David Miller wrote:
>>John Smithson in the not too distant past has
>>expressed some idea that my life is characterized
>>by rejection from nearly everyone and he has used
>>that erroneous perspective as some kind of leverage
>>to try and get me to hear him
John Smithson wrote:
>Give me the time and date for this posted comment.
>If I said it just this way and for that purpose, I will
>want to apologize. Often, David, you misquote what
>has been written. Time and date.
I find it very difficult to communicate with you because you seem more
interested in debate rather than getting to the truth. Here you allege that
I OFTEN MISQUOTE what has been written. To my knowledge, I have NEVER
misquoted anyone in this forum. I try very hard to spell correctly and to
quote people accurately. It is hard to misquote someone when I simply copy
and paste their text. I think you probably picked the wrong word here and
meant misunderstand rather than misquote. I suspect such because I did not
quote anything in this particular post that prompted this response from you.
Also, it is true that I often misunderstand what people are trying to
communicate. So did you mean "misunderstand" rather than "misquote"?
In regards to this topic, if you want to say that you do not have these
sentiments and that you do not remember ever having them and did not mean to
communicate such, that would be just fine. From my perspective, this would
be much more important than an apology. I do not dwell in the past and I
certainly do not want to waste a lot of time searching for posts that would
make you apologize to me. What is important to me is what you think right
now. I use past statements primarily to understand your present mindset.
Right now, I have been wrangling with understanding you in regards to
"logic." I don't know if you just say what seems appropriate at the time,
or if you have some nuance of understanding that escapes me. For example,
in the past, you wrote to Judy the following about "logic" on Oct. 21, 2004:
-----------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 12:26 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] What is sin?
In a message dated 10/20/2004 7:30:59 AM
Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>John, last time I checked it was the Holy Spirit who
>>reveals God's Word, it's not Greek logic even though
>>God always makes sense.
John Smithson wrote:
>You contradict yourself here. Why you reject logic
>everytime it is introduced into the discussion is beyond
>me. "Logic" is just another word for "making sense."
-----------------------------
Then, just a few days ago, you said things to me like the following:
John Smithson wrote:
>... what you have presented above is not "logic."
>It is a reasonable way of arriving at a decision.
>...
>A conclusion, in logic, does not have wording that
>is not found in the major and minor premise.
>A conclusion in logic is a forced observation based
>on that has been stated before.
>...
>logic is a specific and predicable [sic] way of confirming
>or arriving at truth. It is not the only way.
So which is it? What are alternative methods of reasoning besides logic?
Or, is logic just another word for "making sense"? I would appreciate you
trying to explain your perspective about the role of logic in our
discussions. At times I think we are in close agreement, but then at other
times it appears that we are not.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
On misquoting -- I do not agree with your defense, however, it is, also, not impotant to me that we continue this discussion. What we have to do, you and I, it seems, is concentrate on those discussion points that edify --- neither of us have done a good job on that of late.
As far as "logic" is concerned - what I had in mind with Judy and then with you involved two very different thought contexts. I see no purpose in expanding on that statement.
Since no good purpose in the continuing this thread -- lets move on.
"I try very hard to spell correctly" ?????? :-)
John
