Re: Alpha prefix issue....

On Aug 17, 2:30 pm, "Dana Tweedy" <reddfr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Ray Martinez" <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1af2a046-94b0-49c8-8961-acec39289126@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
snip

You have, for the fourth consecutive time now, ignored all three
sources inlcuding two Ph.Ds----world renoun experts in Greek----while
invoking your own alleged education in God knows what, attempting to
insult everyones intelligence by saying Atheism is not against Theism.

First of all, Ray, you have no intelligence to insult.   Atheism is not, in
general, against theism.   Atheists are without theism.  Some individual
atheists may be against theism, but by and large, atheists don't oppose
other's religious beliefs.     Second, the source that Howard gave, and your
own Dr. Wallace agree that "a" means without, not against.   Mr. Scott's
opinion about "neutral gear" in Greek is both irrelevant (no one here is
talking about "netural" meaning) and in error.   Mr. Scott was not a world
renouned expert in Greek.    His opinion here is not an issue.



You have continued to argue your subjective opinions concerning the
English while ignoring that we are only addressing the Greek.

Ray, the prefixes means the same in Greek as the do in English.   The
prefixes are borrowed directly from the Greek.

I have
listed three Greek sources, one of which is your own source, and I
have plainly shown how all three clearly support the Greek to be
saying that the alpha prefix means total againstness.

The two relevant sources don't support your claim.    "total againstness"
would be "anti".  "a" means "totally without".   You've misunderstood the
sources, and you are too pig headed to realize you error.

In reply, like I
just mentioned, you keep arguing the English THEN asserting that these
points apply to the Greek in defiance of said three sources.

Again, the English and the Greek forms are the same.



Said issue is not advanced Greek grammar but basic 101 Greek grammar.
You have chosen to distort by arguing the English then you say that
these arguments apply to the Greek. Greek and English grammar are not
the same.

That the issue is "basic greek...grammar" is why you are wrong.   Remember,
you don't understand Greek.   He's not the one distorting the issue.
You've misunderstood the genuine Greek sources, for whatever reason, and
choose not to accept correction, again, for some unknown reason.



For the fifth time concerning what the alpha prefix means in Greek
grammar:

1. Your own source established that said prefix exists in a either-or
state of negative *or* positive.

His souce didn't say there was an "either or" relationship.   A third
situtation, "against" exists, and you won't acknowledge that.



2. Dr. Wallace said that the alpha prefix represents "negation."

Here's where you are making your error.   Negation doesn't mean "opposition
to".  You are misunderstanding Wallace.   What you are doing is similar to
mistaking the latin prefix "mis" (meaning wrong) for "mal" (meaning bad)
as in malevolent.

Wallace is speaking in the context of Greek grammar. "Negation" in
this context is a variant of "negative" and it, of course, corresponds
to the negative established by your souce above. Anyone can google
around and confirm that the alpha prefix represents "negative."

Consider, if you asks someone to borrow their car, and that person answers
in the negative.   Does that mean that person is opposed to you ever having
a car?      Does that mean the person is entirely opposed to cars?


Total evasion of a self-evident fact (= total dishonesty, as are all
replies in this message).



3. Dr. Scott, many times, has said, but not in the context of
addressing the meaning of Atheism, but in the strict context of what
the alpha prefix means: "there is no neutral gear in the Greek."

This is irrelevant,.   Mr Scott's opinion about a "neutral gear" is
meaningless, and Mr. Scott isn't an expert anyway.   "Atheist" doesn't mean
one is netural to religion.  It means that one doesn't have a religion.
Neutrality and without, are not the same thing.


Dr. Scott was the greatest expert in Greek when he was alive. You are
just lashing out because he was an antievolutionist.



All three sources establish a different component of the same fact:
said prefix is negative, neutral territory does not exist in the
Greek. Said prefix means "total againstness."

Again, that's where you are wrong.    The "a" prefix means "totally
without", not "total againstness".    There's a Greek prefix which does mean
"against", and that's "anti".

Any source on Greek prefixes will tell you this.http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0907013.htmlhttps://www.msu.edu/~defores1/gre/roots/gre_rts_afx1.htmhttp://www.class.uidaho.edu/luschnig/EWO/18.htm



Of course reality confirms: Atheism opposes Theism to a fanatical
degree. From mass murder by communist-Marxist regimes, to publishing
books arguing against Biblical veracity, and on and on and on.

Once again, Ray, the mass murder by "communist-Marxist" regimes was for
political reasons, not for religious ones.  It was not atheists killing
theists because of their religioius beliefs.   Theist regimes committed the
same kind of muders, for the same reasons.    The books arguing against
Biblical inerrancy were mostly written by theists, not atheists.



The message of the Bible is that if you are not for Theos you are
against Theos: neutrality is impossible.

One verse has Jesus saying that if you are not for him, you are against him.
This was not phrased as atheist versus theist, but as one religion versus
another.    Likewise the Bible doesn't really mention atheist beliefs, but
other theist beliefs.     In the context of the Bible, God's people were
opposed by other religious believers, not atheists.



You can argue and attempt to confuse the simple issue by invoking the
ambiguous English all you want. These arguments, which I also reject
to be illogical and false, cannot be transferred to represent Greek
grammar; and the negative alpha prefix existing in a state where
neutrality is non-existent.

The great irony here is that you are the one trying to "confuse the simple
issue".   English words with Greek prefixes are borrowed from Greek, and
mean exactly the same in Greek as they do in English.



I suspect that you will keep evading and misepresenting and lashing
out in slander all because you cannot admit that you are wrong
concerning the Greek.

This may be the reason you aren't able to admit your error, but it doesn't
describe what Howard is doing.

Based on your performance here everything you
argue elsewhere is undermined. All this means is that to discuss
things with you is a waste of time since you have not shown the
capacity to admit error. I have proven my case in the eyes of any
impartial observer.

Ray, since you aren't an "impartial observer" and you are the one who is
objectively wrong here, perhaps you should reconsider your position.



Not too long ago I made a very bad error in the way I described
natural selection. Dana Tweedy continually pointed it out. Then by
chance I discovered that he was right. I promptly issued an apology
and correction. Dana accepted. I actually knew what Dana pointed out
but for some reason I had a mind block. Ironically I traced the error
to the first edition of the _Origin_ where Darwin himself had made the
exact same error. He too, in a later edition, corrected himself.

You are making the same type of error here.   Since you have a established a
pattern of making basic errors like this, perhaps you should listen when
everyone tells you that you are wrong.

Incidentally, Darwin didn't make the same mistake you did.    Darwin himself
never claimed that individual organisms changed by natural selection.  You
seem to have misunderstood Darwin the same way you've misunderstood Wallace.



The three point evidence here concerning the alpha prefix is
unmistakably clear and well supported. You are wrong concerning the
Greek.

No, Ray, you are the one who is wrong, and maybe, just maybe you'll
eventually realize your error.     When you do, I'll expect another apology.



The English is another subject. I see no reason to argue the English
until you acknowledge the Greek.

Ray, you are wrong about both English and Greek.    You really need to
realize that you are establishing a pattern of errors that are repeating.
This pattern has dire consequences for your "paper", should you ever get
around to actually working on it.

DJT

The "agree with me or you have misunderstood" tactic employed to evade
simple facts and evidence; proving dishonesty, unable to admit to even
the most obvious errors.

Dana Tweedy is the prime example of the ordinary dishonest
evolutionist. More importantly, the silence of every evolutionist
concerning his messages and Howard Hershey's messages in this brutally
anti-complex issue demonstrates why evolutionists have reputations as
brazen liars.

To repeat the simple facts and evidence:

Again, that's where you are wrong. The "a" prefix means "totally
without", not "total againstness". There's a Greek prefix which does mean
"against", and that's "anti".

1. Howard's own source established a basic Greek grammar fact: the
alpha prefix exists in a state of two options: negative or positive.

2. Dr. Wallace said the alpha prefix is negation. He said this in the
context of basic Greek grammar. Said negation is a variant and
corresponds to negative.

3. Dr. Scott has said, concerning the alpha prefix: "there is no
neutral gear in the Greek."

All three facts above clearly establish that the alpha prefix means
total againstness; neutrality does not exist. Therefore, in the Greek,
"Atheism" means to be totally against Theism. Of course reality
confirms: Atheists have murdered hundreds of millions of Theists in
the 20th century and they oppose the Bible and Christianity to a
fanatical degree.

If the evolutionist would deny and lie and insult our intelligence
concerning this axiomatic and uncomplicated issue, then just think
what they do with complicated scientific evidence?

Of course since over half of all adults in the U.S. are Creationists
or IDists this mass of persons already know.

Ray






.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Alpha prefix issue....
    ... Atheists are without theism. ... renouned expert in Greek. ... saying that the alpha prefix means total againstness. ... Dr. Wallace said the alpha prefix is negation. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Alpha prefix issue....
    ... the alpha prefix means: "there is no neutral gear in the Greek." ... Dr. Scott was the greatest expert in Greek when he was alive. ... Dr. Wallace said the alpha prefix is negation. ... There's no evidence that atheists in general oppose the Bible, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ancient Rome
    ... Greek or Carian in a different script, or it could even be German. ... no such thing as an Etruscan language. ... " The Commission has found violations of a number of Articles of the ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: The first annual TO defamation of character lawsuit for the silly
    ... that evolution is not supported by the evidence, ... But you said that "Atheists always lie". ... But as I've pointed out to you several times before, Gould disagrees ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Alpha prefix issue....
    ... Atheists are without theism. ... renouned expert in Greek. ... the prefixes means the same in Greek as the do in English. ... For the fifth time concerning what the alpha prefix means in Greek ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading