[George W. Bush]

Serious question...are you also zadok; reason you answered the question???

No. I was interested in the remarks and butted in. I have no alternate identities. My GWB is notorious well-established.

What do you know of the new RLC forum? Who's the RLC?

Is this like "What's the frequency, Kenneth?". I don't know anything about the RLC.

I just don't have any questions anymore, GW. When the "I" fell, it was obvious that the "U" was untenable.

Translation: you know you have no rational answers and have therefore decided to declare victory and run away.

[xzins]

Serious question...are you also zadok; reason you answered the question??? No. I was interested in the remarks and butted in. I have no alternate identities. My GWB is notorious well-established. What do you know of the new RLC forum? Who's the RLC? Is this like "What's the frequency, Kenneth?". I don't know anything about the RLC. I just don't have any questions anymore, GW. When the "I" fell, it was obvious that the "U" was untenable. Translation: you know you have no rational answers and have therefore decided to declare victory and run away.

Seriously, GW. The "I" is untenable. The truth cannot include both a biblical "U" and a biblical "R." In that case you'd have a person chosen to be saved who had the ability to resist. That would equal persons decreed to be in heaven who on being born then rejected/resisted salvation. You would have unbelievers in heaven. It's untenable.

All along the key has been the "I." I'm surprised I didn't see it sooner.

The "L" is also important. All unlimited atonement scriptural support is additionally support for "R" instead of "I."