Prayer ... SERIOUSLY?!

[Statler Waldorf]

---

Could you also please show where I have used a logical argument incorrectly instead of just asserting that I have?

naw -
I think anyone here who has gone one on one with you already knows what I was referring to anyway, and I'm just not willing to pick up the same argument where we always seem to leave off. What would be the point.

I'll limit my remarks to your posts in the future if you'd like -- but hey, how will you ever know when your logic is flawed and your arguments are biased??

---

Well you just asserting that they are of course does not make it so. How am I supposed to correct the problem if you won't point out where and how I commit it? I guess I will just carry on as usual

---

---

I will use an argument until someone can actually refute it.

"used a logical argument incorrectly" -Statler
used logic incorrectly* The way you had it is a fallacy of assuming the initial point.

---

I wish you'd use the quote function, sure would make responding easier. If I present an argument that I feel is completely logical, and nobody refutes that argument; my argument stands un-refuted and I see no reason to abandon that argument.

---

"I just trust the expertise of others just like you do all the time." -Statler
Your "just trusting"? You dont care whether their claims are backed by data?
You are also presuming that the person you were talking to blindly trusts experts.

What is your method for when two experts disagree? just trust them both?

---

I will admit, I don't quite follow you on this one. Seeing the Hebrew for myself is not going to help anything. When an expert in Hebrew says that Hebrew verb tenses are determined by context and the verb for "formed" is correctly translated in the ESV as "had formed", then I see no reason to doubt this.