Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Bill Rea <bsr15 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz>]

Karl wrote in respond to a post by George Athas:

>In other words, what you did was to step outside of the ideology taught
>by the Bible, then judged the Bible based on a different ideology. Then
>you said that the Biblical record is improbable based on the
>presuppositions inherent in this other religious faith that you now
>embrace. That's how I read the above paragraphs. Correct me if you think
>I am wrong.

I get the digest so don't know if George has corrected you, but this
paragraph is absurd. You use the words -- religion, science, observation,
evidence, mainstream and probably a whole lot of others in a non-standard
way. You have, in the past, got quite nasty with those, such as myself,
who have pointed out that your usage does not match that of the vast
majority of English speaking peoples and is a source of confusion.

This list is supposed to work according to scholarly principles. If
you fundamentally disagree with the way scholars work then this
list is not the place to be. People of faith can and do work according
to scientific methods. This does not mean they've abandoned their
faith to become adherants of philosophical rationalism or naturalism
or some other such mumbo-jumbo and you ought to know it by now.

I think you ought to apologise for posting such offensive material.



Bill Rea, Ph.D. ICT Services, University of Canterbury \_
E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz                       </   New
Phone 64-3-364-2331, Fax  64-3-364-2332               /)  Zealand
Unix Systems Administrator                           (/'