Subject: Re: 3 questions for theists Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:26:58 -0800 From: Brian Holtz Organization: Sun Microsystems To: "Michael A. McAngus" "Michael A. McAngus" wrote: > > "Netcom jimhumph" wrote : > > a) I said "all you [Jason] are left with" and and > > not "all *one* is left with", and > > Netcom jimhumph is not Jason. Yep, I know. My message was potentially confusing in two respects. First, I thought (apparently incorrectly) that I had successfully posted this message almost a week ago as a followup to JH's now-expired posting, so I reposted it as a followup to the only unexpired message in that thread, which was Jason's. Second, I was telling JH that my use of "you" in my earlier reply to Jason was intended to mean "Jason" as opposed to "one". All the ad hominems between JH and you atheists are disappointing. If JH incorrectly claims he's answered a question or rebutted an argument, why debate that meta-point? I'd simply repeat the question or argument and ask for (a pointer to) the response. As long as casual readers see the (perhaps repeated) question or argument alongside JH's non-answer or non-rebuttal, I'd declare victory and move on. Isn't it more interesting to debate atheism than to debate the debate? Speaking of debating atheism, I'm thinking it might be fun to write up what I'd consider the strongest possible argument for theism (or perhaps one for deism, and one for Christianity). It would probably be pretty eye-opening, and it would be fun to challenge theists to say what they think the strongest argument for atheism is. Do you know of any such previous attempts by either side? -- Brian Holtz 650-OK-HOLTZ http://holtz.org Brian.Holtz@sun.com 650-SUN-0598 http://starsync.eng/~holtz Knowledge is dangerous. Take a risk: http://humanknowledge.net