Toto

In my experience, the term hyper-skepticism is only used by people who insist that there must be some history to be found in the NT texts, but have no evidence that this is the case. They often try to argue that ancient documents should be treated as historically true unless there is irrefutable proof that they are not.

I'm not sure what the reviewer is trying to say here - that there is no point to the academic study of the Bible unless one believes in it or can come to a firm conclusion about it? What about knowledge for its own sake?

Jeffrey Gibson

Doesn't look like you've read the reviewer carefully then. He doesn't imply it, he says it. And what he says is, after all, true, isn't it.

In any case, you still haven't answered my question above -- about what it is that the reviewer finds strange. It isn't, as you claimed, that Price argues against the historicity of the resurrection or of Jesus, is it. It's what I noted it was, isn't it.


Yep. That's why he's decided to make guild members one of his targets in his book. And that's why he's a regular attendee and participant at SBL.

But he's also a right wing Republican. So manners are not his concern.

But are you saying that because he is not addressing them, he's free to be un-mannered? Or are you denying that he engages in ad hominem in his book?

Moreover, how you are so certain of what he'd do when addressing the guild is beyond me.

You've never heard him address the guild at SBL, have you.

Jeffrey

Toto

I wasn't aware that he had addressed the guild at SBL. I would be interested in seeing a transcript or a video.

Price is an interesting combination of personal traits (as we all are in some way.)

Jeffrey Gibson

Yes, there's much about what goes on there that you are unaware of, despite your claims to know the minds and agendas of those who attend.


This still leaves unanswerd what it is that makes you so sure, as you said you were, that when addressing the guild, "Price's southern manners would come to the fore". Isn't this counter indicated from the books he has written for the guild (and/or for an audience wider than those who read the Atheists of America Press' publications) and in the way he has characterized the scholars whose views he opposes there?

And how do you know that he has southern manners. Or is this just an assumption on your part, grounded in the same sort of logic that you used when you were making claims about the MIT grad student -- i.e., because someone is from X, he must have the characteristics of what I think X is?

Jeffrey

spamandham

I don't recall claiming any particular hermeneutical skills. My guess is, neither do you.

spamandham

You don't seem to know what "special pleading" means. Special pleading does not mean that we approach categories differently, it means that an exception is made for a particular case *within* a given category.

Wonderful. We both agree that the pastorals are pseudepigrapha. Can we agree then that the author's intentions are probably not what the text explicitly states?

Unless you can establish such a penchant for authorial statement that disagrees with authorial intent that we can only describe it as the norm, or at least commonplace, your case is non-existent. I'll await your list.

You accept at face value every modern authorial intent you read!? I guess I'm a bit more skeptical than that. This exchange is not productive, so I'm stopping now.