so have I gabby Allan On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:10 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Ah, I happen to be one of the poor misguided sheep who was being > taught to treat a literary oeuvre as such, a literary oeuvre. > > On 11 Sep., 03:28, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oh, I think you know us well enough, Molly. ;) > > > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > I don't think anyone here subscribes to the literal interpretation of > > > the bible that you present here, Adam. But, I can only speak for > > > myself with certainty. > > > > > On Sep 10, 5:27 pm, Adam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > OK. If the Bible is true, then I think I have given a good summary of > > > > how things are. > > > > If not, then it doesn't matter anyway. I posted this same article on > > > > alt.bible.prophecy > > > > and got only one reply, and that was abusive. And they are supposed > to > > > > believ in God!! > > > > Adam. > > > > > > On Sep 10, 2:30 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > 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:- Hide > quoted > > > text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > -- ( ) I_D Allan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
