"Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message
news:bvnr3u$qps$0@pita.alt.net...
>
> news:bvnk0k$u76i8$1@ID-105978.news.uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message
> > news:bvm6e5$h5o$0@pita.alt.net...
> > >
> > > Are you an elder?
> > >
> >
> > FYI, as if it matters here, I am a High Priest.
>
> Can you be touched with the feeling of our infirmities?
>
Another question that leaves more to interpretation than I care to bother
with. What are you asking?
<Snip>
> > Well then not really a question at all - your just trying to encite some
> > sort of argument.
>
> Well, I never!
>
Never what?
>
> Ok, do you agree with Brigham Young that it is wrong for whites and blacks
> to intermarry?
>
Wrong? On what level. Do I believe that the marriage of a black and white
couple, sealed in the temple, is not honoured by God? No, I do not believe
that.
Do I believe that that would have been the case in BY's day - well yes,
since they could not be sealed then.
I believe that anyone who willingly puts their desires above God's will
suffer the consequences.
> >
> > Both can not and cannot are acceptable - and synonymous - at least in
> > English. I am guessing, given that most here are, that you are american,
> and
> > therefore may well be using a slightly different language from myself.
>
> I am English.
>
> 'Can not' is an error, and would have cost you your English O level when I
> was at school.
>
Well, I can't speak for when you were at school - since I do not know how
old you are. However the Pocket Oxford Dictionary states:-
cannot v.aux. can not.
You are mistaken I am afraid. "Can not" is perfectly acceptable english.
Andrew R.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
|