XPost: alt.abortion, alt.abortion.inequity, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.support.abortion, talk.abortion   
   From: nachobiznez@all.com   
      
   "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   news:7943568.0405172255.7a7f1f2f@posting.google.com...   
   > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   news:...   
   > > "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   > > news:7943568.0405170736.5c168cb1@posting.google.com...   
   > > > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   > >  news:...   
   > > > > "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   > > > > news:7943568.0405152216.5a44bf3d@posting.google.com...   
   > > > > > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   > >  news:...   
   > > > > > > "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   > > > > > > news:7943568.0405142227.5be8cd31@posting.google.com...   
   > > > > > > > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   > >  news:...   
   > > > > > > > > "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in message   
   > > > > > > > > news:7943568.0405132223.5b2dd4c8@posting.google.com...   
   > > > > > > > > > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   > >  news:...   
   > > > > > > > > > > "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in   
   message   
   > > > > > > > > > > news:7943568.0405111824.750bb117@posting.google.com...   
   > > > > > > > > > > > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   > >  news:...   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > "Robert B. Winn"  wrote in   
   > >  message   
   > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   news:7943568.0405110601.69db8795@posting.google.com...   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > "MrD"  wrote in message   
   > >  news:...   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Light Templar"  > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In every post you make.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Blithering idiots do not pretend that they   
   > >  cannot   
   > >  tell   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what a child is?  Thank you for noticing.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I gave you the professional definition of what   
   a   
   > >  child   
   > >  is,   
   > > > > > > > >  from a   
   > > > > > > > >  peer   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reviewed medical publication.  There is   
   nothing to   
   > >  pretend,   
   > > > > > > > >  liar   
   > > > > > > > >  Robert.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Winn has to pretend he doesn't know what a child   
   is,   
   > >  else   
   > > > > > >  his   
   > > > > > >  God is   
   > > > > > > > > > >  a   
   > > > > > > > > > >  child   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > killer and the people he persecutes aren't.   
   Puts   
   > >  him in   
   > >  a   
   > > > > > >  nasty   
   > > > > > >  position   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that he doesn't want to realize is actually the   
   > >  reality   
   > >  of   
   > > > > > >  the   
   > > > > > >  situation.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't have to pretend anything.  I am not   
   killing   
   > >  any   
   > >  children.   
   > > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > You pretend to not know what a child is.  You even   
   > >  misquote   
   > > > >  the   
   > > > >  scriptures   
   > > > > > > > > > > > > in an attempt to justify your accusations of others.   
   > > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > > No, I do not misquote scriptures.  For instance, we   
   have   
   > >  Luke   
   > > > >  2:5   
   > > > >  To   
   > > > > > > > > > > > be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with   
   > >  child.   
   > > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > > Which is a misrepresentation of the translation 'being   
   great   
   > > > >  with   
   > > > >  child.'   
   > > > > > > > > > > You already knew that, though, so you are bearing false   
   > >  witness.   
   > > > > > > > > > > Again.   
   > > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > > Well, you might want to discuss the translation with Luke   
   > >  after   
   > >  the   
   > > > > > > > > > resurrection.  My belief is that Luke would approve the   
   way it   
   > >  was   
   > > > > > > > > > translated.   
   > > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > > If we have to wait for the resurrection, then I think it is   
   only   
   > > > >  fair   
   > > > >  that   
   > > > > > > > > you refrain from using that personal translation until after   
   the   
   > > > > > > > > resurrection when you have cleared it with 'Luke'.  You will   
   be   
   > >  surprised to   
   > > > > > > > > find out that you might not be speaking with Luke, however.   
   You   
   > > > >  really   
   > > > >  seem   
   > > > > > > > > to have no idea who actually wrote the scriptures.  Someone   
   > >  today   
   > >  could   
   > > > > > > > > write the Gospel according to Elvis and state that he'd   
   actually   
   > > > >  heard   
   > > > >  these   
   > > > > > > > > things from Elvis, but since Elvis is dead we couldn't   
   actually   
   > > > >  confirm   
   > > > >  any   
   > > > > > > > > of it.   
   > > > > > > > > Elvis was resurrected, according to the Gospel of Elvis.   
   > > > > > > > > I'm sure you believe that too.   
   > > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > > No, I do not believe Elvis has been resurrected yet.   
   > > > > > >   
   > > > > > > I do not believe Jesus has been resurrected, yet, either.   
   > > > > > > I don't believe he ever will.  I've seen no reason to believe   
   so.   
   > > > > > > Have you?   
   > > > > >   
   > > > > > I have no doubt that he is resurrected.   
   > > > >   
   > > > > And apparently no reason.   
   > > >   
   > > > The reason he was resurrected was so that other people could be   
   > > resurrected.   
   > >   
   > > Once again you misunderstand the context.  It was earlier stated that   
   you   
   > > had no reason to believe in the resurrection.  You have either mistaken   
   the   
   > > context of that or you are dishonestly changing the context to state the   
   > > reason for the fabled resurrection, rather than a reason to believe in   
   the   
   > > fabled resurrection.   
   > > Why do you do this?   
   >   
   > Why do I do what?  Have you enacted a decree of some kind that no one   
   > is to speak of the resurrection of Jesus Christ?   
      
   You've given me another example of what I am asking about.  Why do you   
   either mistake the context of the discussion or dishonestly change the   
   context to state something other than what was being discussed?   
   I certainly haven't decreed no one should speak of the resurrection of   
   Jesus, it was what I was asking you to give a reason for believing.  You   
   avoid my question by creating a false situation.  Why?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)