Re: Attacks

Ed Brayton (cynic@net-link.net)
Tue, 19 May 1998 14:00:54 -0400

Stephen Jones wrote:
>
> Burgy
>
> On Thu, 14 May 1998 12:40:53 -0600, John W. Burgeson wrote:
>
> JWB>Stephen wrote to Glenn:
>
> SJ>"So your attacks on Christian apologists like Morris & Parker and Davis
> >& Kenyon, regarding..."
>
> >JWB>From what I can see, Stephen, Glenn often ATTACKS
> >the reasoning and lack of data integrity of certain
> >self-styled apologists.
>
> I am primarily defending *Hugh Ross* and *Phil Johnson* from Glenn's
> attacks. Are you claiming they are "self-styled apologists"?
>
> But I would dispute your claim that even "Morris & Parker and Davis
> & Kenyon" are "self-styled apologists".

Wow, talk about missing the point. Burgy's point was that Glenn attacks
the REASONING AND LACK OF DATA INTEGRITY, not the person. You have
accused him of ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack IS an attack on
the person, not the argument.

> JWB>I have not seen him attack the person. There is a difference,
> >of course.
>
> I never said Glenn attacks "the person" of Christian apologists. You
> are being over-literal.
>
> My point is that Glenn's attacks on the position of Christian apologists
> is 100% negative. I have never heard him say anything positive about
> the position of *any* Christian apologist.

If that is your point, why did you accuse him of ad hominem? Did you
just not know what the phrase means, but thought it sounded good to
accuse someone of it?

Ed