From: taxis@gte.net
Date: Tue Sep 30 1997 - 20:58:13 EDT

Is it my imagination or is this argument *still* going on?!!!!

Paul Zellmer writes on 10/1/97:

> Paul Dixon wrote:
> > I believe the archives will bear this out: 1) I was not the one who
> > brought up the issue of contradictions, rather, 2) two other
> list-members
> > brought it up. This is how it happened. One list-member, at least
> > several times, commented that 1 John has contradictions throughout.
> > Another list-member seemed to agree and suggested 1 Jn 2:7-8 as a good
> > example. That was when I responded and attempted to show
> > non-contradiction because of the two different ways KAINHN was being
> > used.
> All right, I confess, I will not deny, but confess that I was the
> offending party that caused the notorious thread to come up again. I
> apologized to Jonathan within a couple days when I noted that it was
> putting him in front of the firing line. It took a couple days because
> that is the delay I normally have in receiving and reading the digests.
> I believe that the original thread had been allowed to die down, and
> the statement which kicked it all off again was:
> > BTW, Jonathan, it appears to me that verses 7 & 8 of chapter 2
> support
> > your notes in the past concerning conflicting statements in the book.
> > We have to continually fight the tendency to soften these statements
> so
> > that the points that he is making can continue to have their "shock
> > effect." Of course, we note as you have that these statements do not
> > make John undecided in the points that he is making.
> [The "we" was referring to the translation project that I am a part of.]
> But, Paul, I also believe that you and the others that went after
> Jonathan's position were more concerned with semantics than you were in
> understanding what other people were actually saying. I used
> "conflicting statements," Jonathan [at least at times] used
> "contradictions," others [of which I think you were one] wanted to use
> "paradox." But all of us involved in the the discussion agreed with
> the last statement quoted above: that John was not undecided on the
> issues.
> I note that Carl does not claim that this thread was without merit,
> just that it got out of hand. Perhaps a better way to handle issues
> where we feel the need to "present the other side" is to ask the
> original poster for further insight in his position on that particular
> area that we are questioning. I realize that sometimes genuine
> differences do occur, but frequently we are all saying the same thing
> using different words.
> Peace,
> Paul
> Paul and Dee Zellmer, Jimmy Guingab, Geoffrey Beltran
> Ibanag Translation Project
> Cabagan, Philippines
> zellmer@faith.edu.ph

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:30 EDT