Not exact matches
You called me out as being disingenuous when I said «that as time goes on however, I'm finding things that are helping to disprove things previously held as fact
among Christians», so I have provided you an example that not only wasn't it a disingenuous statement, but that I've done my homework, on both sides of the
argument, and came up with something that no one has been able to give me a response with even either the slightest chance of being possible, or falling back to the
old status qua of «mysterious ways» and «having faith».
Unlike
old - time liberals who busied themselves with finding «contradictions» in the Bible, and unlike fundamentalists who busied themselves with trying to explain away those «contradictions», these Bible readers see a series of robust
arguments among the many voices of scripture.
Oh, the
old line, guns don't kill... There is no appropriate application, nor any
argument, for having rapid reloading ultra rapid firing guns in cities
among the general populace.
Money and finance is the biggest cause for
arguments among American couples, so get your first date off on the right note and try not to squabble about whose picking up the dinner bill, sometimes it's just easier for the man to pay - «call me
old fashion».
But when scientists resolved a problem the deniers fastened on a newer one, while the
old disproved
arguments stubbornly lived on
among the Web's countless niches.
Among other
arguments, it is suggested that this body of historical case law has no persuasive value and, even if relevant to a litigant's issue, is too
old to matter.