Re: logic makes a comeback

Russell Stewart (diamond@rt66.com)
Wed, 11 Jun 1997 13:59:52 -0600

At 02:20 PM 6/11/97 EDT, you wrote:
>JB >I would also add that you have not responded to the allegation that you
>simply
>>made something up to support your critique of the Bible--e.g., the
"political
>
>>revisions" that somehow render the extant manuscripts unreliable.
>
>RS <<Fine, I'll withdraw that claim, because I admit that I don't have the
>evidence to back it up. Fortunately, however, it's not essential or even
>relevant to my argument.>>
>
>If it wasn't essential or relevant, why did you bring it up?

Because I'm human and I make mistakes. Have I ever claimed otherwise?

>Of course it was
>relevant. You were trying to denigrate the accuracy of the texts. Of
course it
>was essential. You asserted a falsehood to support the argument. I
appreciate
>your withdrawing the claim, but that leaves the original proposition
>unopposed.

Um, isn't that kind of inherent in withdrawing a claim? What are you trying
to accomplish here except to score ego points?

_____________________________________________________________
| Russell Stewart |
| http://www.rt66.com/diamond/ |
|_____________________________________________________________|
| Albuquerque, New Mexico | diamond@rt66.com |
|_____________________________|_______________________________|

2 + 2 = 5, for very large values of 2.