To: blue-duncan; metmom; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; boatbums
John said quite plainly in his Gospel that he did not include everything of importance. There is no basis for claiming that the Assumption of Mary did not happen because it was not reported in the Gospels.
To: mas cerveza por favor; metmom; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums; ...
“John said quite plainly in his Gospel that he did not include everything of importance:”
No, what John said was that there were “many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book”, not that “he did not include everything of importance.” There is a difference.
To: mas cerveza por favor; blue-duncan; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; boatbums; caww; ...
John said quite plainly in his Gospel that he did not include everything of importance. There is no basis for claiming that the Assumption of Mary did not happen because it was not reported in the Gospels. Oh really? And the chapter and verse for that is???????
2,128 posted on
12/02/2011 7:34:19 PM PST by
metmom
(For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson