Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jeffrey Gibson · 05-27-2013, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Thankfully, in the real world, credibility is not dictated by the sole opinion of 'spin', But is a matter of individual persuasions.
If you wish to believe a 1st century 'Paul' actully wrote the 'Pauline Epistles', and that they accurately reflect 1st century CE Christian beliefs that is your prerogative.
There are others who are persuaded otherwise, and they are not contesting.

And why should anyone believe them or you? So far as I can see, the only "argument" you've offered for accepting your view of the nature of the Pauline writings is "Because I say so".

Jeffrey

Sheshbazzar · 05-27-2013, 07:39 PM

Then like 'spin', you have been selectively ignoring much of what I have posted. I can't do anything about that.

spin · 05-27-2013, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

So far as I can see, the only "argument" you've offered for accepting your view of the nature of the Pauline writings is "Because I say so".

I gather you don't think that is sufficient.

Jeffrey Gibson · 05-27-2013, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

So far as I can see, the only "argument" you've offered for accepting your view of the nature of the Pauline writings is "Because I say so".

I gather you don't think that is sufficient.

How could you tell? What was the give away?

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson · 05-27-2013, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Then like 'spin', you have been selectively ignoring much of what I have posted. I can't do anything about that.

You haven't posted anything except assertions.

Jeffrey

Sheshbazzar · 05-27-2013, 07:57 PM

And of what I have posted, you only reply to what bits you are willing to acknowledge.
Anything that might require you to present an alternate or any uncomfortable explanation, you ignore. crafty.

spin · 05-27-2013, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Gibson

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

I gather you don't think that is sufficient.

How could you tell? What was the give away?

Jeffrey

I guess it was the lack of due deference.

spin · 05-27-2013, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

And of what I have posted, you only reply to what bits you are willing to acknowledge.
Anything that might require you to present an alternate or any uncomfortable explanation, you ignore. crafty.

Specifically, which bits of your evidence and argumentation do you feel have not been acknowledged and which have been ignored?

Sheshbazzar · 05-27-2013, 08:07 PM

Guess you will have to read, and discover what parts of my posts you have overlooked.

Jeffrey Gibson · 05-27-2013, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

And of what I have posted, you only reply to what bits you are willing to acknowledge.
Anything that might require you to present an alternate or any uncomfortable explanation, you ignore. crafty.

Not my job to present an alternative explanation nor am I required to do so when the validity of your claims that are at issue I trust you've heard of the little thing called "the burden of proof"?

Jeffrey

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-27-2013, 07:39 PM	#52
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Then like 'spin', you have been selectively ignoring much of what I have posted. I can't do anything about that.

05-27-2013, 07:57 PM	#56
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	And of what I have posted, you only reply to what bits you are willing to acknowledge. Anything that might require you to present an alternate or any uncomfortable explanation, you ignore. crafty.

05-27-2013, 08:07 PM	#59
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Guess you will have to read, and discover what parts of my posts you have overlooked.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.