Isn't misdirection such a fantastic tool for reframing the terms of a debate?
Viva la nuevo consensus-steering techniques!
And it's SO contemporary too! Just a little bit earlier this morning I listened to an interview on Fox "News", in which some effendi (whose name I forget) was asked a fairly straighforward question regarding the new "chipped" passports about to be issued -- and required for an increasing number of "travel applications", to coin a phrase. The question was simple. He was asked if the electronic passports can be used to track people's movements. They can, of course. It's been covered quite a bit; the passports can be "read" from a distance, by anyone with a reader, and apparently it's not too hard to get a reader. But the question pertained to government tracking of citizen movements.
The effendi was quite skilled in the art. He immediately leapt into a reply (I can't in good conscience call it an "answer"), explaining what information was in the chips, how important passports were, and nothing to worry about anyway, since it's only the government who'll be reading them. By the time he was done, the questioner (E.D. Hill) had apparently forgotten her own question (the goal of this maneuver!), and moved on, as if he had answered her question. He didn't. He gave a rambling dissertation of passport technology (watered down to the preeskool level), artfully evading the actual question.
We see this Delphiesque technique so much, that upon reflection, I guess I'm not really that impressed with the efforts in this context. It's kind of like walking through a gravel field, and spotting something on the ground. "Look! Look what I found! I found a pebble! Wow!"
So, to get back to the point -- lost for the moment in your exquisitely irrelevant counter, "There is such a thing as being 'unequally yoked with unbelievers,' and I do believe that Master Rick has mastered it."
If I knew what you were talking about I might be able to respond, but carry on with whatever. You made the comment, "There is such a thing as being "unequally yoked with unbelievers," and I do believe that Master Rick has mastered it". I simply ask the question, "when did the disciples, the twelve and the seventy, become "believers"?"
Matt. 9:10-13, "And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners? But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."