Gary wrote:
>* e.g., how many ppl, actually, are involvd
>in composg the ff. 'quote'(?):
Gary, you are straining at gnats here. There are three people involved:
Judy, Schaff, and a book of the works of Servetus which Schaff references.
When I asked Judy to give the source, she accidentally included part of the
text of the section she was trying to reference. That section included some
latin phrases that apparently you did not understand, but they plainly
stated in Roman numerals that the year of the work was 1532.
Judy wrote: "It was written of Calvin after the death of Servetus." She
was referring to Schaff, the historian, writing about Calvin.
Schaff wrote the quote that you republished.
The criticism you wrote originally, was not about this quote, but about her
earlier quote when she was asked to reference the source. That earlier
quote was Schaff giving us one of his many references for material that
exists and which he presumably has read and based his opinion upon. You
claimed that this was not relevant because Schaff did not know who printed
the book, nor the exact place of plublication, even though he knew the city
and when the book was published. I think it is relevant because the source
should not be discounted simply upon the basis that in 1532 there was no
standard practice of printing in the book the name of the exact publisher.
They didn't have ISBN numbers back then either, does that mean the source is
not to be considered relevant? Please.
Why are we wasting time straining at gnats?
Your very detailed answer on behalf of Judy Taylor negates your final question. If G is wasting time straining at gnats, why respond at all?
Tea anyone?
J
