Initial reaction to Turkels latest

Joseph Crea Joseph.Crea@worldnet.att.net
Mon, 1 Feb 1999 07:38:58 +0000 (00917876338, 19990201073858.JMB12662@LOCALNAME) 

Hello Farrell!

At 12:24 PM 1/31/99 -0800, Farrell Till wrote:

>At 12:08 AM 1/31/99 -0500, achillesz@usa.net wrote:

>>On 30 Jan 99, at 22:24, Jason Carter wrote:

>>

>>> 

>>> Here's the address of Turkel's reply:

>>> 

>>> http://www.integrityonline15.com/jpholding/tekton/tekton_05_03_03.html

>>> 

>>> Cheers,

>>> -Jason

>>

>ACHILLESZ

>>Oh, wow, I just read the first page and a half and already I have found out 

>>that I am a "thrall" of Tills. I got a good laugh out of that one. 

>>

>>You've been here long enough to have a clue, do you honestly think that there 

>>is any accuracy in describing me and the rest of the regular posters here who 

>>disagree with inerrancy as "local thralls of the Grand High Weasel?" What

sort 

>>of argument is that? 

>>

>>Jason, why don't you ask your hero to join us here on the list, and try to 

>>defend this drivel? If he says he doesn't have the time, then you should 

>>certainly at least expect him to have the decency to let his readers see both 

>>sides, which he has consistently refused to do. 

>>

>>Visitors to Tills webpage see both sides of the issues. In fact he has had a 

>>policy of publishing any inerrantist that would dispute him, at his own 

>>expense, for years now. Why is it that Till can be so fair, even generous, to 

>>his opponents viewpoints and arguments, but Turkel designs his site so his 

>>readers see only what he picks and chooses to show them? 

>>

>

>TILL

>What is really amusing about all this is that I have had very little to say

>about the Genesis 2:19 issue.  I remember posting a statement that said a

>Hebrew grammar I bought in college agreed with CREA's source on the function

>of the waw consecutive, yet Turkel paints me as the guru of this issue and

>all other skeptics on the list as my lackeys.  I'm sure it's amusing to Ed

>Tyler, CREA, Alward, and the many others who have disagreed with me that

>they are considered my "thralls."


CREA
   Actually, I really should be flattered that Turkel/Holding considers my
contributions to the issue at hand to be so threatening that he finds it
necessary to resort to the use of abusive ad hominems.  If he was really as
familiar with debate as he would have us believe, he'd realize that an
argument necessarily stands or falls on its own merits, not those of the
person presenting it -- but then I guess he needs all the help he can get,
and indulging in put-downs and ad hominems can be SUCH a boost to one's
self-esteem.


With Mettaa,

Joseph Crea
<Joseph.Crea@worldnet.att.net>