Skip to comments.
Good Girls Go Bad, for a Day
new york times ^
| 10/19/06
| STEPHANIE ROSENBLOOM
Posted on 10/19/2006 7:17:27 PM PDT by mathprof
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
To: patton
That does not make us all saints. The Bible teaches that there are only "saints" (ones sanctified by the blood of Christ) and those unrepentant sinners who will suffer eternal separation from God and His Saints in Hell.
I was speaking of saints and their child raising.
21
posted on
10/19/2006 7:46:34 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: unspun
" The Bible teaches "
Which translation of which books?
I watched an old scholar once attend a biblical diatribe at MSU - he listened to the lecture for a while, then called BS. "I have a copy, in the original..."
"That word does not mean what you think it means..."
Funny, how words change things.
Let the little kids have fun.
22
posted on
10/19/2006 8:01:42 PM PDT
by
patton
(Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
To: patton
The Bible is consistent. It doesn't not contradict itself. It doesn't say don't dress up in a costume and go trick-or-treating. It does say not to join in the world's celebration of sin, where it does.
23
posted on
10/19/2006 8:20:20 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: unspun
Again I ask, " Which translation of which books?"
Show me an original Bible.
24
posted on
10/19/2006 8:24:50 PM PDT
by
patton
(Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
To: patton
Again I ask, " Which translation of which books?" Show me an original Bible.Wherever they are found, the earliest known manuscripts of each Book of the Bible are notoriously consistent, one to the other.
25
posted on
10/19/2006 8:27:14 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: unspun
Do you include the Book of Judas in your assessment?
It makes history, and the most supressed book ever. Banned for 1800 years, the only existing copy was then debated for 40 years, on whether it should be burned, or released.
Look, if you favour the King James, and believe it to be the Word of G_D, I wish you well - go with that. It will help you in this life, and save you in the next, I hope.
But about a million other versions exist, all of which contradict that one - maybe G_D left the whole thing an open question, and wants people to think.
26
posted on
10/19/2006 8:35:12 PM PDT
by
patton
(Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
To: patton
Do you include the Book of Judas in your assessment? Wheoew! I smell very old red herring!
Let me think. No.
The New Testament Canon was settled way back at the time of Augustine. I could like to it, but you could look it up, for yourself.
That which was found, by rational analysis, prayer and Christian comit, to be the Canon contains no self-contradiction. That was one of the tests, of course, the words of Christ, Himself leading the informed heart and mind.
27
posted on
10/19/2006 8:43:25 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: patton
like = link
28
posted on
10/19/2006 8:43:53 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: patton
comit = comity
Better hit the sack.
29
posted on
10/19/2006 8:44:30 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: unspun
Goodnight, I am off to bed.
Please consider that your argument is circular, and I will respond on the morrow.
"The book is consistent, because everything inconsistent was burned. That proves its literal truth."
30
posted on
10/19/2006 8:53:31 PM PDT
by
patton
(Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
To: patton
"The book is consistent, because everything inconsistent was burned. That proves its literal truth." For your morning, since I may not be here: think of a circular orbit around what is actual.
Here's a riddle for you: why do counterfeits exist?
Also, think of maintaining consistency with the words of actual participants and witnesses. (That will help in your Constitutional interpretation, as well.)
31
posted on
10/19/2006 8:58:38 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: patton
"The book is consistent, because everything inconsistent was burned. That proves its literal truth." Oh, and the other documents are widely available, to this day. No ashes, only paper, vellum, and competing data.
32
posted on
10/19/2006 9:00:20 PM PDT
by
unspun
(What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
To: mathprof; MeekOneGOP; Conspiracy Guy; DocRock; King Prout; SandyInSeattle; Darksheare; OSHA; ...
There are pics. You need another reason?
To: Slings and Arrows
Sure. I'd just love to get into an irrelevant theological debate on a thread with pics of women in lingerie.
34
posted on
10/19/2006 10:22:51 PM PDT
by
pcottraux
(It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
To: snarks_when_bored
Saw your name and just had to troll you.
Ready...?
Which of those costumes would you most like to see Lisa Randall dressed in?
Full Disclosure: No fair saying "I'd like to see her *out* of them" ;-)
Cheers!
To: pcottraux
Sure. I'd just love to get into an irrelevant theological debate on a thread with pics of women in lingerie. You could discuss Heavenly Bodies ;-)
Bad...bad kitty!
Cheers!
To: grey_whiskers
37
posted on
10/19/2006 10:34:41 PM PDT
by
pcottraux
(It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
To: pcottraux
Sure. I'd just love to get into an irrelevant theological debate on a thread with pics of women in lingerie. I'm still trying to figure out why Santa and the cross are both symbols of Christmas, but a crucifed Santa just ticks people off.
To: grey_whiskers
I'm kinda partial to that ref costume. It suggests all sorts of stuff, you know...the blowing of whistles, going offsides, backfield in motion (sure there's a penalty for that, but only
after the, uh, infraction), illegal use of the hands, ... (there's a million of 'em).
Ah, Lisa, penalize me...please!
To: mathprof
Slut sells! Thank you MTV...
40
posted on
10/20/2006 12:49:39 AM PDT
by
endthematrix
(“Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-64 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson