|
|
 | | Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
|
| (...) I am still working on a full reply to (URL) your post>, but let me inject here briefly. That there are 4 Gospels does not add any form of credibility to the veracity of the Gospel (Good News) to most Christians, and certainly not me. In fact, (...) (21 years ago, 15-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
|
| (...) Well, now I'm confused. Granted, the four magi Dave, Todd, Tim, and Jake are four LUGNET sources, but to LUGNET-savvy people they represent four discrete voices. However, to a non-LUGNET person, all four are subsumed under LUGNET and therefore (...) (21 years ago, 15-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
|
| (...) I'm saying that your examples are the exact same as the model you are criticizing. You cite three supporting people (from a single source: Lugnet) as an example of a more believable evidence, and I'll I am doing is pointing out that that is (...) (21 years ago, 15-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Terrorists hate freedom
|
| (...) Well, the public can rely on perfectly secure and transparent digital voting systems, as well as an accurately representative and flexible electoral college, just like we enjoy here in the States. Dave! (21 years ago, 15-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
|
| (...) Maybe at this point I need to fall on my sword and admit that I don't understand quite what you're getting at. What is the flaw, exactly, in the original example? Let me try again, in the spirit of redundancy: Within a single framework, three (...) (21 years ago, 15-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
