You wrote:
“That’s nonsense.”
Well, I no longer remember the publication, but it was a Protestant author writing in a Protestant publication for other Protestants. The chance of dishonesty might have been high with such a set up as that.
“Moody is a revivalist school and would not contenance anyone on their faculty with that belief. It would be contrary to their statement of faith.”
So you say. Should I believe you or the guy who got the edited and reveiwed article published in a Protestant publication?
“Moody is a revivalist school and would not contenance anyone on their faculty with that belief. It would be contrary to their statement of faith.”
So you say. Should I believe you or the guy who got the edited and reveiwed article published in a Protestant publication?
Let me see if I have this straight......
We are given a choice between believing b-d or believing your recollection of an article in a publication of which you don't recall the name, by an author you haven't identified, edited by someone who you also have not identified.
“Well, I no longer remember the publication,”
Why should anyone believe your libel? If you can’t cite the source than your statement is worthless; much like the authority of an unnamed or anonymous source.
When one slanders an institution like Moody one should have the integrity to at least cite the source of the calumny.