On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Ricardo Araoz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mmmm.... besides the real point. What Richmond vulture is telling you is > that those scriptures may be used whichever way you see fit. You want to > follow a certain path? Ok, then pick those that fit that path and forget > the rest. > What a crock of bullshit! Why don't you people take responsibility for > your actions instead of dropping it over some old books? -------------------------------------- I at least reference the segment with in the Chapter, instead of just citing a verse to make my point. Last night I started a very high brow Philosophy & Religion course and find that my Philosophy knowledge is in the null environment. I can grasp the authors point being made, I just fail to comprehend the major supporting references within the paragraphs. I have to start somewhere, and the leader is very knowledgeable and has a PhD in Philosophy so he explains these points for the 1/2 of us that don't get it yet. This is the book we are using. <http://tinyurl.com/3qkx5j> I knew I was in trouble when I read the Preface to the Latest edition. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Mimeo.com Memphis TN 901.246-0159 _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
