Re: Please pray for the troubled soul of dear convicted neighbor Kenneth Doyle. - OS2

This is a discussion on Re: Please pray for the troubled soul of dear convicted neighbor Kenneth Doyle. - OS2 ; ah wrote: >Art Deco wrote: >> Archie Leach wrote: >> >>>Phil Kyle wrote: >>> >>>>Art Deco wrote in >>>>news:301120071809563059%erfc@caballista.org: >>>> >>>>> Phil Kyle wrote: >>>>>>Archie Leach wrote in >>>>>>news:aiqok3lddjmehv76oehlsmld94m0rh7a3k@4ax.com: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>ah wrote in >>>>>>>>news:474a3b42$0$68460$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.oct anews.com: ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 22 of 22

Thread: Re: Please pray for the troubled soul of dear convicted neighbor Kenneth Doyle.

  1. Re: Please pray for the troubled soul of dear convicted neighbor Kenneth Doyle.

    ah wrote:
    >Art Deco wrote:
    >> Archie Leach wrote:
    >>
    >>>Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Art Deco wrote in
    >>>>news:301120071809563059%erfc@caballista.org:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>Archie Leach wrote in
    >>>>>>news:aiqok3lddjmehv76oehlsmld94m0rh7a3k@4ax.com:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>ah wrote in
    >>>>>>>>news:474a3b42$0$68460$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.oct anews.com:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Art Deco wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>Art Deco wrote in
    >>>>>>>>>>>news:241120071917422070%erfc@caballista.org:
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>Art Deco wrote in
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>news:241120071144441342%erfc@caballista.org:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ah wrote in
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>news:47428643$0$90412$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.oct anews.com:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Art Deco wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Archie Leach wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>cary@afone.as.arizona.edu (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In article
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><1194464004.552080.181760@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> writes:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > convicted neighbocr Kenneth Doyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > convicted neighbor Kenneth Doyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> Pastor Frank wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > convicted neighbor "Zen Cohen"
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> "Dubh Ghall"
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>wrote: >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>> BTW, bible quotes are not
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >evidence.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> I'm right there with you, Dubh, but
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >I > >> think bible
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>quotes are indeed
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> evidence of a sort -- but not very
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> credible evidence at
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>all.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > The Bible is not evidence to
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > atheists
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > only because
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>atheists don't
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > have a
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > similar reference for their
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >disbelief
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > system. LOL
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> The bible is not evidence, because it
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> was 'falsified by
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the lying pen
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> of the scribes' (Jer. 8:8).
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > Those lying pens of the scribes stopped
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > moving long ago
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>with the advent
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > of the printing press.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > So if something is printed instead of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > written, then it is the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>truth?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > That which is printed is a faithful replica
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > of the original.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> So either Jeremiah was lying or he was
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> telling the truth.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > Jeremiah described what was happening
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > before the advent of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the printing
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > press. Thankfully, those days are now
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > over so that you can
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>be confident
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > that your copy of the Bible does not
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > contain any
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>falsification by "the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > lying pen of scribes."
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > From whom then, does it get its
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > falsehoods?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > The Bible remains truthful despite the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > history of lying pens of scribes.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> Either way, the bible contains at
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >least > one lie.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > Incorrect. The modern printing process
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > does not rely on
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the "lying pen
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > of the scribes."
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > Yes it does.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > Incorrect.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > Either that or the printed bible was
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > invented from whole
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>cloth.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > The assembly of the text of the printed
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > Bible did not happen by
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>chance
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > but by GOD. Through this assembly by GOD,
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > the errors from the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lying
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > pens of scribes have been removed.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Apparently GOD's attention wandered
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > subsequently:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Thou shalt commit adultery.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Know ye not that the unrighteous shall
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > inherit the kingdom of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>God?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Go and sin on more.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > The fool hath said in his heart there is
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > a God.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > All from various print runs.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > Not from the consensus print run.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > Would this be the consensus print run which
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > includes Third and Fourth Macabees; or the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > consensus print run which does not include those,
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > but does have Tobit, Judith, and Bel and the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > Dragon; or the consensus print run which has none
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > of these?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > No. That would be the one that is the consensus of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > all print runs.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > There is none such, as I just pointed out.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is for the discerning.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sorry, but if George says that Ben Sira belongs in the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bible, and Ralph says that it does not, then there is no
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"consensus".
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Least common set" and "consensus" are two different
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>concepts.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Is it me, or has Jesus the Chung become positively
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Th0l3nesque in selectively snipping points from posts that
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>he's too chicken to address?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yes, the parallels are more than just a few. Along
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with outright lies and snipping relevant context via his
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cowardly "digests", Wee Davie is well-known for
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post-editing attributions much like St. Chung. The main
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> differences are in the litsing behaviors -- Wee Davie is
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an obsessive poast counter and collector enemies' quotes
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who poasts his enemies lits to rec.music.classical, while
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> St. Chung prefers to use the HTML medium for displaying
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his enemies lits o' haet.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for myself, as a sockpuppet of Satan, I'm confined to
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> poasting to demon.local now.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lies!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filth!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [++comp.os.os2.advocacy, ++demon.local]
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Hi, Tholeln!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Hi, Tholeen!
    >>>>>
    >>>>Hi, Tholeen, Tholeen, Tholeeeeeeeeeeeen!
    >>>
    >>>Who are "Tholeen" and "Tholeeeeeeeeeeeen!", Kyle? No one in this
    >>>newsgroup is using those aliases, Kyle.

    >>
    >> Hi, Tholen!

    >
    >Hi, Tholen!


    Hi, Tholen!

    --
    Supreme Leader of the Brainwashed Followers of Art Deco
    Official "Usenet psychopath and born-again LLPOF minion",
    as designated by Brad Guth
    COOSN-266-06-39716

  2. Re: Please pray for the troubled soul of dear convicted neighbor Kenneth Doyle.

    Art Deco wrote:
    > ah wrote:
    >>Art Deco wrote:
    >>> Archie Leach wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>Art Deco wrote in
    >>>>>news:301120071809563059%erfc@caballista.org:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>Archie Leach wrote in
    >>>>>>>news:aiqok3lddjmehv76oehlsmld94m0rh7a3k@4ax.com:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>ah wrote in
    >>>>>>>>>news:474a3b42$0$68460$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.oct anews.com:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Art Deco wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>Art Deco wrote in
    >>>>>>>>>>>>news:241120071917422070%erfc@caballista.org:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Art Deco wrote in
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>news:241120071144441342%erfc@caballista.org:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Kyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ah wrote in
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>news:47428643$0$90412$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.oct anews.com:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Art Deco wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Archie Leach wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>cary@afone.as.arizona.edu (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In article
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><1194464004.552080.181760@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.c om>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> writes:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > convicted neighbor Cary Kittrell wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > convicted neighbocr Kenneth Doyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > convicted neighbor Kenneth Doyle wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> Pastor Frank wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > convicted neighbor "Zen Cohen"
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> "Dubh Ghall"
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>wrote: >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>> BTW, bible quotes are not
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >evidence.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> I'm right there with you, Dubh, but
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >I > >> think bible
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>quotes are indeed
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> evidence of a sort -- but not very
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> >> credible evidence at
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>all.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > The Bible is not evidence to
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > atheists
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > only because
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>atheists don't
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > have a
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > similar reference for their
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >disbelief
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> > system. LOL
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> The bible is not evidence, because it
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> was 'falsified by
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the lying pen
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> of the scribes' (Jer. 8:8).
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > Those lying pens of the scribes stopped
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > moving long ago
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>with the advent
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > of the printing press.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > So if something is printed instead of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > written, then it is the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>truth?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > That which is printed is a faithful replica
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > of the original.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> So either Jeremiah was lying or he was
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> telling the truth.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > Jeremiah described what was happening
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > before the advent of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the printing
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > press. Thankfully, those days are now
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > over so that you can
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>be confident
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > that your copy of the Bible does not
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > contain any
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>falsification by "the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > lying pen of scribes."
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > From whom then, does it get its
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > falsehoods?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > The Bible remains truthful despite the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > history of lying pens of scribes.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >> Either way, the bible contains at
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >least > one lie.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > Incorrect. The modern printing process
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > does not rely on
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the "lying pen
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > of the scribes."
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > Yes it does.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > Incorrect.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > Either that or the printed bible was
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > invented from whole
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>cloth.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > The assembly of the text of the printed
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > Bible did not happen by
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>chance
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > but by GOD. Through this assembly by GOD,
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > the errors from the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lying
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > pens of scribes have been removed.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Apparently GOD's attention wandered
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > subsequently:
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Thou shalt commit adultery.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Know ye not that the unrighteous shall
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > inherit the kingdom of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>God?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > Go and sin on more.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > The fool hath said in his heart there is
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > a God.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > All from various print runs.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > Not from the consensus print run.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > Would this be the consensus print run which
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > includes Third and Fourth Macabees; or the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > consensus print run which does not include those,
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > but does have Tobit, Judith, and Bel and the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > Dragon; or the consensus print run which has none
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > of these?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > No. That would be the one that is the consensus of
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > all print runs.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > There is none such, as I just pointed out.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is for the discerning.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sorry, but if George says that Ben Sira belongs in the
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bible, and Ralph says that it does not, then there is no
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"consensus".
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Least common set" and "consensus" are two different
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>concepts.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Is it me, or has Jesus the Chung become positively
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Th0l3nesque in selectively snipping points from posts that
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>he's too chicken to address?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yes, the parallels are more than just a few. Along
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with outright lies and snipping relevant context via his
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cowardly "digests", Wee Davie is well-known for
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post-editing attributions much like St. Chung. The main
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> differences are in the litsing behaviors -- Wee Davie is
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an obsessive poast counter and collector enemies' quotes
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who poasts his enemies lits to rec.music.classical, while
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> St. Chung prefers to use the HTML medium for displaying
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his enemies lits o' haet.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for myself, as a sockpuppet of Satan, I'm confined to
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> poasting to demon.local now.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lies!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filth!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [++comp.os.os2.advocacy, ++demon.local]
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Hi, Tholeln!
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Hi, Tholen!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Hi, Tholeen!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>Hi, Tholeen, Tholeen, Tholeeeeeeeeeeeen!
    >>>>
    >>>>Who are "Tholeen" and "Tholeeeeeeeeeeeen!", Kyle? No one in this
    >>>>newsgroup is using those aliases, Kyle.
    >>>
    >>> Hi, Tholen!

    >>
    >>Hi, Tholen!

    >
    > Hi, Tholen!


    Hi, Tholen!
    --
    ah

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2