Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Meanings of Words
Message-ID: <258@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 11-Nov-84 22:19:46 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.258
Posted: Sun Nov 11 22:19:46 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Nov-84 08:19:50 EST
References: <606@watdcsu.UUCP> <294@qantel.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J.
Lines: 12

> The problem with these arguments is that you are trying to make man's 
> definition of these words be the standard for your discussion.  In my system
> the standards of these words are much higher that a human standard.
>   [KEN NICHOLS in response to David Canzi's followup]

Ken's "higher standard" is nothing more than his own assumptions and
presumptions about what he feels a deity should be like.  Nothing more.
(Since Ken has offered to answer all points/questions, I hope he will have
a response to this.)
-- 
Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen.
					Rich Rosen    pyuxd!rlr