Posted by Janey on March 23, 1999 at 06:18:24 {MW/mrDAKQdkdU}:
In Reply to: *****Stafford's Response to White posted by J.H. on March 23, 1999 at 01:00:02:
JAN - A circular argument is what points back to the conclusion as a supporting premise. White referred to all other uses of "theos" to support a particular interpretation of this word in John 1:1. >>
Jan, here is where your
stupidity shines through. All those "other" uses would include the very use under discussion right? So White ASSUMES in his premise the conclusion that theos in JOhn 1:1 means that Jesus is the one true God!
Are you really this incompetent?
KAN - Stafford misrepresented White. I don't doubt that White also misrepresented Stafford when he claimed Stafford had used circular reasoning, and neither do I doubt that these men are more than capable of quite a bit
of logical fallacies. What Stafford wrote was plain wrong, that's all.
Nope. You are just not familiar with basic logic. Notice that you did not comment at all on the specific points I emphasized.
White uses his conclusion as his premise. In stating that theos is ALWAYS (did you note that word Jan?) used of the one true God then White his conclusion to prove his point. The very point under discussion is whether or not Jesus, who is WITH God, is God in the same sense in John 1:1. White CONCLUDES that he is in his premise and so how could he reach a different "conclusion" IN HIS CONCLUSION!
A genius you are not Jan.
Janey