One would think (hope) that the argument from silence
would be seen for what it is. This argument is particularly
bad when combined with a Priestly robes argument. "How
long are your robes? What color are they? Ah, no answer?
I bet they aren't even purple."
At 09:03 PM 5/28/98 -0500, Glenn wrote:
>Stephen,
>
>You have asked two question. I will, for the last time ever respond to
>these issues.
>
>On Thu, 28 May 1998 22:00:36 +0800 you wrote:
>SJ:==
>>I still notice that Glenn himself does not deny it. How about it Glenn?
>Make >Ed's joy complete. Deny *categorically* that you have *ever* posted
>ad >hominems against me or anyone else on this Reflector.
>GM:==
>I don't recall any.
>
I do not recall any either. I've been on this reflector for a
very long time. Longer than Steve and I imagine longer than
most others, but not longer than Glenn. I have debated with
Glenn many times. Glenn is tough (sometimes he's even right!)
but I have never seen him use an _ad hominem_ against me
in the thick of our battles or against anyone else. Actually,
I appreciate Glenn's approach a great deal and on those
occasions where he has pointed out errors in what I have
said I felt very grateful. Its embarrassing to be wrong
of course, but one has to put such feelings aside if you
want to learn something.
Also, I think I might be somewhat of a unique case in that
I've argued with Glenn from both sides of the fence. When I
first came here I was a PC and Glenn and I argued about various
things. Later I changed my position to TE and Glenn and I
argued about various things. I was treated no less rigorously
after I changed than before. Never an _ad hominem_ before or
after.
>At 08:02 PM 5/28/98 +0800, Stephen Jones wrote:
>>I said "regularly". I will ask you one more time:
>>
>>Do you go *regularly* to church? Do you read the Bible and pray *regularly*?
>>Do you pray for your `enemies' like Morris, Gish, Ross and Johnson?
>>
>>It is no crime if you don't *regularly* go to church, or read the Bible
>and pray
>>*regularly*. But it is a bit naughty to keep evading the question. How about
>>a simple "yes" or "no" (Mt 5:37).
>
GM:==
>While frankly, it is absolutely none of your darned business what my church
>attendance is or what my Bible reading habits are, I will answer this and
>then I am through with you.
>
>I go to church every Sunday, unless I am out of town. I am in the choir
>and have been for several years (sing bass as long as I sit next to a good
>singer, otherwise I am not sure what part I sing). Do I pray for those who
>differ from me? Often. Do I read the Bible--nearly every day (not all, I
>can't live up to your standards of perfection.)
>
>Now get your nose out of my personal business! I find your repeated demands
>on this particular issue to be rude, annoying, unchristian, unloving,
>judgmental, pridefully pharisaic, and holier than thou. Are you going to
>look down your nose at me if I am not as good as you think you, yourself
>are? You have NO right to judge me in this fashion. Who do you think you
>are, God? I am a servant of God and am responsible to Him. I don't have to
>answer to you for my relationship with my God. That is between Him and me.
>With that, keep your nose to yourself!
>
Yes, Glenn is correct on this. This is not the place for questions
such as these. Also, no one on this list has either the right
or the spiritual authority to ask these questions of any one else
on this list.
There is a proper place and role for these types of questions.
For example, it was entirely proper that I be asked these
types of questions (and many many more :) during the oral
examination I received prior to being ordained as a Deacon.
There is a proper place for these questions, but it isn't
here.
Brian Harper
Associate Professor
Applied Mechanics
The Ohio State University
"It appears to me that this author is asking
much less than what you are refusing to answer"
-- Galileo (as Simplicius in _The Dialogue_)