[Vision2020] Going Nowhere Fast: Is there a correct interpretation of the bible?

[Edna Wilmington]

Forum Members,

My thanks to Ted for his questions.

Please see my replies to Ted's message inline below:

--- Aldoussoma@aol.com wrote:
 
> What does this now have to do with the question
> about the correct 
> interpretation of the Bible?

Nothing unless Mr. Fox wishes to invoke it in his
answer, but it appears probable that he won't do so.
My most recent question to Mr. Fox is the subject.  I
have no objection to him changing the subject line
above to reflect that fact in his reply.

> You want a proof that arrogance and insincerity are
> unethical behaviors?

Yes.

> Wayne Fox already stated his empirical knowledge
> claims are in the form of 
> probabilistic statements, not proofs.

I'm aware of Mr. Fox's statements regarding the
relationship between knowledge and probability.  The
message cited does not seem to imply Mr. Fox considers
his ethical claims merely probable.  In his answer,
Mr. Fox has complete freedom to qualify his ethical
statements as he sees fit; however, even if he decides
to describe them as merely probable, he must, by his
own standard for testing knowledge claims, still prove
his basis for doing so.

Perhaps Mr. Fox would agree with this definition of
probability by John Locke:

"Probability is the appearance of the agreement or
disagreement of two ideas, by the intervention of
proofs whose connection is not constant, but appears
for the most part to be so."

My question requests an "intervention of proofs" for
what Mr. Fox has said.

Edna Wilmington


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus