15904Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: RPNA GM apology
- Jul 25, 2007Deejay,
You don't have to burst my bubble as I had never
intented to influence your views on this subject. My
comments were intended and hopeful toward those who
could bring a neutral view to the excellent arguments
posted by the author.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that we all
bring our presuppositions to everything we read and
hear, and clearly you will too. This is a fundamental
principle in studying any subject.
Nevertheless, in my opinion, it does not detract from
the amazingly well written arguments made by Nick. I
have read another several sections this morning and
can only say it is some of the best argumentation I
have ever read on any subject, and I read a ton of
legal and argumentative documents weekly. The hardest
kind are clearly those I translate with mechanical
translation tools, and can only get part of the
intended meaning out of the authors natural language.
Even my translators who I have going over documents
about every day to make them easier for me to
understand do not take away from the complexity of
what someone says by what they write. Nevertheless,
we all have to give the author some benefit of the
doubt when listening to their position in writing,
over the phone or face-to-face.
So, you can still believe the only reason I think his
arguments are excellent is because I'm just taking his
side with my presupposition and epistemology, but I
will leave it up to those who are coming in the next
round (hopefully it will be you as you are certainly a
leader against our position) to show me that I'm all
washed up. I stand ready, willing and able to change
my mind on this next set of arguments that I hope will
come from your pen...no matter what ever language you
wish to write in...as I will do my best to get it into
something I can read and understand.
Thanks for bringing up the point and bursting my
bubble. It does me good.
--- Deejay <group.only@...> wrote:
> I hate to pipe up and burst your bubble--well no I
> don't actually, but
> whether we know anyone personally or not, we will
> always favour and
> esteem someone writing or otherwise communicating
> something, who is
> echoing our own opinion, even if our opinion is
> wrong. It just confirms
> us in our error if we are wrong.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org,
> Walt Bre
> <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
> > Darren,
> > It is written by Nick as a defense to his position
> > the controversy with primarily Bob. I printed it
> > yesterday morning and read half of the 84 pages
> > work. I hope to finish the balance today if my
> > schedule permits. It is an absolutely excellent
> > document in my opinion, and I have NEVER EVER met
> > and only know him by his involvement in the
> > controversy. I did write to him once, but he never
> > responded to me at that time. Thus, I have no
> > personal feeling toward him one way or the other,
> > after reading the first half it is obvious the
> > man is extremely gifted and blessed in my opinion.
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>