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".