Theos-Talk Archives (March 1995 Message tl00227)

John M: <could someone explain that if Paul Johnson's work is
incorrect, then what is the correct interpretation of the
Masters??>

> You just hit a nerve John.  None of Paul J's critics have tried
> to answer this one here (but I would have thought that
> theos-Roots would have the details by now!).  My hope was that
> all history buffs, pro and con Paul J's book, would get together
> on Theos- Roots and hash this out between them.  We have all
> heard a lot about where Paul was wrong, but nothing about what
> really did happen or who the real Masters were (which no one
> knows with certainty, but at least Paul J took a reasonable stab
> at it).

jerry --

you see my point correctly.  The critics have an easy time
attacking Paul since he has spent so much effort in writing out
his ideas.  (several hundreds of pages)

the others have not a word to say, other than what is not
correct.

So -- where are the critic's alternatives?? can they send out any
statements/arguements which we can judge?? they seem mysteriously
silent.  Perhaps their opinion is even less well-founded than
Paul's ??

peace --

john e. m.
jem@vnet.net