Robert Baty : I have answered your first question and you know I have answered it . You even recorded my answer in your own post . Robert , stop playing games...
Jack, Please try to remember to post your comments regarding our discussion of Acts 2:1 under this subject header - "Re: Gibson v. Baty; was it 12 or 120?". ...
Jack, For you and others following this discussion, I would like to address further what I consider to be your confusion and evasion regarding this important...
... In that comment, Jack is critically accusing some of his opposition of imposing an interpretation on the text that, by implication, they know is not...
While Jack's evasion of that third question relating to unstated antecedents is something to be dealt with later on, as may become necessary, I think some...
I had an interview with Jennifer Garza of the Sacramento Bee a couple of days ago. She indicated to me that she would be having a story on the FFRF IRC 107...
For those who may be having a little trouble figuring out where we are at, it might help to formalize a fundamental aspect of my approach to setting up a...
Jay Guin is a most vocal member of the church, experienced lawyer, "preacher";, elder and very popular "progressive" blogger. As reflected in the archives of...
Jack Gibson did not return this morning to submit an offering to the discussion, so I guess I'll take the opportunity to briefly review and summarize where we...
17759
Jack Gibson
u.h.g@...
Jan 2, 2010 11:45 pm
Robert Baty ; I don't know what more that I can say that I haven't already said . My point is that the context of Acts 1:15-26 establishes the antecedent of...
Jack, So, is it the case that you are not going to present the alleged "work" you claimed you were prepared to present for Ancil's consideration? ... Well, I...
... If Jack has done the "work" he said he has done but has yet to produce for our consideration in discussing Acts 2:1, then he is probably as familiar with...
Today's date, 01022010, is a palindrome; it reads the same backwards and forwards. This also happened on August 31,1380 (08311380). Sincerely, Robert Baty...
From: http://www.cseblogs.com Posted on: December 31st, 2009 at 2:18pm. On January 8, 2010, the Supreme Court will look at my "Motion for Reconsideration to...
17764
Jack Gibson
u.h.g@...
Jan 3, 2010 7:57 pm
Robert Baty : I believe that Acts 11:15-17 says what it means and means what it says . And it says that the Holy Spirit fell on the Gentiles (household of...
Jack, You need to stick with trying to resolve your problems in dealing with Acts 2:1. We can then consider the broader context of Acts 1 and Acts 2 and then,...
In Acts 2:43 many signs and wonders were done by the Apostles. If the gift had been bestowed on the 120, rather than just the 12, why weren't some members of...
Charles, Your question appears to be directed to Jack, or someone holding his position, so I will simply so note for the record and, with you, wait to see how...
17768
Jack Gibson
u.h.g@...
Jan 3, 2010 10:29 pm
Robert Baty : All you are doing is listing Acts 11:15-17 without resolving the question that these verses deal with , the question of who the Holy Spirit fell...
Jack, It is not my game-playing that bothers you, it is that I play your game better than you play it (e.g., Jack Gibson is NOT answering the relevant...
Following my name below is a recent answer I posted to RM-Bible after Jack posted a cheap shot over there regarding this discussion. That is followed by...
Why did Jack Gibson want to contend that the "they" of Acts 2:1 has reference to the "120" of Acts 1:15 instead of only the "12" of Acts 1:26? Could it be that...
... and ... My further comments: The other matter involved Pepperdine's position regarding the FFRF lawsuit. Jerry indicated Pepperdine has no public...
17775
Jack Gibson
u.h.g@...
Jan 5, 2010 2:11 pm
... From: Jack Gibson To: rm-bible@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 7:58 AM Subject: [rm-bible] Acts 2:1 Robert Baty : Robert , You ask me to...
Jack, ... Jack, is your answer today "yes"? (Note: I'm not asking about other rules and/or exceptions.) As I recall, when I previously brought up the idea that...
17777
Jack Gibson
u.h.g@...
Jan 5, 2010 4:51 pm
Robert Baty : I have answered your question repeatedly . The answer is NO in the case where the antecedent of the pronoun "they" in Acts 2:1 is not the...
Jack, In a sense, I like your answers, but you continue to struggle in dealing with your problem in coming to a mutually acceptable conclusion regarding a...
