[b-hebrew] )BYMLK vs. Abimelech vs. Abi-Molech
George.Athas at moore.edu.au
Thu Apr 16 22:40:44 EDT 2009
Jim, Jim, Jim. Let's try this again, shall we.
What you are doing is creating a hypothesis, and then assuming that it is necessarily the norm that has to be disproved, and until that happens, your hypothesis must be right. What you are failing to see is that the hypothesis you've created is based on some logical fallacies and extremely tendentious assumptions. The burden of proof lies not with others to prove you wrong, but rather for you to tighten up your case with proper logic and method. I still haven't seen this from you. Instead, you just keep trotting out the same old improbable assumptions. And then, when people argue against you, you demand that their evidence has to take a particular (odd) shape for you to be convinced by it. This is just simply not realistic. It smacks of 'head in the sand' syndrome, and actually comes across as childish and silly, rather than mature or learned. You're not doing yourself any favours here, Jim.
It seems to me that no one will convince you out of your ideas because you're demanding that they share your particular assumptions. Yet, practically everyone disagrees with your assumptions, and so you will never be convinced of anyone else's arguments, because there's no point of contact at all. As such, you're on a lonely deserted island where Hebron = Aijalon Valley and south is north. No one else lives in that world.
Has it ever occurred to you that if everyone is arguing against you, then maybe, just maybe, it might be worth reconsidering your assumptions and methods? Some self-evaluation and epistemic humility go a long way. You might be pleasantly surprised at the results.
Let me urge you one more time: Get a blog, please! B-Hebrew is not your personal publishing outlet. You can get one of those for free at a blog site.
More information about the b-hebrew