Your tirades against Dr. Lerner remind me of the people I hear
on late night radio programs. They merit no response.
>Lerner (of one of his graduate goons) wrote:
>
>"Does not an attempt to "scientifically prove" scripture open scripture
>itself up to the same methodologies by which all data should be tested?
>I have observed that -- rather than being a repository of proto-memory or
>a wealth of allegorical moral teaching -- scriptural statements, usually
>tendered in translation, are simply offered as facts without the high
>degree of perspicacity called for in scientific data.
>
> "When science works as it should (and too often it does not), the
>qualities of observability, testability and general agreement on
>scientific data frees subsequent theoretical development from the errors
>of homoioteleuton, dittography, confusions in transmitting or
>translation, deliberate fraud and alteration that are found in
>scripture."
>
>I hate to admit this but after I looked up all the words I must admit
>that he's right.
>
>Sick, twisted and dangerous... but right.
>
I'm not sure what Dr. Lerner has in mind by "...deliberate fraud and
alteration that are found in scripture", but the general tone of
his statement is that of a warning. The same warning given by
Galileo, BTW. Do you think Galileo was sick twisted and dangerous?
Brian Harper
Associate Professor
Applied Mechanics
The Ohio State University
"It is not certain that all is uncertain,
to the glory of skepticism." -- Pascal