Jump to content

Taking On A Christian Cultist (Again)


raoul
 Share

Recommended Posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Babylonian Dream

I like how he states says "criminal" forgery, isn't that, changing the language of your opponent to drop in words, one of the first clues that someone is lying? Perhaps he already sees Ehrman's point and just wants to deny that he has one. Why he needed to insert the criminal part was to make Ehrman's claim seem like an attack on Christianity and the Bible, as opposed to the actual arguement, that it was forged in the names of those who it claims wrote them. A practice that is old and wasn't seen the way it is today. He acted like the claim was that they broke a copyright or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how he states says "criminal" forgery, isn't that, changing the language of your opponent to drop in words, one of the first clues that someone is lying? Perhaps he already sees Ehrman's point and just wants to deny that he has one. Why he needed to insert the criminal part was to make Ehrman's claim seem like an attack on Christianity and the Bible, as opposed to the actual arguement, that it was forged in the names of those who it claims wrote them. A practice that is old and wasn't seen the way it is today. He acted like the claim was that they broke a copyright or something.

He's done that before and it is very irritating because of the subtle way he slips in those things. And it's very hard for me not to immediately sink to ad hominems because of the total lack of respect he has for Ehrman's background. Nothing he tosses out is challenging - most of it is just regurgitation of other people's comments like Wm. Lane Craig.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.