In a message dated 2/8/2003 4:05:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, furuli AT online.no writes:Return-Path: <Polycarp66 AT aol.com>
It is not true that "This version (what I write in the paragraph
below) of the name of God is not supported by scholars". Please take
a look at Buchanan G. W. (1988). "Some unfinished business with the
Dead Sea Scrolls", Revue de Qumran, 13:49-52. Buchanan draws about
the same conclusions that I do in the paragraph below. But would you
say that Buchanan is not a scholar?
You're a real "Johnny One-note" aren't you? Do you have any other interests? I frankly think that this obsession with the tetragrammaton goes beyond your Arian heresy and heads straight for paganism. It's as though you think that waving the magic wand of the tetragrammaton over things is going make a big difference. This is an attempt at the practice of magic, not faith.
gfsomsel
From Polycarp66 AT aol.com Sat Feb 8 16:48:25 2003
Two times now, you have made an attack on me and on a particular faith that you ascribe to me. Please stop that, and focus your attention on the subject and not on the person.
From scarlson AT mindspring.com Sat Feb 8 17:20:26 2003Return-Path: <scarlson AT mindspring.com>
From osbo AT hn.ozemail.com.au Sat Feb 8 18:13:31 2003Return-Path: <osbo AT hn.ozemail.com.au>
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.