Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8945 total)
26 online now:
CosmicChimp, PaulK, RAZD, Theodoric (4 members, 22 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Upcoming Birthdays: ONESOlivia, perfect
Post Volume: Total: 865,453 Year: 20,489/19,786 Month: 886/2,023 Week: 394/392 Day: 10/74 Hour: 0/1

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Report discussion problems here: No.2
Member (Idle past 3123 days)
Posts: 400
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 02-16-2009

Message 466 of 468 (580093)
09-07-2010 5:30 PM

Off topic???
Not a real big issue, but I noticed that slevesque's Message 34 in the "Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen?" thread was tagged as off-topic. I just thought that since the thread is about the validity of a scriptural account, responses to perceived inconsistencies or errors in the text should be on topic. Since slevesque is replying directly to a message that was not deemed off-topic, it seems odd that his should be marked as such.


Replies to this message:
 Message 468 by AdminPD, posted 09-07-2010 8:22 PM Meldinoor has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 420 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008

Message 467 of 468 (580118)
09-07-2010 8:21 PM

Dawn is losing it: Message 373

You idiot...

Are you not intelligent enough to see ...

Now watch, rocket scientist...

Inactive Administrator

Message 468 of 468 (580119)
09-07-2010 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 466 by Meldinoor
09-07-2010 5:30 PM

Re: Off topic???
Participants are responsible for not responding to off topic posts or off topic portions of posts.

Just because a message or previous message is not marked as off topic doesn't mean it wasn't off topic. It just means that at the time I checked the thread the discussion had moved beyond the off topic post and the post didn't derail the discussion.

When someone picks up the ball, I then tagged the current post to prevent further derailing.

The thread is an opportunity for those who might think the Exodus story depicts an actual historical account to present their best arguments in support of that position. Inconsistencies or errors in the text don't necessarily support whether the event described was historical or not.

The issue with the bricks not even close to being relevant. If a participant feels that an inconsistency or error is proof the event didn't happen, they need to make the argument, not just show the error and assume it's obvious.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 466 by Meldinoor, posted 09-07-2010 5:30 PM Meldinoor has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019