RE: Literal and Not Literal
September 10, 2019 at 9:33 am
(This post was last modified: September 10, 2019 at 9:34 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Semantic equivocation. That isn’t -all- the possible relationships between them. The theory has excluded all but three, in your retelling.
Did it do so unscientifically? Are those scientists being unscientific? Are all three explanations truly equal. Upon what basis have you determined this....
.....and what relevance does it have to literalism or to a choice between explanations?
Did it do so unscientifically? Are those scientists being unscientific? Are all three explanations truly equal. Upon what basis have you determined this....
.....and what relevance does it have to literalism or to a choice between explanations?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
