Biblical Hebrew Forum

["K Randolph" <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Good point. LOL.

On 3/24/07, Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org> wrote:
> On 23/03/2007 23:58, K Randolph wrote:
> > Peter:
> >
> > Some of the times I didn't answer, I prepared the situation by writing
> > to the effect that unless the other person presents new information,
> > that I will not answer. Then by my silence I indicated that he has
> > merely repeated what I have already dismissed, that he has not
> > answered my objections, therefore my final statement stands. Sometimes
> > silence is itself an answer.
> >
> Would that have been the best answer to Goebbels' repeated lies, to
> ignore them unless there was new "information"?
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> E-mail:  peter AT qaya.org
> Blog:    http://www.qaya.org/blog/
> Website: http://www.qaya.org/
Seriously, this is also a question of audience and venue. In the case
of Goebbels and his modern successors, it is to repeat over and over
again in as many ways and media as possible that they are lying and
why what they say are lies. Their lies are continuously out in the
open in front of everyone, and so should our response.

But in this case where educated people are following a debate where
one debater can set up the situation that silence can be an answer,
sometimes that is the better way.

Karl W. Randolph.