On Thu, 18 Jul 2002 23:39:13 -0700 "Allen Roy" <allenroy@peoplepc.com>
writes:
> From: "D. F. Siemens, Jr." <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
> > What Allen posted concerning the soul is standard SDA teaching,
> usually
> > described as "soul sleep." I consider the claims special pleading.
> The
> > nonreductionistic monism of Nancey Murphy and others happens to
> overlap
> > it. As I and Paul noted some time back, the latter group ignores
> all the
> > scriptures that do not fit their view.
>
> It isn't clear whom you mean by "the latter group." If you are
> refering to
> SDAs, I'd be happy to consider the scriptures that "do not fit their
> view."
>
>snip>
Here I thought I was using standard English. I mentioned two groups,
first, SDA, and second, Murphy and her associates. That there were only
two requires the comparative, hence "former" (or "prior") and "latter".
Even if one were to think historically, the former group antedated the
latter by more than a century. I would understand Allen's problem had I
referred to "this group" as a synonym for "latter", though "these" would
be normal, for "this" may be more inclusive unless clearly connected to
"that".
As to your offer, I have read (and own) SDA publications. I have no
interest in hashing over the twists given by White's prophecies,
interpretations which, interestingly, have been modified in the last
half-century or so as SDA scholars have paid closer attention to the
original languages.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 19 2002 - 21:30:36 EDT