The SAB vs. The SAB: Corrected and Explained

[Jason Gastrich]

Hello,

I'm Jason Gastrich and the author of The Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained. Yes, I clarified Steve Well's SAB. You can see my book here: [Solicitation deleted - NS]

I've challenged Steve to a debate, but he has been waffling. I'm hoping that he will come out of hiding and discuss our books. I'm open to the specifics of the debate.

If you would support such a debate (if you would be interested in seeing it happen), please contact Steve Wells at [email deleted]. As I said, he has been waffling and I think he needs a little prodding before he will debate me. Perhaps someone can even help coach him; I don't mind.

I'm open to the regular, text debate at iidb or ANYTHING else (e.g. phone debate, public debate, etc.).

I'm not trying to pick a fight, but I enjoy debate and I think it would be quite exciting to debate the guy who wrote the book that took me hundreds of hours to correct and explain.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
JasonG@jcsm.org


Jason, we would prefer it that the privacy of others be maintained. Please do not post other people's email addresses on the forum. Thank you.
- Nightshade, FD Moderator

[Godless Wonder]

Originally posted by Jason Gastrich
Hello,

I'm Jason Gastrich and the author of The Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained. Yes, I clarified Steve Well's SAB. You can see my book here: http://sab.jcsm.org.
[...] Actually, one cannot see your book there, only some samples. One can buy it there.

And it's not a book, it is software. And it does not work on "any PC" only those that can run Windows software.

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

Hi Jason,

As far as I know, Steve isn't a user at IIDB. I you want him to sign up and debate you here at II then I think it's best that you attempt to persuade him on your own. Respectfully, I don't think it's entirely appropriate for the II users to do the 'prodding' for you.

Nevertheless, it would make an interesting debate. If Steve decides to come here and agrees to a formal debate, we'd be happy to accomodate you. Keep in mind that there are plenty of highly qualified potential debating opponents right here at II too.

However, we'd ask that you finish your current debate with J.F. Till before you start another one.

Thanks,

- Nightshade, FD Moderator

[Jason Gastrich]

Hi Nightshade,

I don't mind following the rules, but is seems that you have made some arbitrary ones. If not, please point me to where these rules are posted.

First, Steve Well's email address is on his web site and is NOT private. Therefore, I don't appreciate you censoring it. For all those that wish to contact him, please go to his web site and click his email address. Link: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com .

Next, I disagree with your ad hoc rule that I need to finish my debate with Farrell before I begin another debate. I should be allowed to debate as I please. Incidentally, if you were to suggest that I should finish my current debate first, then I may agree with you. I simply don't like the "rule" that you are imposing on me.

Godless Wonder, my book is technically an e-book. It is available on CD. It will work on all Windows platforms.

On my site, you can download a free sample; which is the books of Jude and Ruth. You can also see a couple of examples. [Solicitation deleted - NS]

At any rate, my offer remains open. I'd like to debate Steve Wells. If he refuses, then I'd consider debating another author, professor, etc.

Finally, if Nightshade wishes to impose a rule that forbids me from engaging in another debate as I see fit, then I will gladly debate on Inerrancy.com or in another venue.

Have a good night.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich

[Silent Dave]

Jason, two things . . .

First, treating another person's private information as sensitive is a large theme on IIDB in general. Encouraging FDD users to engage in only one debate at a time is a very large theme in this forum in particular. Both of these facts would have become apparent to you with a little bit of research. Nightshade was following well-established principles in his actions, and was by no means acting arbitrarily.

Second, I must warn you that Nightshade -- or myself, or an administrator -- may indeed impose a rule that forbids you from engaging in another debate as you see fit. For example, in a telephone debate with Doug Kruger hosted on your website, you saw fit to append to the debate a 20-minute "closing statement" of your own, without Krueger's foreknowledge or consent. Here at IIDB, we would indeed impose a rule upon you preventing you from doing something like that; if that is a problem, you should consider a venue other than IIDB.


Dave

[Secular Pinoy]

So you've brought your book advertisement to this board as well? You've personally emailed me concerning your "book" (perhaps via my website), and I've seen you promoting your work at a yahoo group (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/errancyn/) as well, and boy, you were thoroughly debunked there.

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

Originally posted by Jason Gastrich
Hi Nightshade,

I don't mind following the rules, but is seems that you have made some arbitrary ones. If not, please point me to where these rules are posted.

These are not arbitrary, and you are breaking another forum rule here as well:

II Discussion Forum Rules and Policies (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21680)

(1) You will not advertise or solicit other members to buy, sell or peruse any products or services through this discussion forum. Chain letters and junk mail are strictly prohibited.

I looked at the link you provided and I decided to delete it. In order for someone to debate you on your work, he or she would have to purchase your e-book. I'm sorry, but the IIDB is not a venue for soliciting

(3) You will not violate a person's privacy by publishing against someone's will information that is private and personal.

Originally posted by Jason Gastrich

First, Steve Well's email address is on his web site and is NOT private. Therefore, I don't appreciate you censoring it. For all those that wish to contact him, please go to his web site and click his email address.

It is irrelevant that his email is on his website. Though my address and phone number are available to the public in the phone directory, I would not like it if they were displayed on a public discussion forum without my consent. The only email address you may display is your own.

Originally posted by Jason Gastrich

Next, I disagree with your ad hoc rule that I need to finish my debate with Farrell before I begin another debate. I should be allowed to debate as I please. Incidentally, if you were to suggest that I should finish my current debate first, then I may agree with you. I simply don't like the "rule" that you are imposing on me.

In addition to what Silent Dave said, we desire to keep formal debate participants focused on one debate at a time. It is a judgement call on our part to maximize the quality of the formal debate content. In addition, the administrators allow us moderators to exercise flexibility and to make our own judgement calls depending on the situation. We have the right to impose unwritten rules within reason.

Originally posted by Jason Gastrich

At any rate, my offer remains open. I'd like to debate Steve Wells. If he refuses, then I'd consider debating another author, professor, etc.

Finally, if Nightshade wishes to impose a rule that forbids me from engaging in another debate as I see fit, then I will gladly debate on Inerrancy.com or in another venue.

If you want my advice, no one here is likely going to go through the trouble to purchase your book (thus donating financial support to your ministry) so that they can formally debate you on your work. However, you are welcome to initiate a formal debate here at II dealing with Biblical inerrancy and contradictions. You could use the same arguments from your e-book.

In addition, keep in mind that if you want to debate Biblical inerrancy vs. errancy here, then there's nothing preventing you from informally debating in the regular Biblical Criticism & History (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=60) forum. You're welcome to set up a future formal debate here, but you need to finish your current debate with Till before you can actually start it. If you disagree then it's best that you find another venue.

If you have any further complaints, please bring them to Bugs, Problems, & Complaints (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=16).

Thanks,

- Nightshade, FD Moderator

[Jason Gastrich]

Night Shade,

I'm new here, so thanks for explaining things to me. Each DB does things differently, so, I suppose I'm just discovering how iidb does things.

Several atheists have a copy of my book, so I wouldn't doubt that one around here will buy a copy or already has a copy.

I don't mind waiting until my current, formal debate at iidb is finished before engaging in another one, here. Farrell has challenged me to another formal debate, but I've told him to wait as well.

Silent Dave, my 20 minute piece was a commentary and was not a continuation of the debate. As I've said before, it is perfectly right and ok for a person to comment on their debate; in writing or in audio. To assert otherwise is foolishness.

For instance, I turned my debate with Stephen Geddes into a research paper/web page on Isaiah 53. And I commented on the Krueger debate, too. I'm sure everyone has heard of a commentary and wouldn't disagree with recording one. If iidb has a quirk against it being done on their server, then so be it. If they do, it just goes to prove my point why Krueger can't do one on my server. He needs to get his own.

Pinoy, I don't recognize your name or the name of that Yahoo Group. I generally do not post on Yahoo Groups because I don't like them. On further investigation, I see that this link goes to Yahoo's alt.bible.errancy, usenet group. Now, I do post on usenet.

Rest assured, my book was nowhere near debunked on that newsgroup. I challenge someone to do so, though. Saying it was debunked is a joke, but I don't blame you for sticking to the party lines and cheering on your friends.

The alt.bible.errancy group is totally dead. It's likely dead because of its poor moderation (it can take 48 hours to see a message) and the behavior of its resident posters. At any rate, over the last 2 weeks, I've posted a large number of messages at alt.atheism and answered questions about the Bible and its inerrancy. Anyone is free to join and the subject with the most Q/A is "Jason Gastrich Answers."

Lastly, this thread was not designed to advertise my book. It was designed to challenge Steve Wells to a debate.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich

Signature:
(Solicitation delted ~SD)

P.S. Any idea why the signature in my profile isn't working? I had to manually enter it.

[B. H. Manners]

[Inflammatory/off topic comments deleted - NS]

[Silent Dave]

Jason--

Whether you want to call your 20-minute addition a commentary or a continuation, the fact remains that we would not allow you to do something similar here. You seem to be saying that IIDB would have the right to post a lengthy debate commentary into the debate threads (or allow one side but not the other to post such a commentary), because we own the server; I will not argue the point with you, but will only say that we choose not to do so. If we did, most people would have a very low opinion of our character.

We do not enable signatures around here; that is why you had to enter yours manually -- and that will have to be deleted as well, I'm afraid, since it is advertising a product for sale on your website.

We don't wish to actively prevent IIDB members from buying your products such as the one you've been advertising here -- indeed, I may have purchased it myself, if I thought, based on the samples on your website, that it had anything of value to add to the discourse on Biblical errancy. But at the same time, the fact is that your debate challenge (a) is contingent upon your opponent having purchased a certain product from your website, (b) is primarily targeted at a person who is not an IIDB member, and (c) comes from one who, whether or not deservedly, clearly has a reputation for dishonesty and none for being skilled. To be honest, I think it is therefore unlikely that your challenge will be accepted. That's usually not a problem, but since the thread already shows signs of devolving into a lengthy, non-topical and venom-filled conversation, I am going to close it. It will remain here in FDCS so that everyone can view your challenge, and it will be re-opened if Nightshade or I hear from someone who is interested in accepting the challenge.


Dave