Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: Rhetoric versus Factual Argument: An Example Message-ID: <255@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Sun, 11-Nov-84 21:59:24 EST Article-I.D.: pyuxd.255 Posted: Sun Nov 11 21:59:24 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 13-Nov-84 08:19:13 EST References: <959@phs.UUCP> <280@qantel.UUCP> <1650@ucf-cs.UUCP> <832@umcp-cs.UUCP> Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J. Lines: 35 > In article <1650@ucf-cs.UUCP> yiri@ucf-cs.UUCP (Yirmiyahu BenDavid) writes: > > There is nothing 'saving' in believing in a counterfeit. Neither you nor > > any of the others has shown any kind of logical basis to dispute these > > things which I have rather clearly and forcefully shown on the net over > > the past few weeks. You just continue to spout the same unfounded drivel > > giving the same anti-historical reasons. > This article is totally free of rational argument, and essentially consists > of the author corwing over the ineffable greatness of his own position. > Is it any wonder that the voices of Christendom in net.religion have > acquired a certain note of frustration? [CHARLIE WINGATE] The article itself may be "totally free of rational argument", but the point that Mr. Ben David makes is quite relevant: he has presented over the past few weeks an extended series of arguments about the validity and verifiability of Christian theological beliefs, in fact the very tenets of Christianity itself, but answers have not been provided to these arguments (perhaps they are been assumed to be false because they come from an unbeliever---a standard action [apparently] among those who would ignore arguments that provide evidence that contradicts assumed beliefs). I know just how Mr. Ben David feels. (It should be pointed out that the Jewish belief system that Mr. Ben David feels supercedes the Christian belief system has no more claim to evidential validity than that Christian belief system, although I wouldn't expect Christians to point that out, since doing so would completely erode the foundation of their OWN beliefs.) > At least when I argue with Rich Rosen, I can get him to tell me what he is > trying to say. Would that the reverse were true in engaging in discussions with religious believers.... -- "So, it was all a dream!" --Mr. Pither "No, dear, this is the dream; you're still in the cell." --his mother Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr