Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

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.