1. You are wrong because there is a great deal of scriptural evidence supporting
universalism. You choose to ignore it, or say its application is "contextual" and
therefore not worth considering.
2. Logos has acknowledged this
REPEATEDLY You were right in pointing it
out, he was right in apologizing, now it would be right of you to show a little
GRACE
in a situation which has obviously been very embarrasing for him. 'Tis the season, after
all. Otherwise those ghosts that visited BillyBob last night may have to visit you
as well
3. I have seen some excellent works composed completely as scholarly collections
of referenced quotes. Usually this is in the context of comparing the thoughts of one
historic figure against another, so its not out of the question to have a properly
referenced excellent work composed almost completely of others' thoughts, creatively
woven to illustrate a point.
I think the lack of reference was the larger fault here, and I think
that Logos' focus on that aspect in his apology was most appropriate. But I also agree
that the use of wholesale lengthy verbatim material in the response was outside
the bounds of the rules of this debate, as Poly so aptly pointed out, and Kevin
GRACIOUSLY allowed.