ApostateAbe

The passage in question is 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.

Logical

What is their alternative to Evolution?

Are you an agnostic?

hjalti

1 Cor 11:2-16 is the anti-feminist passage. And you claimed (well, insinuated, which in my opinion is worse) that her reason for suggesting that 10:23-11:29 is an interpolation was to get rid of the anti-feminist passage.

Now it appears that other scholars (even alive ones!) think that the anti-feminist passage is non-pauline. So maybe, just maybe, your theory regarding Munro's was wrong!

No Robots

There is polyphylogeny, which posits that each genus originated independently from protoplasm.

ApostateAbe

OK, you win.

Toto

These are not lone dissenters. Monro and Walker are standard, non-mythicist scholars without a particular agenda who have spent their careers analyzing Paul's text. They have detailed, well sourced reasons for identifying interpolations.

If you think there is an overwhelming consensus that this passage is not an interpolation, where is the scholarship? Abe did not cite a single scholar. He just assumes that there is a scholarly consensus because a consensus backing him would be convenient for his argument. Now you have elevated this into an overwhelming consensus.

Do you have any clue as to the issues involved here or the state of the scholarship, or the variety of bases that people bring to this?

doubtingt

Several people have commented that the key difference lies in whether History has the same legitimacy as Science in terms of deferring to consensus.

I'd argue that Biblical Scholarship is not a legitimate subfield of History.
What % of the "Biblical Scholars" even have a Ph.D. in History from a secular University and are actually just Historians in general who happen to have a specialty in historical issues surrounding religion?

I'd contend that if Biblical Scholarship was a legit field it would be simply a sub-field of History that emerged organically from historical analyses of the relevant time periods, performed largely by people who just generally went into the field of History and began studying the role of such texts in the history societies.
Biblical studies seems to legit History what "Parapsychology" is to the field of Psychology, and what ID is to Biology (I bet Theological Seminaries will soon be granting degrees in "Intelligent Design Scholarship" and the OP will claim we need to take their consensus about ID seriously.

aa5874

What a load of BS. There are no sources of antiquity that can show that the Pauline writer could NOT have written any passage in the so-called Pauline writings.

Again, we have Fallacious arguments.

The Pauline writings contain EVIDENCE that they are LATE but these are now called interpolations.

If the supposed interpolations are discarded then then there will be no way the Pauline writings can be considered early unless they are CORROBORATED.

It is absurd to discredit a source and still accept it as credible WITHOUT corroborative evidence.

It is EVIDENCE from antiquity that matters. People can cite any number of Scholars with Fallacious arguments.

We have a LARGE body of Scholars with Fallacious arguments so it really does NOT make sense to cite them. Let us deal with the evidence from antiquity. CITE the evidence.

Jedi Mind Trick

Well, I'm certainly no expert, but there are several alternatives to the darwinian model, if I'm not mistaken, such as Lamarckianism, Punctuated Equilibria, Pan-Spermia... Aliens...

No, I don't know what I am. Perhaps you would classify that as agnostic, but I do believe there is something. I just don't know what it is. I also believe in the gods, so I am sort of Pagan right now.

outhouse

and not one alternitive holds a credible position.