FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-20-2004, 01:38 PM   #31
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Nowra, N.S.W, Australia
Posts: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
(The quote below was copied from Sean McHugh's attempted post in FDD)

Sean, I'm not sure if you made a mistake and intended your post to come here or not, but only Vinnie and RobertLW can post in the FDD thread.

Hi Nightshade,

Thanks. It was meant for here. That's the trouble with posting after midnight.

:banghead:

Apologies for the inconvenience.


Yours sincerely,


Sean McHugh
Sean McHugh is offline  
Old 04-24-2004, 03:17 AM   #32
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Can You Hear Me Now
Posts: 110
Default

Vinnie's latest post is quite nice -- short, to the point -- and I was especially happy to see him throw down the gauntlet (to borrow from Roy and HG) to RobertLW on demonstrating inerrancy. Sadly I can only see a few possible outcomes of this.

1. RobertLW will retreat to the position that he only has to defend inerrancy, not demonstrate it.
2. He will return to his attempts to shift the burdon of proof.
3. He will resort to a species of circular argument.
4. He will (attempt to) demonstrate inerrancy. (!)

Obviously 1 and 2 (with a sprinkling of 3) are the most likely. At this point I consider 4 unlikely, but RobertLW may as well stop dancing in quicksand and go down fighting. The way I see it, he's going to be sucked down anyway, so he may as well give it one last shot. He might even manage to save this debate from mediocrity (though Vinnie has done a nice job, considering).


Fallon
Fallon is offline  
Old 04-30-2004, 09:29 PM   #33
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Bloomington, MN
Posts: 2,209
Default

RobertLW has posted his latest statement, and in doing so he has announced his intention to withdraw from the debate. Thus, Vinnie will be allowed to post a concluding statement, after which the debate thread will be closed.


Dave
Silent Dave is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 07:33 AM   #34
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Looks like Fallon forgot a fifth possibility

I think most here will agree that this is the best outcome the debate could have. An important lesson which can be drawn from it is that one should perhaps not debate someone whose style of argumention/arguments one is not familar with. A little bit more discussion for the start of the debate would have been helpful to get a much more interesting debate.

But perhaps this topic simply is not worth debating
Sven is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 10:04 AM   #35
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

Since I just hit "submit" on my latest response I guess I can post in here now. As long as its allowed through I guess the debate is over. My final installment was a little high on the "rhetorical jousting" at times but granted nothing of substance to respond to, what else could I do?

I don't really see a need to add anything to this thread that hasn't been addressed by someone else already. If I missed something let me know. If someone new chimes in I'll be lurking.

I think this experience might discourage me from engaging in future formal debates with unknown people or people in general. This was pitiful.

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 10:18 AM   #36
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven
Looks like Fallon forgot a fifth possibility

I only listed three myself at the end of the debate:

Quote:

1. Robert is in fact that ignorant.
2. This whole debate was a parody.
3. Robert is intellectually dishonest.

I let the readers in the Peanut Gallery decide on this one.
I find it amazing how many points I made that he actually ignored. Almsot everything I wrote was skewed or ignored :banghead:

This sums it up for me:

""Boohoo, I can't refute it. Boohoo. You cheated. Sniffle. Wine. Sniffle."

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 10:19 AM   #37
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here
Posts: 10,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinnie
1. Robert is in fact that ignorant.
2. This whole debate was a parody.
3. Robert is intellectually dishonest.
I let the readers in the Peanut Gallery decide on this one.
I vote for (2)! Anything else would be just too improbable.

Nice Job, Vinnie! You never had any tough points to answer, but presented your points quite coherent. At least for most people...
Sven is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 10:23 AM   #38
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sven
I vote for (2)! Anything else would be just too improbable.

Nice Job, Vinnie! You never had any tough points to answer, but presented your points quite coherent. At least for most people...
There are no tough points to answer when arguing against verbal plenary inspiration. I should have let that fact restrict me from ever entering this debate to begin with. I have only myself to blame.

At least I got my "surface anomaly" argument drafted up in a more lengthy and thorough manner. I had a similar argument online with this same issue but this one updates it extensively.

I also have some material up on Judas Death and the food laws and the lack of a canonical dimension which could all easily be adapted into four separate articles for my site. So all is not lost and I have a reformulation of the tenth plague which cuts past "you don't posess an objective standard."

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 10:53 AM   #39
Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Alaska!
Posts: 14,058
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinnie
I think this experience might discourage me from engaging in future formal debates with unknown people or people in general. This was pitiful.

Vinnie
I've had bad luck doing that with my last couple of debates too.

crc
Wiploc is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 12:17 PM   #40
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

Apparently my concluding statement was too high on the polemic and rhetorical jousting to be posted :notworthy

I kind of thought it might be but I will not rewrite it. Ths debate was too much of a comic nightmare to waste any further time on cumbersome pleasantries.

I'll put my original submitted reply on the net tonight after work. If anyone wants to read my concluding piece they can do it then

Vinnie

P.S. I feel your pain wiploc
Vinnie is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:23 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.