Posted by Steve Turner on March 17, 1999 at 15:26:57 {MWfZlKV6ncg82}:
In Reply to: *Review of Rolf Furuli's Book posted by J.H. on March 17, 1999 at 14:35:46:
: What I could not understand was how anyone, especially someone like J. H., could even offer comment on a book that they have not yet read.:
>>I did not. I provided background information on the author. I was not asked about the book, but about the person, so I did not talk about it. I think it's polite to answer the question you are asked. Don't you?<<
Yes, I do. But what I am referring to is the part where you said:
"Alas, he's been very absent lately, obviously busy with his book. I have little interest in it, as I mostly prefer to watch paint dry on the wall to reading another trinity debate."
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but "it" in line two is in apposition to "book" in the same line, and the implication is that "reading another trinity debate" is an accurate characterization of the book. It is not.
>>I have read much of what Furuli has written, and heard him talk, and I simply don't believe he's able to form a single
coherent argument on any subject. <<
I conclude otherwise. I have read his published material, and it is quite loaded with cogent, coherent arguments on a variety of subjects. Key JW-related subjects are avoided as I mentioned in my
review, but those subjects he discusses are well-thought-out and quite coherent.
< But, your opinions
are your opinions. Now everyone has mine, which are based on a careful consideration of his published material. >>Thanks for providing your review of the book here.<< You are welcome. Steve
It is hard for me to take such a characterization
seriously with no evidence to back it up. His book reveals the work of a scholar, and his discussion is very balanced, which gives much evidence of an honest person. Your comments appear to be excessively one-sided.