-Original Message-From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Sun, 29 May 2005 02:03:12 -0400Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
David Miller wrote:
>> I quoted you exactly as you wrote it
John wrote:
> The very next sent
John wrote:
> ... Christ took the curse of the Law away
> ... If righteousness came by the Law,
> then Christ died in vain, David.
> ... to be justified by Law is to be fallen from grace.
> <...snip...>
Enough, Bishop. You are preaching to the choir here. I agree with points
like these. Goo
David Miller wrote:
>> I quoted you exactly as you wrote it
John wrote:
> The very next sentence is EXACTLY what I said.
John wrote:
>> I wrote: Knowing you are right in some esoteric way
>> is a fantasy of the first order.
David Miller wrote:
>> That is exactly how I quoted you John.
>> Go ba
John wrote:
> ... Christ took the curse of the Law away
> ... If righteousness came by the Law,
> then Christ died in vain, David.
> ... to be justified by Law is to be fallen from grace.
> <...snip...>
Enough, Bishop. You are preaching to the choir here. I agree with points
like these. My poi
Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]com>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]innglory.orgCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]innglory.orgSent: Sun, 29 May 2005 00:43:11 -0400Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
Meaningless religious mumbo jumbo Gary; I don't have any such "hermeneutic" in fact
Meaningless religious mumbo jumbo Gary; I don't have
any such "hermeneutic" in fact I totally reject the Gk god Hermes along with the dualistic philosophy of Plato that
you have accused me of endlessly. If you would follow hard after God and
seek Him with your whole heart rather than give Him
good question; ftr,
tt evidence suggests parallelism betw his hermeneutic and (e.g.) jt's;
the/ir bed rock is philosophical while the Bible is
evaluated (conformed to) dualistic bias which yields a religious
ideology..biblical theology has no priority with them, no native
respect given to i
AIL PROTECTED]innglory.orgSent: Sat, 28 May 2005 17:42:09 -0600Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
evidence suggests DavidM's into forgery--for what purpose?
On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:41:22 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John wrote:> As such, there is no way of co
evidence suggests
DavidM's into forgery--for what purpose?
On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:41:22 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John wrote:> As such, there is no way of convicting you of
your> complicity apart from your willingness to stop with> the
game and cast the beam from your e
John wrote:> As such, there is no way of convicting you of your> complicity apart from your willingness to stop with> the game and cast the beam from your eye.You misunderstand. I am not playing any game.
Of course you are - at my expense -- but hey, the tickets are free. David Miller wrote:
..Now there's spiritual warfare and flesh and blood
breaking down.Ya either got faith or ya got unbelief and there ain't no
neutral ground.The enemy is subtle, how be it we are so deceivedWhen the
truth's in our hearts and we still don't believe?..My so-called friends
have fallen under a s
On Sat, 28 May 2005 18:04:47 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:John
wrote: You are a legalist, David.
David wrote: Thank you. Nothing wrong with being a legalist.
God is a legalist too. Read the Torah and study why Jesus had to die for
your sins.
John responds: There can be no argument
-Original Message-From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]org>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]innglory.orgSent: Sat, 28 May 2005 10:53:28 -0400Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
John wrote:
> You are a legalist, David.
Thank you. Nothing wrong with being a legalist.
Lance Muir wrote:
Word is, Terry, that he's also a gun
totin', tabaccee chewin' good ol' boy when off TT.
=
If he chews, he is probably a ball player, and you know how THEY are.
:-)
Rollin Stones Magazine?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Perry Locke
Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 12:52 PM
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
Lance,
I will not argue with you
Lance,
I will not argue with you on Gary's credentials as you have stated them.
But, I have rarely seen a post of his that I have understood. People, in
general, don't think and communicate like Gary, so much of the time it
sounds to me like he is speaking a foreign language. His style of wr
Word is, Terry, that he's also a gun totin',
tabaccee chewin' good ol' boy when off TT.
- Original Message -
From:
Terry Clifton
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: May 28, 2005 14:25
Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad
hominem ar
Lance Muir wrote:

Gary is, at present and IMO, one of
the more perceptive, creative, literary, imaginative writers on TT.
Others trail far behind. You've never understood him or, what he's
doing.
I can identify with that last line.
Terry
--
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: May 28, 2005 12:56
Subject: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem
arguments
That may be so Lance and there are all kinds of
creative and imaginative ppl out there, enough to wear an
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: May 28, 2005 12:40
Subject: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem
arguments
Why should I have to do that - after all this is a
Truth Talk List is it not? I understand Truth to be a
person
with a name other than Dylan. Killing with
self-confid
If you want substantial then, write privately to
David and Christine.
- Original Message -
From:
Judy
Taylor
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Cc: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: May 28, 2005 11:29
Subject: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem
arguments
ubject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
> John wrote:
> > You are a legalist, David.
>
> Thank you. Nothing wrong with being a legalist. God is a legalist too.
> Read the Torah and study why Jesus had to die for your sins.
>
> John wrote:
> > W
John wrote:
> You are a legalist, David.
Thank you. Nothing wrong with being a legalist. God is a legalist too.
Read the Torah and study why Jesus had to die for your sins.
John wrote:
> Well meaning, of course.
Thank you.
John wrote:
> As such, there is no way of convicting you of your
> co
http://www.mail-archive.com/truthtalk@mail.innglory.org/
On Sat, 28 May 2005 09:57:36 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
TT archive address, anyone?
Jd
no--tell us about
them
thanks, Lance -
g
On Sat, 28 May 2005 06:56:05 -0400 "Lance Muir"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gary:Have you read any of the following: The Tipping
Point, Blink (same author) or, Freakonomics?
||
TT archive address, anyone?
Jd
] [TruthTalk] Ad
hominem arguments
On Fri, 27 May 2005 13:25:37 -0400 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:>[Gary thinks] people [are] free to speak however they
like to speak.
(& he ain't
the only one)
..Across the street they&#
-Original Message-From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 27 May 2005 17:12:47 -0400Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
John wrote:
> That is true -- hopefully you will come to
> see your complicity in the problem,
On Fri, 27 May 2005 13:25:37 -0400 "David Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:>[Gary thinks] people [are] free to speak however they
like to speak.
(& he ain't the
only one)
..Across the street they've nailed the curtainsThey're getting
ready for the feastThe Phantom of the OperaA per
John wrote:
> That is true -- hopefully you will come to
> see your complicity in the problem, as well.
I have always maintained that I have violated the no ad hominem rule also
and that I have to work hard at not doing it. One reason I like to have
someone other than myself moderate the list
That is true -- hopefully you will come to see your complicity in the problem, as well. -Original Message-From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 27 May 2005 14:07:22 -0400Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
John wrot
John wrote:
> I will refrain from that word in the future.
It is not the word, per se. Calling people "pretender" or "hypocrite" is
worse, in my opinion. The real problem is turning the subject to being
about the person you are discussing an issue with rather than continuing the
dialogue.
La
Original Message-From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 27 May 2005 13:25:37 -0400Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
John wrote:
> So where was the concern when Deegan called
> me a liar half a dozen times?
Just fo
John wrote:
> So where was the concern when Deegan called
> me a liar half a dozen times?
Just for the record, John, I wrote Gary privately about that and his
response was asking me to dig up the old posts for him. Then he posted
something to TruthTalk that basically said he wanted people to be
So where was the concern when Deegan called me a liar half a dozen times? -Original Message-From: Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent: Fri, 27 May 2005 12:24:35 -0400Subject: Re: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
Is there a moderator in the
y 27, 2005 11:48
Subject: [Bulk] [TruthTalk] Ad hominem arguments
> Izzy wrote:
> >> Calling DM “nuts” is an ad hom attack,
> >> and entirely uncalled for.
>
> Lance wrote:
> > IFF he is not nuts.
>
> It is an ad hominem argument even if it were true. The truthfuln
36 matches
Mail list logo
