the head of Macy’s Department Stores, and John Jacob Astor, probably the wealthiest man in the world. Their total wealth, at that time, using dollar values of their day was more than 500 million dollars. Today that amount of money would be worth nearly eleven billion dollars. These three men were coaxed and encouraged to board the floating palace. They had to be destroyed because the Jesuits knew they would use their wealth and influence to oppose a Federal Reserve Bank as well as the various wars that were being planned.

Edward Smith was the captain of the Titanic. He had been traveling the North Atlantic waters for twenty-six years and was the world’s most experienced master of the North Atlantic routs. He had worked for Jesuit, J.P. Morgan, for many years.

Edward Smith was a ‘Jesuit tempore co-adjator.’ This means that he was not a priest, but he was a Jesuit of the short robe. Jesuits are not necessarily priests. Those who are not priests serve the order through their profession. Anyone could be a Jesuit, and their identity would not be known. Edward Smith served the Jesuit Order in his profession as a sea captain.

Many interesting points about the Titanic are discussed in a videotape made by National Geographic in 1986. The videotape is entitled The Secrets of the Titanic. When the Titanic departed from Southern England on April 10, 1912, Francis Browne, the Jesuit master of Edward Smith, boarded the Titanic. This man was the most powerful Jesuit in all of Ireland and answered directly to the general of the Jesuit Order in Rome. The videotape declares:

A vacationing priest, Father Francis Browne, caught these poignant snapshots of his fellow passengers, most of them on a voyage to eternity. The next day Titanic made her last stop off the coast of Queenstown, Ireland. Here tenders brought out the last passengers; mostly Irish immigrants headed for new homes in America. And here, the lucky Father Browne disembarked…. Father Browne caught Captain Smith peering down from Titanic’s bridge, poised on the brink of destiny. — The Secrets of the Titanic, National Geographic, video tape, 1986.

Here is Jesuit treachery at its finest. The Provincial [Father Francis Browne] boards Titanic, photographs the victims, most assuredly briefs the Captain concerning his oath as a Jesuit, and the following morning bids him farewell. — Eric J. Phelps, Vatican Assassins, Halycon Unified Services, p. 427.

Browne went over with Edward Smith one last time exactly what he was supposed to do in the North Atlantic waters. The Jesuit General told Francis Browne what was to happen; Browne then tells Smith and the rest is history. Edward Smith believed that the Jesuit General

… is the god of the [Jesuit] society, and nothing but his electric touch can galvanize their dead corpses into life and action. Until he speaks, they are like serpents coiled up in their wintry graves, lifeless and inactive; but the moment he gives the word of command, each member springs instantaneously to his feet, leaving unfinished whatsoever may have engaged him, ready to assail whomsoever he may require to be assailed, and to strike wheresoever he shall direct a blow to be stricken. — R.W. Thompson, The Footprints of the Jesuits, Hunt and Eaton, pp. 72, 73.

Edward Smith was given an order to sink the Titanic and that is exactly what he did.

By the command of God, [the Jesuit General] it is lawful to murder the innocent, to rob, to commit all lewdness, because he [the Pope] is Lord of life, and death, and of all things; and thus to fulfill his mandate is our duty. — W. C. Brownlee, Secret Instructions of the Jesuits, American and Foreign Christian Union, p. 143.

There is no record in history of an association whose organization has stood for three hundred years unchanged and unaltered by all the assaults of men and time, and which has exercised such an immense influence over the destinies of mankind… ‘The ends justify the means,’ is his favorite maxim; and as his only end, as we have shewn, is the order, at its bidding the Jesuit is ready to commit any crime whatsoever. — G. B. Nicolini, The History of the Jesuits, Henry G. Bohn, pp. 495, 496, emphasis added.

Let us remember the oath that every person takes to become a part of the Jesuit Order:

I should regard myself as a dead body, without will or intelligence, as a little crucifix which is turned about unresistingly at the will of him who holds it as a staff in the hands of an old man, who uses it as he requires it, and as it suits him best. — R. W. Thompson, The Footprints of the Jesuits, Hunt and Eaton, p. 54.

When a person takes the Jesuit Oath, he is bound to his master until the day that he dies. Edward Smith had become a man without will or intelligence. He would commit any crime the Order wanted him to commit. Edward Smith had been required for martyrdom. On board the Titanic that night, Edward Smith knew his duty. He was under oath. The ship had been built for the enemies of the Jesuits. After three days at sea with only one pair of glasses for the bridge, Edward Smith propelled the Titanic full speed ahead, twenty-two knots, on a moonless dark night through a gigantic ice field nearly eighty square miles in area. Edward Smith did this despite at least eight telegrams warning him to be more cautious because he was going too fast.

Did Edward Smith need one caution? No, he had been traveling those waters for twenty-six years. He knew there were icebergs in that area. But eight cautions did not stop this man who was under the Jesuit oath, and under orders to destroy the Titanic.

The absurdity of warning veteran Captain Edward Smith repeatedly on Titanic’s tragic night to slow down is nothing short of preposterous. The fact that Smith never listened or heeded the warnings is insane. He had been given orders from his god in the Vatican, and nothing would turn him from his course.

The encyclopedias paint a very tragic picture of Smith in his last hours. When it came time to give the order to load and lower the lifeboats, Smith wavered and one of his aids had to approach him for the order to be given. Smith’s legendary skills of leadership seem to have left him; he was curiously indecisive and unusually cautious on that fatal night. Are these words to describe a legendary sea captain with 26 years of experience, or are these words to describe a man who was struggling in his mind whether he should do his duty as a sea captain or obey his master who told him to sink the ship?

John Jacob Astor’s wife got into a life boat and was saved, while John Jacob Astor perished in the waters of the North Atlantic. There were not enough lifeboats and many of them were only half full with only women and children.
To prevent nearby freighters from responding with help, the distress flares were white when they should have been red. White flares to passing freighters state that everybody was having a party.

One of the greatest tragedies of the twentieth century, the sinking of the Titanic, lies at the door of the Jesuit Order. The unsinkable ship, the floating palace was created to be the tomb for the wealthy, who opposed the Federal Reserve System. By April, 1912, all opposition to the Federal Reserve was eliminated. In December of 1913, the Federal Reserve System came into being in the United States. Eight months later, the Jesuits had sufficient funding through the Federal Reserve bank to begin World War One.

from: Pacific Institute

Comment #141887

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 29, 2006 9:10 AM (e)

To Ruth, Chris, and all the other names you use – a simple question:

Exodus 22:18 – “Suffer not a witch to live”.

Do you beleive that witchcraft and supernatural witches exist?

If so, do you think they should be killed?

Also:

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that democracy is evil and anti-God?

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that the US government was behind both the Oklahoma City bombing and the 9-11 attacks?

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that AIDS and SARS are biological warfare agents?

I look forward to your not answering any of these simple questions. And I will repeat them, again and again and again and again, as many times as I need to, every time you post anything here, until you either answer them or run away.

Comment #141888

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 29, 2006 9:16 AM (e)

We will now show that the Jesuits planned and carried out the sinking of the Titanic, and we will show why they did it.

BWA HA HA HA HA AHA HA HA HA AHA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please, please, please, tell me about the black helicopters and the UN plot to invade America …. The road signs – tell us about the road signs …

(snicker) (giggle)

To the audience: This is all standard lunatic-right militia stuff. Ya know, the kind of whackos who blew up the Oklahoma City building. Hovind is involved with them right up to his eyebrows.

As you can see, they are utterly paranoid cuckoo clocks.

Comment #141889

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 29, 2006 9:18 AM (e)

for leni flunk

By the way, that was, um, clever beyond measure.

(snicker) (giggle) BWA HA HA HA AH AHA HA !!!!!!!

Comment #141893

Posted by jessy chris on October 29, 2006 9:54 AM (e)

mr. leni FLUNK, is character assassination the only ploy you know to evade accepting world reality and the truth of God’s words?

You’ll remember this final message on that final day when you’re facing God Almighty the Creator of man and the whole universe.

Book of John, chapter 8:

42Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”

Comment #141894

Posted by ruth on October 29, 2006 10:00 AM (e)

mr. leni FLUNK, is character assassination the only ploy you know to evade accepting world reality and the truth of God’s words?

You’ll remember this final message on that final day when you’re facing God Almighty the Creator of man and the whole universe.

Book of John, chapter 8:

42Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”

Comment #142034

Posted by Carol Clouser on October 31, 2006 2:04 AM (e)

Kelly Harly wrote:

“Well, let’s talk about the Creation. We sure do not want to be ignorant of the Creation like the scoffers are. Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” If you skip down to verse five and it says, “The evening and the morning were the first day.” Notice the word the—T-H-E. In English that is called the definite article: the first day. Now this is from the King James Version of the Bible, which I use, and I think you would be smart to use if you speak English. Many of the newer translations have made some serious changes. I would just be real cautious if I was you. I used to say (I do collect Bibles—versions of Bibles), I used to say I am not afraid of them. The more I study this, the more afraid I am getting folks. They have made thousands of changes in some of these, some of them very serious. Now, if you do not read Greek or Hebrew, you might want to stick with the King James if all you can read is English, which is all I can read. Here is the Reviled Substandard Perversion - I was reading through my Bibles to see how they treated the Creation story, and I came to the RSV. They said, “And there was evening and there was morning one day.” What happened to the first day? Well, now it is just one day. Down in verse 8 instead of saying “the second day”, they said it was “a second day”. Why did they do that? Well, the reason these guys did that, they do not believe in a literal six day creation. They believe in what is called the Gap Theory.”

For your information, “And there was evening and there was morning one day” is far closer to the meaning of the original Hebrew, a langauage you - by your own admission - do not know, than the sloppy, lousy, inept and deceitful KJV translation.

Make no mistake about it. If your do not know ancient Hebrew, you certainly do not know the Bible, period.

And that is actually an OK thing. You see, the Bible (OT) was not meant to be read by ignoramuses like you. You have no business distorting it, adding to it, mistranslating it, and dabbling in it without the oral tradition with which it came. It was written by the Jews, of the Jews, and for the Jews.

Comment #142036

Posted by Sir_Toejam on October 31, 2006 2:24 AM (e)

Kelly Harley, xian evangelist, meet Carol Clouser, Jewish evangelist.

I’m sure you two have much to discuss, although I’m just as sure it will have nothing to do with the topic at hand, Kent Hovind.

Comment #142037

Posted by Andrew McClure on October 31, 2006 2:25 AM (e)

Make no mistake about it. If your do not know ancient Hebrew, you certainly do not know the Bible, period.

Unfortunately only two people in the entire world know ancient hebrew– a Ms. Carol Clouser and a Mr. Judah Landa– so popular knowledge of the bible is somewhat limited :(

By the way, Carol, why hasn’t Landa published a translation of the book of John from its original hebrew yet? Is he still working on it?

Comment #142061

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 31, 2006 8:24 AM (e)

To Ruth, Chris, and all the other names you use – a simple question:

Exodus 22:18 – “Suffer not a witch to live”.

Do you beleive that witchcraft and supernatural witches exist?

If so, do you think they should be killed?

Also:

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that democracy is evil and anti-God?

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that the US government was behind both the Oklahoma City bombing and the 9-11 attacks?

Do you agree with “Dr” Hovind that AIDS and SARS are biological warfare agents?

I look forward to your not answering any of these simple questions. And I will repeat them, again and again and again and again, as many times as I need to, every time you post anything here, until you either answer them or run away.

Comment #142110

Posted by Torbjörn Larsson on October 31, 2006 6:48 PM (e)

“tor larson,fill your head with this med:”
“hear ye toejamjew,larsonjew,etc.”

Well, I found my misplaced reference, so I reprise the comment from the other, as it were totally unrelated, thread where I found you last time:
““hear ye toejamjew,larsonjew,etc.”

If you are trying to plead insanity by continuing these comments, it wont help. (At least I think this is the thread I commented in - the comment is probably moved and I lost my reference.)

It is still intolerant to your thinking fellow man to incessantly quote dogmatic texts.

It is also intolerant to jews to go around attaching the reference to sundry people for no good reason.”

BTW, just because you have many names and presumably many voices in your head, doesn’t mean that you need to post at many unrelated threads. Unlike your scattered brain, normal people can only be at one place at any time. It seems my search fu can’t make up for everything you do to comment threads.

Comment #142186

Posted by vic on November 1, 2006 5:20 PM (e)

——————————————————————————–

I’m not so familiar with tax laws but as I see it, the only mistake made by Creation Science Evangelical Ministry Leader Mr. Kent Hovind was non-filing of 501©(3) exemption documents. Any neutral jury can see for themselves that Mr. Kent Hovind was running an organized ministry for religious, educational, and scientific purposes. Even DinoLand tickets were meant as donation to be used to fund the continuous evangelization of kids and adult visitors who visit DinoLand. All rides there had lessons for children on believing God as the Almighty Creator of man and the universe.

I really do not think that Mr. Hovind wanted to evade the IRS. Let me remind the jury that even our country’s presidents (majority) swore by the Bible when they were sworn into office. Court witnesses (often) are also made to swear by the Bible. There is one thing that the IRS can’t admit – God’s laws as contained in The Holy Bible are binding to Creation Science Evangelical Ministry led by Mr. Kent Hovind. The IRS knows that the 501©(3) of the Internal Revenue Code applies to Mr. Hovind’s CSE Church but the IRS doesn’t want to recognize the tax-exempt status of
Mr. Hovind’s CSE Church. For what reasons? Is there a political motive behind the IRS’ investigation of Mr. Hovind’s CSE Church?

Since the IRS is accusing Mr. Hovind to be an “employer” with a “Dino Corporation” “employing” 30 “employees”, why summon only four “employees” who either have lost faith in the doctrines of Creation Science Evangelical Ministry or have grudges against Mr. Hovind? Why not summon all 30 “employees” just to be fair and democratic?

The jury might find this question “relevant” – Is there a law penalizing any leader of Church or Ministry of criminal prosecution and/or imprisonment if he failed to file a 501©(3) ?

If I were Mr. Hovind’s counsel, I will definitely question Mr. Schneider’s political motive behind this “accumulated suits” against Creation Science Evangelical Ministry Leader Mr. Kent Hovind. I wonder what Mr. Schneider’s religious color is. If the jury is consisted of non-blinded/impartial/neutral/non-partisan God-believing American citizens, then Creation Science Evangelical Ministry Leader Mr. Kent Hovind and his helpmate in propagating the gospel, Mrs. Jo Hovind, will be declared innocent.

Comment #142192

Posted by Coin on November 1, 2006 5:47 PM (e)

vic wrote:

I’m not so familiar with tax laws but as I see it, the only mistake made by Creation Science Evangelical Ministry Leader Mr. Kent Hovind was non-filing of 501©(3) exemption documents.

That does appear to be his primary error, yes.

I really do not think that Mr. Hovind wanted to evade the IRS.

Oh. Then why didn’t he file as a 501©(3) exempted organization?

And why did he distribute videos to other evangelicals encouraging them to evade taxes, as Rebekah Horton of Pensacola Christian College testified he did?

And for that matter, why did he go around saying things like this?

Pensacola news-journal wrote:

A Florida attorney testified Friday that Pensacola evangelist Kent Hovind disputed the government’s right to tax him and likened his ministry’s powers to that of a foreign embassy.

“He tried to stress to me that he was like the pope and this was like the Vatican,” Seminole attorney David Charles Gibbs testified at Hovind’s trial before U.S. District Judge Casey Rodgers….
Gibbs said Hovind tried to persuade him he had no obligation to pay employee income taxes and explained with “a great deal of bravado” how he had “beat the tax system.”

Gibbs said Hovind also told him he preferred to deal in cash and that when you are “dealing with cash there is not way to trace it, so it wasn’t taxable.”

And why’d he so consistently withdraw money from the bank in such a way as to avoid the federal $10,000-per-transaction reporting limit?

vic wrote:

There is one thing that the IRS can’t admit – God’s laws as contained in The Holy Bible are binding to Creation Science Evangelical Ministry led by Mr. Kent Hovind.

I guess they are. Surely that is not any of the IRS’s business, though?

but the IRS doesn’t want to recognize the tax-exempt status of Mr. Hovind’s CSE Church. For what reasons?

Because he is not legally filed as a 501©(3) exempted organization, I’d wager.

vic wrote:

The jury might find this question “relevant” – Is there a law penalizing any leader of Church or Ministry of criminal prosecution and/or imprisonment if he failed to file a 501©(3) ?

Apparently so, if they then go on to not pay their taxes and such– after all, they appear to have charged Kent Hovind with a number of them.

Comment #142200

Posted by whheydt on November 1, 2006 6:16 PM (e)

Whether Hovind qualifies for a 501©3 status or not is irrelevant on two grounds.

First, if he didn’t file for it, his organization doesn’t have that tax status and just because it *might* be granted if applied for doesn’t do him any good if he *didn’t*.

Second, the employees of 501©3s are subject to taxes just like the employees of any other type of corporation, and the organization is required to withhold taxes and send those amounts in as well as employer portions just like any other organization. Therefore, even if he *had* gotten 501©3 status, he’d *still* be in the dock for not paying the taxes.

He’s not in trouble because he failed to file for 501©3 status. He’s in trouble for failure to obey tax and banking laws that apply to *all* organizations, 501©3 or not. Failure to maintain proper records and playing fast and loose with banking and tax laws has gotten other ministers in trouble before and will continue to do so in the future. Just because an organization claims to be a religion doesn’t exempt it from proper fiduciary responsibility.

If you think the testimony of the other 26 employees would make a difference, then the defense attorney should call one or more of them to make that point. It is not up to the prosecution to show why Hovind should get off the hook. That’s what his defense attorney is for.

Now late breaking news is that no defense is going to be presented, so it appears that the defense attorney doesn’t share your contention that other employees would make a difference. Did you fail to ask to be part of the legal defense team?

Comment #142207

Posted by Sir_Toejam on November 1, 2006 6:26 PM (e)

Did you fail to ask to be part of the legal defense team?

ah, but this reminds me so much of the armchair lawyers who are absolutely sure that if the defense in the Dover trial just did what THEY thought, the defendandts would have prevailed!

anyone remember larry farfromsane’s continual legal proclamations after the case?

great example.

friggin idiots.

I do hope PT will not be invaded yet again by the parade of circus clowns who think they are lawyers.

Comment #142208

Posted by Sir_Toejam on November 1, 2006 6:36 PM (e)

Vic:

I’m not so familiar with tax laws but as I see it,…

Hyper-Chicken: I may be a simple country Hyper-Chicken but I know when we’re finger-licked. Whattya say we plead insanity?

http://www.geocities.com/theneutralplanet/transcripts/season3/3ACV11.html

Comment #142228

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on November 1, 2006 10:50 PM (e)

I’m not so familiar with tax laws

Yes, I can tell.

The judge, though, is. Very.

Comment #142231

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on November 1, 2006 10:55 PM (e)

God’s laws as contained in The Holy Bible

“Render unto Caesar”, you know ….

Alas for you, though, the Bible is not the law of the land.

The tax code, is.

Sorry if you don’t like that. (shrug)

Comment #142237

Posted by Henry J on November 1, 2006 11:22 PM (e)

Re “why summon only four “employees””

Er, can’t Hovind or his lawyer summon anybody they want as a witness even if the IRS didn’t summon that person?

Henry