Amazon Book Review by Crazy Internet Stalker

  • Amazon Book Review

Amazon Book Review by Crazy Internet Stalker

UPDATE: She deleted this entire review after being busted for lying. And has since posted a new review which is posted at the bottom of this page.

UPDATE: Either Amazon or this woman has deleted the review again.

The following is a one star “review” of The Principled Legal Standard on Amazon. Because of not liking the answers she was given in a conversation with us on Twitter, she decides to purchase a book for the sole purpose of leaving us a bad review on Amazon. After her review was deleted  she then proceeds to harass us on Facebook, making a fake account, commenting that she was thinking about buying a book but decided not to based on our “attitude”. She then deletes her fake Facebook account.

Below are her comments to us using a fake account on FaceBook pretending to be someone who wants to buy the book. She then deletes her fake account but not before I snap this shot of it.

Internet Stalker

This review is from: The Principled Legal Standard: for the First Genuine Doctrinal Reformation of the Church (Kindle Edition)

LoveComplete says:
One of the most alarming man-made false doctrines. They beg for someone to challenge the book, to refute it, and when the heresy is shown that their doctrine maligns the Word of God, then the vile hurling of insults and condemnation spews forth from the two men, Alleman & Tellez. Your comment, question or verse of Scripture given into evidence, will be called misinterpreted blasphemy and bearing false-witness against THEIR truth, but it is not God’s Truth they espouse. The very premise of the analogous courtroom vernacular of this book, demonstrates they are legalistically minded and driven to be the accusers of the brethren, and so blindly, go against the very construct of behaviors they outline in the book where they postulate that you are either righteous or unrighteous, and all virtues of righteousness abide together or not at all. Which obviously, they are not aware of their own behavior, hubris, or the god of ‘their’ doctrines that they serve. [QUOTE]: “Isn’t it true that Satan and hypocrites accuse others who are innocent of what they themselves are guilty of? And in fact, do not hypocrites desire those innocents that they falsely accuse, to be punished for the very things the hypocrite is guilty of himself? In doing this, do not the hypocrites pretend that justice has been achieved by punishing of the innocent in their own place? Is it not the trade mark of Satan to accuse the innocent brethren?” [END QUOTE] And THAT is EXACTLY what they do to everyone who disagrees, questions, or provides Scripture that refutes their man-made doctrinal beliefs. They assume they are the ULTIMATE authority of God’s truth, and that it cannot be refuted, only lied about, and blasphemed. Not God’s Word, BUT THEIR DOCTRINE, and THEIR INTERPRETATION as legal authority, usurping God’s Authority and the Gospel of Christ. The book seems to know more about the nature of SATAN, than the Mind of Christ, or the Will of God…And the fruits of the Spirit; love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and SELF-CONTROL, they obviously do NOT possess, but are possessed with unrighteous indignation, and deem themselves justified apart from God, and the Word of God.

Initial post: Jun 25, 2016 6:43:49 PM PDT
Timothy Alleman says:
You have refuted exactly “squat” and cannot deal with the content of our book. Personal attacks against us have nothing to do with the content of our book. Our book puts the satanically religious “over the edge”…and for anyone who reads your post…it is easy to see that you yourself are doing exactly what you accuse us of. I deal with the content of peoples arguments, the merits of the argument or the lack thereof. You need to get control of yourself, you are spazzing out.

Posted on Jun 25, 2016 7:11:50 PM PDT
LoveComplete says:
Hello, again, Timothy. I did not use ad hominem, as you have with other individuals. Your book mentions SATAN more than it does Christ. I believe it is because you are more an authority on satan, than on God, His Word, His Spirit, or His Son…500 references to satan and his nature in your book, the Bible doesn’t even contain that many references about satan’s nature, as you have provided. You say spazzing out, but I was witness to you tweeting hostilely over 60 tweets to one individual who asked one question, and gave one concern about the use of absolutes in regard to the nature of man and his own righteousness. Calling them names, and losing any type of resemblance to self-control. As far as, projection is concerned, you write in your book that satan is the accuser…And you accuse anyone who disagrees with you, personally, as inadequate in intelligence, a blasphemer, a false-witness, and even accuse the reader, if they do not agree with what you postulate that they are already thoroughly deceived. This isn’t a personal attack as the one you illustrated today on social media, but it is in fact a very accurate description of how you deal with those whom disagree, based upon actual Scripture, instead of a created doctrine of the 21st Century by two men who claim absolute legal authority to interpret the Bible without impunity, I guess you see changing Scripture not being one of those ‘elective’ crimes/sins that goes without punishment.

[Deleted by Amazon on Jun 25, 2016 11:51:41 PM PDT]

S. Tellez says:
You haven’t made any arguments concerning the content of our book so far. All you are doing is focusing on Tim. Why not bring up a doctrine in our book that you can actually refute? I saw the conversation you and Tim had and you are lying outright. You did NOT simply ask a question. You are belligerent and very angered by the answers you did not want to hear which is the only reason for your coming to Amazon to leave a bad review. So instead of throwing a tantrum lets hear exactly and specifically what doctrine in our book you have a problem with and why.

LoveComplete says:
Tellez, there was one question posted, and one concern posted, at which time Tim flew into ad hominem, stating the person didn’t have the intelligence to even understand the title of the book, told them to “shut up or put up,” called them a pretender, a false-witness and the final tweet referenced the person as like a prostitute who was short-changed. Your book is being used as bait for those who believe in the New Testament account of Christ and His Disciples. You sent out tweets directly to individuals on Twitter with the challenge of debating the book, and then post that no one can refute the absolute truth of this book, and as Tim refers to it, his doctrine, but you allow no one to provide Scriptural refute without attacking the individual, then blocking and deleting the evidence of the hellacious insults. I see that a possible Tim comment was so volatile in nature that Amazon deleted the post.

Tellez, if the mere fact that your book references more knowledge about the knowledge of satan, satanists, & the satanic in regard to the nature of them, make your book more of an authority on satan than on God, and Christ. The reason that Tim became so enraged at the concern that absolutes do not apply to man’s nature is that your book postulates that Christ’s crucifixion was not that of the Omega Lamb, but simply his death at the hands of wicked men, as a legal dispute between God and satan, and was just a demonstrative example that we, too, as mankind could live a life without elective sins, as Christ did.

The book is full of dangerous contradictions, mainly for its authors. In Chapter 59 of the book it gives a trait of a deceiver, and/or deceptive doctrines being word usage, using of words that are not found in the dictionary because words define real things, and yet, the book starts out, in Chapter ONE with the author acknowledging the INVENTED word he made, “PASSUNMENO.”

The book is riddled with these self-incriminating contradictions, and the authors themselves disprove their own doctrinal belief, by their strict belief in the ABSOLUTE, yet, do not bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit which is their premise of a bad man cannot do good works, and a good man cannot do bad works in correlation with a good tree cannot bear bad fruit…But yet, the distinguish that they are respecters of sins, and categorize sins of ignorance and elective sins, of which neither of them seem to believe lying about others lying, bearing false-witness about someone else false-witnesses, accusing someone of lacking self-control after going on an hour long rant from voicing one concern, as their lacking self-control being a sin, after outlining in their book the behavior in and of itself is the behavior of satan himself, as quoted from the book in my first review.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 26, 2016 7:22:16 AM PDT
Timothy Alleman says:
(LoveComplete MISREPRESENTING what is stated in chapter 59) In Chapter 59 of the book it gives a trait of a deceiver, and/or deceptive doctrines being word usage, using of words that are not found in the dictionary because words define real things, and yet, the book starts out, in Chapter ONE with the author acknowledging the INVENTED word he made, “PASSUNMENO.”

(What is actually in chapter 59): “Word replacement is anathema to them, because it is fatal to their deceptive doctrines and reveals that the DEFINITIONS of the select chosen words they use ARE NOT FOUND IN THE DICTIONARY. Since words define real things, their definitions cannot be used to define unreal things. Therefore, their definitions must be made unreal as well.”

(quote from chapter one) The word “passunmeno” means “all together abide”. It is a technical term I invented and use to refer to the absoluteness of righteousness along with all of its aspects or qualities that must accompany it without omission.

Nothing like bearing false witness about what is in our book. The misuse and unreal use of words: The words are real and are found in the dictionary, the unreal definitions given those words are not…so you twist it into “using of words that are not found in the dictionary”. The inventing of words is normal, (example: “computer”)…”hafta call it a toaster of something Charely!” “well Bill, I call it a bread browner, since toaster is an invented word.Now lets surf the net with this bread browner”.

This is what you have been doing from the start, you are one of the satanically religious, LoveComplete is a stalker and follows us around the web, telling lies about our book.

LoveComplete says:
Thank you, Tim, please keep demonstrating that you are an ungodly man, that hurls insults and accusations.

The only missing tweet before you removed the thread regarding the book specifically, was “My statement was in regard to all things must abide together or none are present at all, in regard to righteousness.” There were two other questions regarding another thread pertaining your postulation that men have free will without interfence, and clarification was asked that you were referencing free choice.

Psalms 143:2 “…For in Your sight no man living is righteous.” Since you do not believe in the New Testament account, only the Old Testament Law, I am giving you the Old Testament Psalm.

The PLS has very little reference to the Bible, and when directly in mention, is to overturn the validity in the New Testament, or infer a construct from the Old Testament, but no direct Scriptural support for their doctrine. The book gives examples from the Bible, mentions persons written about in the Bible, but everything thereafter is subjective conjecture about the intent of God and the intent of satan in this fictional courtroom analogy.

The author’s of this book believe that forgiving the unrepentant goes against God’s Law, and calls the one forgiving, and ‘unqualified forgiver’ they sympathize with the example of the sociopathic killer who refuses to accept forgiveness given, and deem the forgiver as the insanely religious. They give the legalistic criteria for forgiveness, that God does not accept our forgiveness, but demands repentance of the offender before their victims in order to be forgiven, and I quote, “If your brother does wrong against you, rebuke him; if he repents forgive him. And NOT before he repents shall you forgive him.” The authors call this an ‘illegal type of forgiveness,” and is standing against God, and bearing false witness against God, and referred to as the satanic counterfeit doctrine of forgiveness by the satanically religious.

The authors mock the Bible, with sardonic humor, and believe that we must become in equal standing with God, aka, “the same page as God” to reach the lawful and righteous state, heaven forbid what the Bible states about God and His ways, would literally make the author spit coffee out his nose and baptize his keyboard with coffee…His words not mine.

The authors mention ‘unforgivable offense(S) even though the Bible states there is only ONE unforgivable sin.

In the first Chapter of the book they state that all abides, that a bad tree cannot produce good fruit, just as a good man cannot do bad works, but later in the book, overturn this statement when they attack the premise of good works stemming from Faith, stating that good works will not ever produce a lawful inner state…But, wait, didn’t the authors start off with the absolute that only good can produce good, but now, in regard to Works of Faith, now, that these works of Faith, are actually bearing false witness against God?!?!?

This is what the author declares about himself, and I quote: “So since I am the authority of lawfulness, the lawful view of God, the correct and perfect understanding of the jurisprudence of God and the ONLY non-satanic view of the cross, I will also be the authority on what the salvation process is.”

My heart literally ached with repulsion and grief, at the lies written in this book.

They believe that the fall of man was not because of a sinful nature, the authors believe that the sinful nature does not appear until Genesis 6. The refuse to see that the sinful nature of man, committed by Eve and Adam was direct disobedience to God, when eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil after being commanded not to eat of it. When in Genesis 3, Eve at of the fruit, because she wanted to be as wise as God, on the same page as God, I guess you could say – not much different than what the authors believe of themselves in relation to the nature of God and the nature of men.

By their own logic, they state that God does not punish the innocent, or ignorant sin, then why would God curse Adam & Eve and remove them from the Garden of Eden, and the Tree of Life, if no sin [sin nature] existed until GENESIS 6? That would indeed make God unjust to give punishment or consequence for a sin of ignorance, but it wasn’t ignorance, God told them to not eat of it, that they would die…It was disobedience to God Himself, and was in fact a sin based upon what was called Eve’s DESIRE to be WISE, and then she ELECTED to disobey God, as did Adam.

Amazing that these two men do not believe the fall of man, had nothing to do with the nature of man, imperfect, fallible even when having direct access to God in the Garden of Eden, but postulate that we can come to a lawful state and become righteous without the Provision of Grace through Christ, removing the impossible yoke of the fulfilling the Law on our own. All the prophecies of Christ, from Genesis onward, were just so that His crucifixion would be reduced to His death being at the hands of wicked men, not God’s Provision of Reconciliation, but a mere reduction of Christ’s Life, Death & Resurrection to show believers they could live and obey the Law just as Christ did…?!?!

I won’t even go into the heresies about the sins of flesh not having spiritual ramifications…As I stated before, this book is BAIT, it is such a convoluted collection of contradiction, that to even attempt to refute it, will only get you tangled in the fishing line of these two fisherman.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 26, 2016 11:10:56 PM PDT
S. Tellez says:
Its a false paradime to say that a persons calculations are incorrect because that person called someone names. It has no bearing on the accuracy of what is being said. Do you sin? If so, then going by your logic, everything you say is inaccurate. Now you need to stop stalking us here and on twitter, and all of this because you don’t like the content of our book or the answer you were given to your “question”. I saw today that you are now harassing our twitter followers. I will no longer be responding to you and your lies.

In reply to your post on Jun 27, 2016 7:38:11 AM PDT
LoveComplete says:
S. Tellez, I gave you some of the contradictions in your book, and you now are saying that because of ‘this behavior’ you are not going to respond. Isn’t that the false basis you are accusing me of by stating your doctrine is unscriptural because Tim called me names? I did not once state that your book is fallacy because of Tim’s and your behavior, only that your behavior doesn’t align with your absolute belief, that man’s nature can be completely righteous or not at all theory. Since cursing, chiding, and mocking people isn’t a fruit of the Holy Spirit, and you postulate an ‘all or nothing’ theory of righteousness, how is that observation reconciled by you? If the authors do not demonstrate the very traits they specify in their book, they themselves have already proven their doctrine as false, or themselves as such.

The ‘answer’ you state was given was ad hominem…Of course, who would like a diatribe launched against them for voicing one question, and one concern about the book?

1) If you invite someone to debate, and they accept, it is not stalking
2) If someone buys your book and gives a review of the BOOK, it is not stalking
3) If the topic of the PLS book is being presented to the PUBLIC with a question of ‘why’ this book cannot be refuted, and a person answers, that is not harassing, but calling people names & lying about them, is indeed harassment.
4) Removing posts of threads showing your behavior, isn’t ‘winning’ the debate, it is obfuscation of the truth, i.e., lying.
5)Refusal to address the contradictions of your book, demonstrates how it’s not about no one being able to refute your book, but that you just ignore, delete, or use ad hominem to state no one can or has refuted your book.
6)False accounts on Twitter promoting the book are not followers, but paid promoters or shell accounts.
7)Most of the accounts that promote your books are secular; one is even a wiccan and another an atheist – What interest would a wiccan and an atheist, have in promoting your book if it was a true reflection of God?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2016 9:01:46 AM PDT
S. Tellez says:
You did not give “contradictions”. You purposely misrepresent our book and what is said. That is called lying. And anyone who has read our book knows that. You were not “invited to debate” on twitter. That was an ad for an actual debate at a certain time and place. It was not an offer for a Twitter “debate” and you know it. And Amazon is not the place to do it either. We do not have “false accounts” on Twitter. Nor are there any “paid promoters” or “shell accounts”. Anyone using Twitter (including you) knows that a lot of people retweet whatever they see in order to gain more followers. We have never had any wiccan or atheist supporters promoting our book. How many more lies will we hear from you?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2016 9:10:54 AM PDT
Timothy Alleman says:
1. you were not invited to debate. You were not invited to anything, period.
2. You have an obessive stalking personality as evidenced on twitter, not only with us but you have pursued other people associated with us.
3. Calling people names is not harassment…following them around is. “get away from me you weirdo” <—is not harassment.
4. What amazon deletes is what they delete, some of my comments were deleted.
5. You have failed to point out any “contradictions” in our book, and that is what makes you angry, and causes you to bear false witness about what is actually in our book.
6. There are no false accounts on twitter. That is a baseless charge, and a false accusation.
7. Point is an insane statement. lol

Adam “did not fall” because Adam “was not up there to begin with”. Adam “trepassed” or “went over the border into the knowledge of good and evil land”. Adam was not “righteous” to begin with, he was in a state of ignorance of the knowledge of good and evil. It is impossible to be “righteous” when one has no clue what evil or goodness actually is, what right or wrong actually is, and so forth.

The bible does not say that “Adam fell”, nor does the bible say that “man is born fallen” (fallen from righteousness). This is purely a misinterpretation based on the false premise that Adam was in a state of righteousness to begin with, he was not. And this is why that is not stated in the bible either nor can the words be found. I was not born “fallen”, because I was “never up there to begin with”. This is once again where the misuse and unreal use of words and definitions comes into play.

Fallen: having dropped or come down from a higher place, from an upright position, or from a higher level, degree, amount, quality, value, number, etc. (I was never in the higher state or position in the first place in order to then “have fallen”). “Fallen man” and “man is born fallen” are terms being applied to all men and is a religious false interpretation, and its origins are not from exegesis nor from the scriptures. Those phrases and terms with unreal definitions were invented by heretics in order to support the penal substitution heresy. And when I point out that I was not righteous before I existed or before I was born…resorting to “we all fell in (or by means of) Adam” is an unreal liberalism. I was not “unfallen in Adam before he ate” and “I was not righteous in Adam before he ate”….BECAUSE I DID NOT EXIST. Assigning the “sin nature” or “corruption” of the fleshy nature” to Adam is once again another false premise and untruth that is not found in the bible and is not born from exegesis: It is liberal misinterpretation, seeing what is not there and refusing to see what is there. Genesis 6 is where it is plainly stated that all flesh became corrupted, and the corrupted fleshy nature is stated plainly by the bible to be according to the course of this world, of which Satan is the present tyrant, (it does not state that the corrupted flesh is according to the course of Adam and patterned after Adam after he ate). With every false doctrine God is portrayed as putting on a pretense and God himself is depicted as bearing false witness. Like is said in our book, it is not called “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that will give you a really nasty biological sin nature that opposes the spirit at every turn and enslaved you to sin…TREE”. It is because of your heretical preconceived views…that you inject that in there…when it is not found in there at all.

It is the same with the “federal headship” heresy, Adam is not my federal head or representative. Which one can easily perceive the unreal definition they give that phrase as being “what ever bad decisions Adam made…I, you, and all men suffer the consequences from (in terms of judgment and condemnation). What is peculiar is, that it is a “we suffer only from the federal head’s negative decisions only”…type of federal headship…and when it is pointed out that indications from scripture is that Adam later made positive decisions or good decisions…we are not represented nor do we benefit from those positive decisions! What would penal substitute heretics like you say to this? That salvation or deliverance is now subject to our freedom of choice??? They suffer from the consequences of the “federal head’s” bad decisions only, and not blessed or benefit from his good decisions, reminds me of the “free to fall, but not free to want to be lifted back up” heresy of Calvinism.

The claim of our book and arguments made are based on “what is there”, not what isn’t. Adam ate the the tree, gained the knowledge of good and evil and as a result became involved or a participant in the legal case and battle between God and Satan and was faced with choosing sides and had to make a decision as to which side he would be on, God’s or Satan’s. And since Adam entered a judge-able state that is subject to cross examination and therefore testing, Adam also entered a testable state: being subject to physical death or mortality. “From the dust you came, to the dust you shall return” is the only death named in Genesis after Adam ate. There is no mention at all (a complete omission) of God saying to Adam “that because you ate you shall receive a corrupt nature and be enslaved to sin”…not there! Penal substitutionists see what is not there and ignore what is there. Just like Peter’s reiterations of the gospel in acts 2 and acts 3…penal substitution is not found there at all. People such as yourself make penal substitution (and your completely different and gospel number 2…when you get painted into a corner) the corner stone and the whole gospel itself. When asked why people would basically “leave out your entire gospels (cause you got more than one) when he gave his gospel, twice in acts 2 and 3″…you have no answer. I was never righteous before I was born and therefore I never fell from righteousness. i use words as they are found in the dictionary, you do not. An infant born in a totally debilitated state, is just that. An infant born in a complete state of ignorance, being a blank slate with no information at all, is just that. When I say I go by what is there, what is there is the Genesis corruption of the flesh due to angelic interference and selective breeding to produce a breed of human that has self control problems, instincts and impulses of aggression and unprincipled urges is what occurred. I go by what words mean and what is there “we all like sheep have gone astray” is a reference to Israel as a nation and individuals…and is not a reference to “all men ever born”. Man born in a debilitated state, with zero information or knowledge…was not on the right path in the first place, “in order to go astray”. Just like “fallen” you have to be unfallen first…I was not born on the right path and never was on the right path…in order to be deemed as being born “having strayed off the right path”.

These misinterpretations of the scriptures by penal substitute advocates are the same method used by hardline calvinists to deny freedom of choice they are “eisegesis” not exegesis.

Eisegesis: an interpretation, especially of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter’s own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text. This in my opinion, and as evidenced, you are guilty of. Also what I find fascinating is when you have been caught several times bearing false witness about the contents of our book…you never acknowledge it and give the “dead fish response” (as I call it). lol To any objective person, you over severity, making mountains out of specks, false premises of suggesting that because I called you a name…my doctrines and the contents of our book are therefore false…is a typical liberal and satanic tactic…trying to make that which is irrelevant seem as though it is relevant. 1+1=2 is just as correct as “1+1=2 you dunderhead”. Calling you a dunderhead (supposed bad fruit!) does not make 1+1=2 untrue. There is a place in my book where I state specifically that people like you would do this…and it is stated in our book that (paraphrase) “arguing that the math teacher’s equations are incorrect because he drinks on the weekends” is illogical and is a typical satanic tactic, used by liars who cannot refute his equations BECAUSE THEY ARE CORRECT IN REALITY”.

I will not respond to you any further, go ahead and post 1,000 more misrepresentations of our book and untruths….due to your vindictive and obsessive behavior and personality…for what you have done and are doing only proves that what we have stated in our book about people types like you is true. Everyone who reads our book knows you are bearing false witness and display the exact opposite of “spirituality”….YOU ARE GRACELESS. I make reasoned and principled arguments and anyone who reads our book sees that we establish a legal basis first, and then reason and argue and built from a legal basis. It takes a liberal and satanically religious personality to claim that Adam “was righteous” while not even having the knowledge of right and wrong (word replacement is a bummer aint it?) lol. That which is good is right and that which is evil is wrong…knowledge of that which is good and that which is bad. I just love the word replacement tactic! Again, this comment and yours will be posted on our website and FB in case Amazon deletes it. And if it is deleted I will post a link to it.

—————————————————————————————————

New “Review” which was also deleted. Screenshot of it below.

review2

A Fictitious & Unbiblical Analogy of a Legal Dispute Between God & Satan, June 25, 2016
By LoveComplete
This review is from: The Principled Legal Standard: for the First Genuine Doctrinal Reformation of the Church (Kindle Edition)

‘I’ deleted my previous review, to try give a more objective review of this book, even though, the book is very heretical. This book contains 500 references to satan, and his nature. Considering the Bible, itself, only contains 38 references to satan, this, in and of itself should be quite disturbing, and the author’s statements of, “If I were Satan…” who would ever even fathom to take on the role of satan, much less write anything that resembled identifying with satan, or what satan would desire or want?!?

There are substantially less references to Christ, not excluding the false hair-lipped christ illustrated in poor taste, as “Jebus of Nazarbeth,”

The authors start out the book with an invented a word, ‘passunmeno’, to establish their definition of righteousness, as an absolute. The declare that there are no standards higher than God’s standards and doctrines; So, it makes one wonder why they have created a doctrine of their own.

The authors frame their doctrine on a fabricated legal dispute between God and satan settled through the human species [Chapter 7]

The basic premise of the book, is primarily through legal vernacular, not a Scripturally supported one, trying to first attempt prove and then disprove a non-existing accusation that satan has made against God, as if in a modern day court of law. This conjecture is all in attempt to prove that Christ, and His blood shed on the cross was not for our sins, because God does not punish the innocent, and Christ did not become sin, as versed in the New Testament, 2 Corinthians 5:21, “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” The author accuses anyone [even the reader as they read] who rejects what he has redefined and attributed as the ‘satanic penalty substitute’ is just wanting to sin with impunity (freely sin without repentance).

The New Testament also covers that Grace is not to be accepted in vain, as a means to justify willful sinning, but these authors have taken it upon themselves to omit all other aspects that clarify that very thing, which completely dissolves any necessity for them to go to such extent to create entire doctrines, much less a 737 page book on the subject.

Christ’s crucifixion was foretold in Isaiah 53, and for what purpose: Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all…

But the Principled Legal Standard states this is a satanic lie, that Christ’s death was to save us from sin, but not punishment. The book avoids the aspect of John 3:16 (and the Bible in general), for whosoever shall believeth in Him, or all the numerous Scriptures that include repentance, and obedience to Christ, the spiritual transformation, and continually working out our salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:13) in accordance with our faith, not ever to be taken as a free pass to sin at will.

I can only assume the authors have either ignored or interpreted Isaiah 53, along with many other verses in the Bible, quite differently as in regard to punishment, sin, and Salvation, and what that means.

The advertisements for this book include Bible verses, and some very misleading excerpts as to what this book portrays, contains, and what its agenda is. I have never read a book with so many accusations made directly to the reader as they read, as if the author knows at exactly which point they have completely stated the opposite of the Bible, and the reader would be beginning to recall what Scripture actually states on the subject, and there it is…An accusation that the reader is thoroughly deceived if they don’t agree with his doctrine.

The author refers to “my doctrines” not God’s Doctrines or the Bible, in this book 93 times. He admits that his doctrines are not acquired from the Bible, so, when I state that this book is unbiblical, I am not simply stating my discernment or opinion, or lying about the book, or its authors, but reiterating what the author(s) plainly state(s) within his own book in the introduction, and confirms throughout the book, and there is nothing more eery than when the author is describing where he gets ‘his doctrines’ from, when he gives the example between Barabbas and Christ, and the inspiration behind the outcome and then writes, “Perhaps this might aid you in making the choice as to who my Master is.”

Initial post: Jun 28, 2016 9:27:14 AM PDT
Last edited by the author 12 minutes ago

Timothy Alleman says:

(the first review was deleted because of being caught repeatedly bearing false witness and misquoting our book. first review is cached right here http://www.principledlegalstandard.org/amazon-book-review-by-liar/ )
1. The name “Jesus Christ” is found 500 times just in rhe first half of the book, and that is not including “Son of God”, God the Son” etc. The bible mentions “hell”, “hades” much more than it mentions “heaven”…therefore using your irrational illogic…the bible itself must be a false book.
2. A legal criminal case between God and Satan and his henchmen not just generically through “the human species” but through Jesus Christ in human flesh, who has reconciled all things and through him Satan and his dominions have been stripped and rendered powerless, Satan being condemned. (Only an idiot would disagree).
3. God did not punish His Son and pretend it was us. “He became sin” (is perverted by people such as LoverComplete into “he was punished for our sins”)…and ignore hundreds of verses like this: Isaiah 13:11 … “I will punish the world for its evil, the wicked for their sins.” But what does LoveComplete care about plain spoken verses in the bible? (time for the non responsive dead fish look when busted yet again).
4. Isaiah 53 and the Greek preposition “dia” found more than once: “He was bruised THROUGH (or by means of) OUR lawlessness” (That is the prophet speaking of the Jewishpeople and those involved in the injustice committed against Christ….NOT EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD. He was not PIERCED THROUGH BY GOD and God did not BRUISE Him. The phrase “We esteemed Him stricken” (was not about all humanity) and it was speaking of what those Jews at the TIME of His crucifixion WERE IGNORANTLY THINKING…THEY WERE WRONG. To suggest that they were not ignorant when they “esteemed Him stricken”…suggests that the pharisees, crowds, Romans…knew that He was being stricken by God…and “believed in the penal substitution doctrine”…WHICH IS INSANE. (being in ignorance: “Father do not hold this against them for they are ignorant”)
5. salvation is not from “punishment” you idiot…it is from being caused to fall short (hamartia). That is why there is no verse on that in the entire bible. (she has to eisegesis it in there).
6. Some who do not hold our doctrines are not deceived, THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING.

7. These are MY DOCTRINES found no where else. The forensic view, which is the NCIS or deistic view…is that acquiring the truth is limited to searching for fragments of parchments, pouring over manuscript variants, archeology, studying scads of theologians from the dark ages…reveals that they are DISCONNECTED FROM GOD AND THE HOLY SPIRIT HAS NOTHING TO SAY. I have had no need to exegete, studying early christian writings, or modern day pastors…Because God taught me and has led me into all truth. My doctrines I got from no other man. The Holy Spirit does not tell one man one thing, then another man a completely different and contradictory thing. THOUSANDS OF “EMINENT THEOLOGIANS” FOR CENTURIES WHO CLAIM THEY HAVE SOUGHT GOD ALL OF THEIR LIVES….YET ALL HAVE DIFFERENT DOCTRINES…THE HOLY SPIRIT AINT BEEN TELLIN 1,000 DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE TRUTH. MANY, MANY ARE LYING AND HAVE BEEN LYING ABOUT SEEKING GOD. I INDICT ALL!I am 1 John 2:27 FULFILLED. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

As for the legal dispute between God and the rebellious angels. If two parties disagree (both knowing the real truth of the matter, but one party not willing to admit it:being satan), both parties are calling each other liars. Satan is the author of all lies and he sure doesn’t tell the truth about God. He lied to Isha (Eve)…and it doesn’t take a genius to see that a court was held concerning the servant Job…where Satan accused God of witness bribery and witness intimidation. When you have God the Judge, judgments, indictments, justice, penalties, witnesses, testimonies and so forth…you have a court and a legal process through which all things and beings are adjudicated. Jesus Christ was cross examined by Satan the adversary (which is a legal term for opposing attorney), we have a LEGAL ADVOCATE (some of us that is), Jesus Christ the righteous.

(Was the angelic criminal trial concluded and Satan condemned through the humanity and crucifixion of Christ? You be the judge. Do you go by what words mean as they are found in the non-religious dictionary? LOVECOMPLETE DOESN’T)

John 16:11-12 … go to the Father and you no longer see Me; and concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.
John 12:31-32 … The time for judging this world has come, when Satan, the ruler of this world, will be cast out. … “This world is being judged now. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”
Colossians 2:15 … And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
(Gee, it sure sounds like it, even to the layman, but not to the lamo who denied it)

http://www.principledlegalstandard.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/fbscreenshot.jpg
LoveComplete assuced us of fake twitter accounts…when lovecomplete is the one who made a fake twitter account @HolySpiritheart. which account was deleted by her (Say Hi to @PearlyWhiter and S. F. White). Also a fake facebook account was created 6/27/2016 named “Charity Holmes” and we were harassed by her on the same day it was created. When we busted YOU on it, you deleted the FB account. What we have here is a serial liar and an internet stalker, with an obsession. our first contact with this stalker (under her phony twitter handle) was on twitter…our kindle version was on sale for 2 and change…she purchased the kindle version for the express purposes of doing a negative review because of our past dealings with her. (She has more than one review on here and thinks we don’t know it). If you will notice all of the 1 star reviews are by the same type of overly severe religious extremists as are accurately described in our book. It is 5 stars or 1 with nothing in between. So these mentally unstable and vicious satanically religious people doing these 1 star reviews and harassment on the net should tell you the kind of people you will be dealing with, as they come up to you out of the blue…IF YOU HOLD AND SPEAK THE SAME TESTIMONY THAT WE HAVE. (write a book advocating penal substitution and all you will get is a yawn from such as those)…But if you want to be hated for His name sake COME JOIN US! 🙂

LoveComplete says:

(the first review was deleted because of being caught repeatedly bearing false witness and misquoting our book. first review is cached right here http://www.principledlegalstandard.org/amazon-book-review-by-liar/ )
******************************************************************************
I deleted it because S. Tellez stated that Amazon.com was not a place for a debate, and because he requested that I review the book based on the merits of the book, not your and my personal interactions. I prayerfully considered, and posted a new review.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 28, 2016 10:41:55 AM PDT

LoveComplete says:

 1. The name “Jesus Christ” is found 500 times just in rhe first half of the book, and that is not including “Son of God”, God the Son” etc. The bible mentions “hell”, “hades” much more than it mentions “heaven”…therefore using your irrational illogic…the bible itself must be a false book.

*****************************************************************************
The name, Jesus Christ is found 42 times in the entire book, not 500
1 time in Chapter 7
1 time in Chapter 8
3 times in Chapter 10
1 time in Chapter 12
1 time in Chapter 15
1 time in Chapter 19
1 time in Chapter 22
2 times in Chapter 29
2 times in Chapter 32
3 times in Chapter 33
1 time in Chapter 34
2 times in Chapter 36
2 times in Chapter 37
2 times in Chapter 39
1 time in Chapter 40
1 time in Chapter 42
2 times in Chapter 44
2 times in Chapter 47
4 times in Chapter 48
3 times in Chapter 51
1 time in Chapter 54
2 times in Chapter 55
1 time in Chapter 57
and once in Chapter 59

Son of God is only referenced 45 times…God the Son, is only referenced 9 times in your book, nowhere near the amount of times you reference satan, and speculate his nature with great emphasis as to satan’s intelligence, personality, and the ‘perfectly satanic’ [Chapter 9]

Hell is mentioned 41 times in the Bible, directly, and Heaven is referenced 176 times, in the KJV of the Bible. Either you are mistaken about your own book, and the Bible, or intentionally fabricating…I dare not accuse that I know which.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 28, 2016 10:57:50 AM PDT

Timothy Alleman says:

Do you think people will buy your insane formula that the number of times a name is mentioned determines whether an argument or doctrine has merits or the lackthereof? YOU’RE NUTZ! You are a loon…but that’s ok everybody can see how crazy you think. 🙂 rave on, lunatic.

S. Tellez says:

This is hilariously ridiculous. Here are the actual numbers if that’s what someone wants go by lol

Jesus 51 times
Christ 847
God 3840
Holy Spirit 34
Son of God 45
The Son 193
The Father 152
Satan 1484

Timothy Alleman says:

you are a loon and to prove that what i say is true…i will use your word count standard for truth (thats it folks, check and mate) jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ jesus christ

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

  Subscribe  
Notify of