(June 15, 2012 at 2:44 pm)Rhythm Wrote: No problem, lets see them go ahead and cut that part of the text out of their bibles Tea? As long as they leave it in there (for whatever reason -in this case, I figure that they leave it because it sounds nice, and they like things that sound nice-) then it's a moot point. It is there, it is a textbook fallacy, and that is precisely what you asked for, is it not? Are you suggesting that apologists might offer an excuse that allows them to weasel their way out of any given part of of the text? This would be surprising exactly how......
You can still find it in modern translations but often it's in brackets or has a footnote explaining its origins. They probably leave it in there because the casual uninformed readers might get angry. And there's still those who think it's original (usually KJV-only nutters).
And yes, it's a fallacy. I just think it'd be unfair to use it against those who recognize the passage is inauthentic.
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
