home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
- Path: sparky!uunet!psinntp!bony1!billg
- From: billg@bony1.bony.com (Bill Gripp)
- Subject: Re: Biblical Inerrancy?
- Message-ID: <1992Dec23.182112.2705@bony1.bony.com>
- Organization: LA&W RR
- References: <85379@ut-emx.uucp> <1992Dec17.194655.25308@bony1.bony.com> <85701@ut-emx.uucp>
- Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 18:21:12 GMT
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <85701@ut-emx.uucp> bill@bessel.as.utexas.edu (William H. Jefferys) writes:
-
- >I have not altered my position that it is illegitimate to attempt
- >to discredit someone's argument by appealing to personal characteristics
- >of that person, whether they be his religion, his beliefs, or whatever.
- >Neither Bill Gripp nor his defender has addressed that issue.
- >The fact that Bill was directly responding to Carl does not
- >alter the fact that his comment was directed towards the veracity
- >of what Avi said.
-
- >#If you follow Avi's posts on various threads you will see that he sides
- >#with skeptics against Christians when it comes to NT issues, with
- >#Christians against skeptics when it comes to OT issues. Problem is he
- >#uses the same types of arguements to argue both sides, e.g. the NT is
- >#invalid due to inconsistancies, the OT is valid due to its lack of
- >#inconsistancies. The OT is inspired by God, the NT isn't. Etc.
- >#Although most "religious" Jews do not agree with Christianity (and I can
- >#understand and accept that) few exhibit the degree of outward (shall we
- >#call it) "zeal" demostrated by Avi.
-
- I thought this last paragraph explained it. It's not a matter of
- religion, it's a matter of being consistently inconsistent. =B^)
-
-
-
-