Naturally you think I am leaving the list because I got "beat up." What
else are you going to say? However, I have heard enough of your "style" to
realize that no matter what I say, you can be very irrational at times,
which makes dialogue futile. Case in point: When I quoted Bruce Metzger,
one of the leading textual critics in the world and backed by the United
Bible Society, you disregarded him for being "biased." You did the same
with Ronald Nash in his work on pagan influences and the New Testament.
Rather than attempt to look at the content of their arguments, you simply
dismiss them out of hand as "biased" and therefore unreliable. It is things
like this that demonstrate to me the futility of this list. I thank you for
the opportunity to be on here, however, I think that all that can be done
has been done.
TILL
Can you cite a single example in all of Metzger's works where he
acknowledged that an actual discrepancy exists in the Bible. I know of
none. I would ask the same question about Ronald Nash. It seems strange to
me that with all of the textual problems known to exist in the Bible, your
"unbiased" experts always seem to say, "Hey, no problem!" As for dismissing
your experts "out of hand," didn't you do the same to Campell, who is one of
the, if not THE, leading experts on mythology? So what you seem to demand
is that we accept without question all of your "experts" while you retain
the right to dismiss ours as "biased."
WALT JR
As for your belief that I am running, well, fine. I have seen you say this
to nearly every christian that has left the list, therefore, I take it with
a grain of salt. Though some of the believers on this list have been less
than adequate to address theological/philosophical issues with you, people
such as Luke Reimer and Jerry Macdonald and David have held their own very
well. Of course, when they decide to leave the list as well (Luke already
has), I am sure you will utilize the same rhetoric of "victory." Well,
enjoy your victory Mr. Till. By the way, I would appreciate you removing me
from the list or informing me of how. I was very surprised at your attitude
of not letting me go unless I answered one of your questions.
TILL
You seriously believe that Dave has held his own quite well? Well, that
tells me a great deal about your ability to assess logical argumentation.
As for Reimer, he refused--absolutely refused--to discuss biblical
inerrancy, and all of the time that he was on the list, he consistently
tried to hide behind abstract philosophy, and anyone--regardless of the
position he is trying to defend--can do that. As for McDonald, I do wish
you could read the written debate that McDonald and I conducted years ago.
I think that even you would have to admit that all through the debate he had
nothing to offer but the same types of far-fetched scenarios that you have
seen on this list. As for holding his on, you do recognize, don't you, that
he has avoided my postings about biblical genetics, the Amalekite X but not
X problem, and the water into blood X but not X problem? He also hasn't
reacted to the postings about MSS variations. In fact, he has said very
little about biblical inerrancy.
WALT JR
Once again, I have grown tired of this list and would appreciate your
assistance at removing me from it. At least you will have one Walter left,
so things won't be all that bad. Take care.
TILL
I will remove you or tell you how to remove yourself when you respond to my
reply to your "rebuttal" of the Biblical Genetics posting. Hey, if there is
no problem in that story, I would think that you would relish the
opportunity to show everyone just how weak my arguments for biblical errancy
are. Or you can just post to the list an acknowledgement that you don't
know how to explain away this problem, and I will send the password command
to unsubscribe you.
Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net