To: MHGinTN; af_vet_1981
I’m sure af vet forgot that I corrected my mistake of saying Acts 29 when I should have said Acts 28...so when he states that I said Acts 29 you of course would not agree with me. DUH...:) SURELY he meant no harm...
271 posted on
05/24/2015 4:27:21 PM PDT by
smvoice
(I would explain it better, but I only know a few words...)
To: smvoice
Of course he meant no harm. I was just trying to lighten up the discussion with a little oblique humor.
272 posted on
05/24/2015 4:36:18 PM PDT by
MHGinTN
(Is it really all relative, Mister Einstein?)
To: smvoice; MHGinTN
I’m sure af vet forgot that I corrected my mistake of saying Acts 29 when I should have said Acts 28...so when he states that I said Acts 29 you of course would not agree with me. DUH...:) SURELY he meant no harm... I did not forget. I assumed he allowed for your reference error and wanted to know if he agreed with your error of substance when you wrote that " "Israel is blinded and set aside in Acts 29"[edit: should be 28]
The error of substance is more troubling than the error of reference, capitalization, mind reading, etc.
283 posted on
05/24/2015 7:11:31 PM PDT by
af_vet_1981
(The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson