Posted on 02/06/2004 1:38:26 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg
You deserve a day off but not for the reason given by the RM.
You got to be kidding, right?
It is widely held amongst those in the industry that Joseph Smith and Mohamed were parnoid schizophrenics and obessive-compulsives. When given a little bit of encouragement by a few friends and followers the results are a superiority complex along with proclivities towards sexual perversions.
Do you think it is wise or healthy to encourage a freeper who exhibits the traits of parnoid schizophrenia?
Dude, don't encourage the obessive-compulsive to continue in their destructive behavior.
op,
The key is under the mat. You'll find a Geneva Bible on the bedside table. You might check under the mattress to make sure Polycarp didn't slip a rosary under there on his recent stay.
Blessings,
drstevej
***Unless there's been a change in the contract, the Purgatory Suite's cable service still has The Weather Channel blocked.***
LOL!!!
Also there is a Servetus filter on the History Channel.
In light of your present "experiential cognitive dissonance", do you think that you might want to possibly modify your latest evaluation of the present situation?
As for the Calvin/Servetus discussion, I'm willing to give Calvin the benefit of the doubt. It was a different time, and in that day Servetus was executed, not murdered. I believe there's a distinction.
What bugs me more is why Calvin agreed Servetus should be executed - because he (Servetus) would endanger other souls...That seems a bit odd coming from the guy who put the "P" in TULIP...Or maybe it's "TULIp"?
Well, bro, enjoy your stay in the time share. I left diet coke in the mini-fridge; DrSteve or Polycarp may have left you something stronger. The TV is dismal...
You make a good point about the P in tulip.
What exactly is the danger if "no man can snatch them out of my hands" means "P?"
I don't like pulling one comment out of a lengthy and otherwise worthy post, but the above line is probably not exactly what OP would write about me if he'd reconsider some of our discussions.
1. It would be more accurate, at a minimum, to say that I might be "anti-calvinism," but it would not be accurate to say I'm "anti-calvinist."
2. Even that, though, is not an accurate reflection of my opinions regarding calvinism. The bottom line is that I'm simply not buying it yet. I won't go into all the details, but I'm not "anti-calvinism" any more than I'm "anti-amillennialism" or "anti-post tribulation rapturism" or "anti-osas....." I consider calvinists (to include hypers) to be Christian.
3. I am definitely "anti-nontrinitarianism" and I'm definitely "anti-nonresurrectionism."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.