Search results

Is this date another Wikileaks revelation? If so, we can expect Mr Assange to be on the receiving end of some heavy-duty smiting which will make the Swedish allegations look like a walk in the park...

Owing to the downturn, I paid no income tax in the last tax year (in fact I got a rebate, my business was doing so badly). There was a general election earlier this year; according to some here, I should have been prevented from voting.:( [ETA - I also claimed welfare support for my family...

Agreed. The sort of purely private charity based welfare advocated by some here has been tried in the past and simply doesn't cover all the bases. Now, it may well be that government-based welfare has swung the pendulum too far the other way and needs reform/ scaling down - fine. But getting rid...

What do you mean by taxpayers? Do you mean those who may not get paid enough to pay income tax but pay GST on their purchases?

Yes, it's back to the property qualification, folks!!. I knew these guys wanted to turn the clock back, but not to the feudal system! I guess the message is: don't be poor...

I'd better start looking busy, then...

David Cameron, our Prime Minister, has basically gone on record as saying that the cuts here amount to his political suicide note but he wants to put the interests of the country before his own political career and that of the Conservative Party. I think he's doing himself down - I think the...

Interesting. The main steps the government is taking here is: Defence - scrapping one aircraft carrier Education - scrapping the schools building programme. This means that replacement of worn-out buildings and other educational infrastructure will be indefintely postponed. Also, they are...

...now they're in control of the House? There was a lot of rhetoric in the run-up to the elections about cutting (of which I approve) government spending but let's get specific now: how much and from which budget? We're having the same debate over here in the UK so would be interesting to see...

I'm saying that Dr Walter's exegesis of it is ahistorical

Because it is ahistorical and an opinion of man.

Yes, but the one thing you haven't yet accepted is that you are as capable of error as the next man in reaching your interpretation. So, why should we accept you interpretation as being true?

I don't reject Isaiah 8:20 either, just your interpretation of it, which effectively does reject everything subsequent to it. You just haven't really thought through the implications of your interpretation and so I was just trying to help you out.

Reject in what way, exactly? [ETA - that's a red herring, since I don't reject Scripture after Isaiah 8:20, which your thesis apparently does.]

Not at all! Except that the big flaw in your argument is that not even the whole OT exised in Isaiah's day: to use Isaiah 8:20 as a proof text for discarding anything not found in Scripture is to discard the rest of the OT and all of the NT, since neither of those existed in Isaiah's time...

Funny then how Paul included 'my memo' then but not 'yours'... How odd!

I guess Paul and Timothy didn't get your memo, then.

Indeed....

Neither of the above are good proof texts for your arguments: the former excludes all the NT and the latter most of it. I suggest you start over...

And your evidence for this conjecture is...?