Dan Wallace Comments - Private

From: Wes Williams (WesWilliams@usa.net)
Date: Thu Apr 16 1998 - 02:41:34 EDT

Dear Greg,

I am writing you personally and copying Carl Conrad, the moderator of the
b-greek list with respect to some information that has come my way today
regarding Wallace's response to your chapter on Sharp's rule. I hope it will
aid in moderating your words towards Wallace since I suspect that he himself
may be an unwilling victim (not entirely though) in the post that recently
transpired. Please let me explain some background before I make my point.

I could understand his Wallace's sensitivity to having his Doctoral Thesis
questioned, since he has reacted with sensitivity before. But the tone was
more biting than I thought was characteristic of Wallace. Wallace in his
literature tends to at least give some credit to those of a different
theology than his own. I could be naive, but I started questioning the post
itself and that is why I asked for the material included within the

David McKay responded to me privately and indicated he was unwilling to
include the deleted material, but he was worried that he had done the wrong
thing and should instead have asked Wallace for a public response. I replied
that Wallace is now in a delicate and vulnerable position as a result of the
harshly worded post to b-greek, a position that Wallace may not have wanted
to be in. (But, watch what you say in private since a little winged creature
will certainly broadcast it.)

Furthermore, today I received an email from another list. I enclose the
relevant paragraph:

> Larry Ingram was interested to find out what Dan Wallace thinks of the
> use of his work in Greg Stafford's book "Jehovah's Witnesses Defended"
> so he wrote to him, and he has been given permission to quote from the
> reply to his e-mail.
> The results of Stafford's method are completely predictable ... He has
> selectively quoted from my works, ignoring the accompanying data given

This comment links Larry Ingram ("Start your Day") to the source of the
message and not McKay. I don't really know who contacted Wallace, but I do
sense an unhealthy collaboration to use the b-greek list to air theological
differences and an attempt to discredit you. In so doing, I further think
that if Dan Wallace knew that his comments would be used for the purpose
they were, he would have at least reworded them.

To make my point, I believe it in the best interests overall to be somewhat
gracious in a response to Wallace, since he may be angered anyway when he
finds that his words have been edited and broadcast to the b-greek
community. I believe you deserve a direct response on the issue and I hope
that Wallace shares in an intelligent probing of the issues. I suspect he
will post once and say he will not participate in a further discussion.

You can do anything with this information you wish, but one thought is to
comment that you do not have all of the information that Dan Wallace
originally shared, but you are responding to the words that David McKay
passed on publicly. In this way, Wallace at least knows and understands what
happened to his words.

If what I suspect with regards to using the list for theological
discrediting is true, then this will certainly not be the last instance
where a theologically sensitive issue will be raised with respect to you. I
trust that gracious responses to hostile ones will contribute to a fine
reputation, not only for you but also for b-greek, a place for issues, even
sensitive ones, to be addressed squarely in an atmosphere of humility and
religious tolerance.

Wes Williams

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:23 EDT