Difference between revisions of "User talk:RSchlafly"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Review: sign)
(Gospel of Thomas)
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
:''it can be argued that the legislative intent of the Amendment was especially to grow with the times, which it certainly has done.''  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 11:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
 
:''it can be argued that the legislative intent of the Amendment was especially to grow with the times, which it certainly has done.''  [[User:RobS|RobS]] 11:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Gospel of Thomas ==
 +
 +
It is true that the Gospel of Thomas is not part of the Bible, and not recognized outside the Coptic Christian church; I simply wanted to clarify that it nevertheless is a valuable source of information about early Christian beliefs, and that many Christians today do find great value in it.
 +
 +
[[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 15:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 19:33, March 14, 2007

good edit to Einstein article.--Aschlafly 00:14, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Thanks Roger. Whatever I can do to help, let me know. Are there any plans for coordinated projects similiar to like they have over in, you know, that other place? RobS 12:48, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Review

Roger, here's some material you may wish to review regarding "expansion of due process", [1]

it can be argued that the legislative intent of the Amendment was especially to grow with the times, which it certainly has done. RobS 11:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Gospel of Thomas

It is true that the Gospel of Thomas is not part of the Bible, and not recognized outside the Coptic Christian church; I simply wanted to clarify that it nevertheless is a valuable source of information about early Christian beliefs, and that many Christians today do find great value in it.

Boethius 15:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)