kilroy@mimsy.umd.edu (Nancy's Sweetie) (03/04/90)
In article <Mar.1.02.55.37.1990.28361@athos.rutgers.edu>, Robert Hale quotes this text: > >>2. Some statements were for a particular place and time and group of > >> people, and were not intended to be universalized. > > > >This is a very convenient, and apparently logical, way to attempt to > >eliminate those teachings which a given person does not like. There is, > >however, absolutely no Scriptural foundation for making a claim of this > >nature. and places this attribution at the top: In article <Feb.22.03.34.10.1990.5730@athos.rutgers.edu>, brandy@mimsy.umd.edu (Brandy R. Provine) writes: Just to be clear, the triple-widget text was written by someone who's name we've forgotten, and the double-widget text was written by Dave Mielke. The WonderDog's text was deleted, and comprised difficulties he saw with Mr. Mielke's assertion. Let's be careful with those widgets! (Brandy probably should have trimmed more carefully, but that's just 20-50 hindsight.) kilroy@cs.umd.edu Darren F. Provine ...uunet!mimsy!kilroy "Anyone whose dog writes netnews postings has no right to complain about a friend who claims to be an elf." -- Charles Hedrick [I'll try to do better. I normally reorganize quotations so the authorship is clear, but I didn't have time that night. Of course it would help if people doing the postings would do it for themselves. The automatic followup command almost always generates misleading widgets when there's more than one level of quotation. --clh]