Re: [TruthTalk] Traditional Christian theology -- does sham mean anything

[Judy Taylor]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 19:03:48 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ad hominem?   the hair splitting distinctions you resort to elicit serious critiques of your sup/posed dichotomies in (e.g.) wisdom, sin, and resurrection..mismanaged Bib language yields cult lang/logic persuasive for certain 'peasants' who'd be reasong at '~8th gr level'--that's not a critique of you; that ppl'd be publically persuadd to take advantage of them may be..   jt: Just because you don't understand what I'm about Gary is not necessarily a reflection on me. Your mind appears to be elsewhere which is fine with me.   ftr, i requstd your 'hermeneutic'--you pointd me to the KJV per se which is to deny TT any info abt your coalesced theory of its interpretation    jt: Just FTR Gary I have no hermeneutic other than my Bible.  Is that OK?   in synch with that you publically ban theologians and theology inquisitiv access to your mental HoH, but you frequently employ private theology rootd in undeclard hermenuetic against (e.g.) my critique/s of myth--e.g. Wesleys view of sinless perf; in the process you indicatd a bias toward Wesley's error which you avoidd owning up to    jt: Hey I don't publicly ban anything - you can follow all the theologians you can find who impress you along w/Calvin.   it is no ad hominem to call attention to such privatizd interpretation/s on a public forum--participants don't seem to mind demythologizing ideogical associates engrossd in private vendettas..guys like KD are worth their weight in gold   jt: When that is all you do Gary it becomes a bit of a bore.   On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:06:42 -0500 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: There was no question about ad hominem when G accused me of writing on an 8th grade level. which is both personal and unflattering along with the ongoing cult and myth accusations...