I don't cheer applepie7 blindly. It's something like this: I know my Classics teacher is excellent with Classical Greek. I can tell he's scholastic and learned. But I may not understand everything he talks about because he's so profound.
Yes, but you know the qualifications of your teacher and you don't know Applepie7 - except you've just assumed he knows his stuff, because you do.
I've questioned you as to why you believe something and you've stated
a) you didn't really understand/follow one of his threads
and
b) you're too young to formulate opinions etc.
It probably would have been better, and seemingly less rude had you entered these threads and said something like "That's an interesting point" and then ask for clarification. Not to say something like "Well Applepie7 you're completely correct, and you've blown everyone else out of the water"
I apologise for having to go off-topic to discuss this, but you keep posting those types of posts on these threads. I'm not picking on you, personally. If you're mistaken I would argue against you, regardless of who you are. And, in point of fact when Applepie7 began his other thread about the Koran talking of Jesus I found some of his parallels very interesting - and am on record for saying so. (however his theory fell down when he can't show why someone would do what he claims they have done)
The same thing with applepie7. Applepie7's knowledge and expertise are profound. I don't need to be as good as he in order to cheer him. We cheer a world-famous clarinettist not because we play as well but because we don't and he does. But it's not blind. I appreciate the depth of applepie7's knowledge.
He certainly knows more languages than I do. However his establishing of a 'fact' is rather spurrious. (please forgive spelling mistakes)
He himself has shown what
might be the use of a 'royal we' in Arabic. I keep using terms such as
might because I don't know that it is the case, or not. But rather, I asked him, who has a greater knowledge of Arabic than me and he ignored it. This to me is highly telling. He ignores this and then crows that no one is debating him.
You are jealous that I'm praising him.
Not at all. I really believe you're doing yourself a dis-service by how you act here. (and yes, I realise people have opinions regarding how I act)
Who else knows so much about the subject? Nobody, really.
No. You make the same mistake he does. That is
a) Knowledge of Arabic
means
b) he is right about who wrote the Koran
You are impressed by his knowledge of Arabic. You then assume that conclusions he draws are correct about an
historical document. If he were correct, I'd salute him but he's still unable to show why Christians would use a book not inspired by God to spread Christianity to the Arabs when the Bible was sufficient to do so. And why, in doing so, they changed the meaning so greatly as to have a highly metaphorical document (very poetic) that is fundamentally flawed in its transmission of the Christian message (evidenced by its view of the Trinity).
He could suggest heretics used it. He could suggest that heretics wrote it initially and it was subsequently changed by Moslems.
But he does none of this.
I appreciate the reverence one has for those who have knowledge. But one needs to have a reason. You associate him with people you know have knowledge of a subject. You can't both know he has knowledge on this subject and then say you can't understand the points he's making. How then do you know he has knowledge. What instead you're doing also is saying "Your argument
sounds impressive." and then concluding "You know a lot about the subject"
Anyway, whilst you continue to blindly cheer, I will continue to debate you on this on these threads.
If you want to discuss the gist of what he says, I'll be happy to discuss this too.
