[b-hebrew] Ezek 3:26

K Randolph kwrandolph at gmail.com
Wed Jul 31 03:36:19 EDT 2013


Jerry:


On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Jerry Shepherd <jshepherd53 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Karl,
>
>
>
> You said: "Of course it’s not the same thing! That’s why Ruth made a point
> of it."
>
>
>
> Karl, you missed entirely the point of what I was saying.  Ruth made a
> distinction between form and function.
>

Duh!!!


>   Your subsequent attempt to capture her thought by framing it as a
> distinction between action and function was incorrect.
>

Wrong, because we were talking about different things.


>   You can't say that I was making a confusion, as Ruth would say, between
> action and function, when that was not a distinction that Ruth made.
>

She didn’t disagree with it during the discussion, thereby made a tacit
agreement.

>
>
>>
>
>
> You said, "This paragraph is a logical fallacy, namely the appeal to
> popularity."
>
>
>
> This was in reaction to my statement, "The problem you have here is that
> there is not a trained linguist in the entire universe who would hold to
> that opinion."
>
>
>
> This was not an appeal to popularity; rather it was simply pointing out
> the obvious.
>

Irrelevant to whether or not such a distinction is valid. Hence appeal to
popularity.


>   There is no linguist who would agree with you.  Therefore, the burden
> is on you to prove your case, rather than the other way around.
>

It doesn’t seem like you’re listening, hence you won’t hear.

>
>
> You said, "This makes me think you have not read a word I’ve written. Or
> rather, you have latched on to a word or phrase that is a trigger to your
> thinking, and have not listened to the whole, rather just stopped listening
> to make your argument. . .  Your argument has missed the mark."
>
>
>
> Karl, I captured your thought very well.
>

That’s a laugh! A straw man presentation is not “captured … very well”.


>   You were the one who said that in all these instances a person is being
> "called aside," and that this was what was in the "inside the head of the
> ancient Greek."  And you expressly said that in all these instances the
> verb "παρακαλειν does NOT mean to instruct, to scold, to encourage, to
> upbraid."  My argument was right on target because what you do here is a
> classic example of the etymological fallacy.
>

Taken out of the context that the “calling aside” is not only physical, but
also metaphorically understood, hence a straw man argument on your part. A
second reason a straw man argument is because I make a distinction between
action and function, and you ignore it.

>
>
> Blessings,
>
>
> Jerry
>
> Jerry Shepherd
> Taylor Seminary
> Edmonton, Alberta
> jshepherd53 at gmail.com
>
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/attachments/20130731/942fa280/attachment.html 


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list