|
1 Cor 7 is posed as a question,
Iz--perhaps as food for thought in your case so you can ask yer husband
about it <rof>...whewy..(perhaps i should spare you the rof till i'm
sure you undertstand it..shall i remind myself to K.I.S.S.??
<x666!>)
--
FTR, Did you know that DaveH; et.al.
relatives, etc. who don't stick there weazily heads out of their holy TT hole no
more due to getting whacked, sorta like CP recently whacked DaveH again
(and rightly so!); use/s v29, below, to argue that the Ap Paul assumes the
validity of polygamy even! while the Ap Paul is clearly!
desiring to 'spare' people from the troubles of marriage
btw, the word 'marry', below and in KJ
English (too, relative to NT Greek sources behind both the NIV and KJV) contains
the biblical premise/s: 'only once and exclusively (till death)', not the
hellish 'multiple and inclusively (whenever)'; and, partic with respect to 'a
woman', not 'numerous women'
..so, Iz..(K'ing. I. S. S.) (for me,
too:) How does MMC relate to MMM? Don't you often wonder..what's your view?
e.g., How much female related Private Property does God allow a
man??
On Thu, 29 May 2003 20:10:06 -0500 "ShieldsFamily" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
gary ottoson * http://ozg2003.blogspot.com |
- RE: [TruthTalk] 2Iz: MMC/PP?/ ttxpress
- RE: [TruthTalk] 2Iz: MMC/PP?/ ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] 2Iz: MMC/PP?/ Dave
- Re: [TruthTalk] 2Iz: MMC/PP?/ Charles Perry Locke

