Alward Makes Farrell Cringe
JAlw@aol.com JAlw@aol.com
Thu, 15 Oct 1998 14:09:37 EDT (00908492977, bbaf5956.36263a61@aol.com)
KORNFORM
Parenthetically, I might note that Alward does not seen to be the devil that
some say he is. He seems to be a devil's advocate instead! I visited his site
and it is indeed heavily tipped in favor of the errantist view. So some people
want to play the other side in testing the solidity of errancy. So what? More
power to our side if we can develop ironclad arguments ahead of time.
TILL
If you have visited his site, then you should have noticed that some of the
conclusions he has reached are such that could be ripped to pieces by
competent inerrantists. If I had the time, I would take his articles to
show that 90% of what he has identified as "errancy" in his articles is far
more presumptive than any position that has been stated on the errancy side
in the matter of the Egyptian plagues.
=====================
ALWARD
I know you're very busy, so why don't you pick just one of my articles. I'm
very confident you could, indeed, find problems with it. One of the main
reasons I placed my essays on the web is so those who are more informed than I
can help me find these problems.
=====================
Farrell Till (continued from above):
I cringe every time he posts his web page address on this list, because I'm
sure that some inerrantists check him out and lap up what they see. One
thing is certain: the standard that he has demanded of us in claiming
errancy or contradiction in the Bible if applied to the articles on his web
site would result in the discrediting of all of them.
=====================
Joe Alward:
Please show us the email post(s) in which you believe I put forth a standard
which you feel is too demanding for any errantist to meet. I don't recall
such a post. I think you may have misunderstood me. But, we'll soon be able
to decide, one way or the other.
======================
Farrell Till (continued):
Did you notice how that he has taken my facetious comment about wanting
someone on the list to shoot me if I ever responded to any of his postings
again? In doing this, he left out the context in which I made this statement,
so it leaves the impression that I have perhaps recognized him as an authority
of such competence that I won't respond to him. The statement has also been
posted in places that have nothing to do with the articles that it has been
affixed to.
=======================
Joe Alward:
You meant it as a joke when you wrote it; I mean the readers to take it as a
joke. In any case, I've already offered to let all my readers know exactly
what you think about me, my articles, and my devil's advocacy brand of
errancy/inerrancy. I've told you that you may write up to 300 words (more if
you absolutely need them) and I will place them at the very top of my web page
for all to see every time they visit, and will leave it there for as long as
you wish. I am quite serious about this; this is not a trick or a joke, and I
expect you to take me up on my offer.