This is true, Adam, but you are riding the fence.  Obviously the
content of the article (thread) is about scripture, which as we all
know is founded upon a belief, a concept, therefore it would follow
that any and all posts would address that concept.
I understand that you are 'not' presenting a position which posits the
existence of God, a God or any Deity, but simply presents questions
relating to the concept of such an existence.  However, still and
without any veering, it is still a thread based upon a conceptual
God.  A discussion in it's most simplistic form regarding "scripture"
is indeed a discussion of a conceptual deity.

On Sep 9, 10:13 pm, Adam <[email protected]> wrote:
> What I wrote was not intended to be a proof of the existence of God or
> of the truth of the Bible. It was just a summary of the things that I
> had discovered through extensive reading of the scriptures. So when
> some of you attacked the concept of God rather than the content of the
> article I did not feel obliged to defend that concept. Others can do
> that more effectively than I.
> Adam.
>
> On Sep 9, 7:34 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I guess Adam may have been a boxer in a past life, a quick jab in and
> > then back out agian.
>
> > On 5 Sep, 05:38, Adam <[email protected]> wrote:
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to