Okay, I'm unclicking the email comments to me thing.
I don't know you and I don't know Lvka. I assume that Lvka is female, since I clicked on the blog and a female's picture was there.
Why do you feel, both on this blog and on Perry's, that you must insult everyone you talk to? Insult me all you want. I don't care. But are you not the least bit embarrassed that you are speaking so disrespectfully, not only to fellow Christians, but to ladies?
I'm still following David's blog, but I really can't stomach to read your comments anymore. And there is no point debating you. You really don't know enough about epistemology and church history to continue the discussion. For example, Lvka, Perry, david, and myself are all humanistic postmodernists because we appeal to tradition and that's circular reasoning.
But on the other hand, how is it not circular reasoning for you to appeal to the bible (like a Platonic document) simply because it's the Bible? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
And Lvka is saying the reason you aren't coming to Arian conclusions on those passages is because you are already presupposing trinitarian dogma--ancient Christian tradition is informing your exegesis. You aren't going on "pure bible."
For someone who's complaining about being insulted, you can sure dish 'em out. But it doesn't bother me, really. The probability of my having a thicker skin seems high.
that you must insult everyone you talk to?
I don't see the insults, really. In my experience, many complain of insults, but when I ask them for a direct quote, it's rare for me to see one. But I'll ask again - please quote me being insulting.
You really don't know enough about epistemology and church history to continue the discussion.
For example, Lvka, Perry, david, and myself are all humanistic postmodernists because we appeal to tradition and that's circular reasoning.
Now you're on a trip to the bizarre.
1) I never called you "humanistic postmodernists". I've called you "humanists", sure. It's what you are. if that insults you, drop the humanism out of your worldview.
2) Identifying that you EMPLOY *ONE* pomo argument doesn't make you "a postmodernist". It means you employ a pomo argument.
3) I've never called anyone a "postmodernist" in my interactions with you.
4) Your appeals to tradition are CIRCULAR, and that's not what you label me as having said.
5) I called David a humanist for one thing b/c his faith is in historical analysis to the limits of human power. That's humanism, and that's not "you're a humanist b/c you appeal to tradition".
6) The pomo argument you employed is the lame "that's just your private interp!" argument. Much like a pomo, you remain blissfully unaware how that argument slits your own throat as well, but I've come to expect that.
I suppose that you'll just complain about more insults b/c I dared to say you were wrong. You know, if you don't want to be called a pomo, you shouldn't act like one.
But on the other hand, how is it not circular reasoning for you to appeal to the bible (like a Platonic document) simply because it's the Bible?
Well, since you're unsubscribing, I guess you won't know my answer. If you'd asked me, I'd've answered; in fact, I already answered DavidW multiple times on this question including in my formal debate with him, which you claim to have read, which means you have no excuse not to interact with what I've already said on it.
You aren't going on "pure bible."
You can *say* that, sure. But you can't DEMONSTRATE it. In point of fact, I go where the Bible leads me. I'm sorry to disappoint you, as I'm sure you'd prefer I be more nefarious in real life so you could whine even more.