Quote:
Originally Posted by fingers
You are a better defence counsel than Peter Plunker.
|
Not so much defending David here. IF David concluded that then David would have gone wrong,
but,
I believe the OP is the guilty one here. The theological/philosophical 'conclusion' he jumps to and then attributes to David is not warranted.
it 'does not follow'.
You don't need to be an expert (or even student) in philosophy to see this.