From: Nichael Lynn Cramer (nichael@sover.net)
Date: Sat Apr 25 1998 - 15:33:28 EDT
Bavinck wrote:
>JWest writes:
>>> [...] We need not restate what others have
>clearly
> >>stated and we need not re-invent the wheel every time we get in our car to
> >>drive somewhere. There is simply no reason for me to argue what he has
> >>proven. Read him.
>
>If Stanton's argument is so conclusive, then it seems that it would be easy
>for you to at least outline it for us? Wouldn't an outline be more helpful
>than the mere claim that Stanton "eruditely argued the evidence"?
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. But given
1] that this topic is discussed in many, easily accessible sources, --e.g.
several introductory texts on Textual Criticism, etc-- (by comparison on a
list devoted to Physics, a presisent request to, say, justify the concept
of the conservation of energy would be rightly directed to a freshman text
on the subject)
and
2] that, in any case, this is *not* the topic of this mailing-list.
A pointer to a sound, even-handed reference seems a perfectly reasonable
response.
Nichael Cramer
nichael@sover.net Gather the folks, tell the stories,
http://www.sover.net/~nichael/ break the bread. -- John Shea
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:36 EDT