FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-24-2007, 09:21 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by praxeus View Post
And despite the fact that the moderators claim to make a specific point that such attacks are 'discouraged' here.
Please follow IIDB procedures by reporting this alleged attack instead of cluttering up a thread with prohibited complaints about moderation.
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 11:52 AM   #12
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr View Post
It was in a comment to
http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/...-proof_19.html

The main blog entry was a poem where Witherington maligns non-believers as blind people, who ignore evidence, and are not open-minded.

...
Another comment:

Quote:
Peleg said...
Very good. Post this over at Internet Infidels and you'll see the message of this poem displayed before your very eyes.
followed by some good comments from Sean, including
Quote:
But then again maybe I missed the subtleties of your poetry (which reads like poetry 101). Maybe you were being ironic. Maybe the internet infidels will pick up on it.
I didn't know that Internet Infidels was so important to Ben Witherington's readers. And I don't think the poem rises to irony. It reminds me a lot of former Attorney General John Ahscroft's musical efforts.

I will always remember Witherington for his defense of the James Ossuary, and his suggestion that DNA evidence from the bone fragments in it could be matched with DNA blood samples from the Shroud of Turin to show that it once held the biological brother of Jesus.
Toto is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 12:23 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the dark places of the world
Posts: 8,093
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Another comment:



followed by some good comments from Sean, including

I didn't know that Internet Infidels was so important to Ben Witherington's readers. And I don't think the poem rises to irony. It reminds me a lot of former Attorney General John Ahscroft's musical efforts.

I will always remember Witherington for his defense of the James Ossuary, and his suggestion that DNA evidence from the bone fragments in it could be matched with DNA blood samples from the Shroud of Turin to show that it once held the biological brother of Jesus.
He also made some pretty boneheaded statements regarding God "trickling out these artifacts (like the ossuary) to build our faith". And apparently he doesn't understand how C14 dating works, either. Small details, I know...
Sauron is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 12:30 PM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Advising against reading Ehrman is, IMVHO, very bad advice, agree or disagree.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 12:36 PM   #15
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by praxeus View Post
Hi Folks,

We actually had a thread here that began with a poster totally
confused about the evidences for the Pericope Adultera after
reading a presentation from Bart Ehrman. He had clearly been
misinformed and started the thread with -

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...ight=Johannine
Do we have the original NT? - Spanish_Inquisitor
"(Ehrman) mentioned in the excerpt that the famous story in John of the woman who was caught in the act of adultery, where Jesus says "let the one without sin cast the first stone", was not in the original, and in fact did not show up in copies of the NT until the Middle of the 12th century, and it was this copy that was used in the translation of the KJV, which is why it is now in the English versions we are familiar with."


Now Spanish_Inquisitor said that this was given from an
"excerpt from one of the lectures".

If so, the above would qualify as fraudulent ....

. . .

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Steven: Please go back and read the thread that you cite. It was noted there that the originator probably was confused by Ehrman's statement that there is no commentary on that passage before the middle of the 12th century.

Please don't be so quick to accuse others of fraud or other sins when you can't even get details like that right. Should I assume that you have been blinded by your own ideological stance?
Toto is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 02:34 PM   #16
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto
Steven: Please go back and read the thread that you cite. It was noted there that the originator probably was confused by Ehrman's statement that there is no commentary on that passage before the middle of the 12th century....
Actually Greek fathers, however that is defined (some are translated, some are bilingual, there is no Chinese wall .. ) is one common method. Whether the very limited specific statement of convenience is even accurate I would have to research, I have seen similar claims go down in flames on examination. (Johannine Comma definitely, maybe 1 Timothy 3:16).

eg. Jerome clearly commented on the Pericope, and was quite fluent in Greek, and even translated from Greek manuscripts (and included the Pericope in the Latin Vulgate, for which he utilized the 'fountainhead', early Greek manuscripts, as well as early Old Latin manuscripts). Yet Jerome is not technically a "Greek father". You see, Toto, there are many tricks in the sleight-of-hand verbiage.

And please notice how you lost that snippet (Greek fathers). That is the idea of the Ehrman-esque deceptive presentation (however, he is not the only one, eg. similar is done by Daniel Wallace and the late Bruce Metzger, Ehrman's teacher).

So even your partially proper correction is a great example of the results of the deceptive style of writing of Bart Ehrman. The 'devil is in the details', the crafty word-parsed formulations, and especially the details and not-so-details omitted.

The result is clearly deceptive and deceitful since the goal is to give an impression not unlike that received by the poster. Hiding piles of manuscript and early writer evidence (oh, internal evidence too). Trying to make the Pericope look like a late middle-ages invention to the unwary, against literally piles of evidence (manuscripts in multiple languages - including many Greek manuscripts in the same period being referenced - as well and many early church writers).

This type of deception we run into frequently when folks who read these presentations come back and speak the intended sense that was manipulatively implied. (By the combination of unusual classifications combined with large-scale omissions).

Otherwise, thanks on the heads-up.

Ehrman on the Pericope

Deceptive and deceitful, surely.
Fraudulent .. can pass (definitionally viable, but a charged word).

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Steven Avery is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 04:03 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by praxeus View Post
[COLOR="Navy"] Whether the very limited specific statement of convenience is even accurate I would have to research, I have seen similar claims go down in flames on examination. (Johannine Comma definitely, maybe 1 Timothy 3:16).
Is that a reference to De Jonge's paper on the Comma?
Roller is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 04:30 PM   #18
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roller
Is that a reference to De Jonge's paper on the Comma?
Hi Roller,
No, the comparable comment on the Comma ..

"No Greek father ..."

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Steven Avery is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 04:34 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by praxeus View Post
Hi Roller,
No, the comparable comment on the Comma ..

"No Greek father ..."

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Do we also have Greek mss (prior to Codex Britannicus) with the Comma in it?
Roller is offline  
Old 02-24-2007, 05:07 PM   #20
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roller
Do we also have Greek mss (prior to Codex Britannicus) with the Comma in it?
Dunno the Greek manuscript dates offhand, some manuscripts may have some contention, and there are some indications that manuscripts existed that are now non-extant.

However none of that was the thread.
We have Greek writer references (and lots of other evidences).

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Steven Avery is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:13 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.