 | | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) Agreed-- however, I think you missed my original point anyway-- my point wasn't that Christ DOESN'T have significance any more but that as a physical event spread by word of mouth (physical) and the bible (also physical) Christ is finite. (...) (24 years ago, 17-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Polyamory
|
|
(...) Funny, I don't recall you answering this question before. I *do* recall you dodging it, though... Provide a cite to where you provided a cite, then... ++Lar (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Polyamory
|
|
Scott: (...) You really are a bit dense sometimes, Scott... Quoting myself in the *very paragraph* you're supposedly "responding" to.. (...) Is that so hard to understand? In shorter sentences: Public (government funded) no. Private yes. Like I've (...) (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) <snipped long references about history of Christmas> My point was that Christ's significance is not limited to what He said and did 2000 years ago, but also who He IS - today - present tense - as in alive and risen from the dead. The history (...) (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) I'm not Catholic, but I've generally found myself in agreement with all the Pope's previous statements. There must be some kind of mistake - I just can't see him saying something clearly un-Biblical like that. SRC (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
