Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!wivax!linus!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!tjt From: tjt@masscomp.UUCP Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: Evidence that Demands a Verdict of ""Nonsense"" Message-ID: <137@masscomp.UUCP> Date: Sat, 28-May-83 23:08:19 EDT Article-I.D.: masscomp.137 Posted: Sat May 28 23:08:19 1983 Date-Received: Sun, 29-May-83 08:14:53 EDT References: utcsrgv.1436 Lines: 16 Just a thought on the idea that one could not take Biblical personalities as witnesses. If we take this idea to its conclusion, then... - Canadians could not report on Canadian events, - Americans could not report on American events, - Computer scientists could not write about computer science, - Net-news users could not write about net-news. Brian Nixon. The point is not e.g. whether or not Biblical testimony would be allowed in a court of law, but whether or not such testimony must be believed. As a general rule (ridiculously oversimplified), I tend to believe those persons in closest contact with an event without excessive self interest. i.e. I would tend to believe American reports on American events, but less so on something like "acid rain".