Nazaroo

Hmm....lets test Zervos' theory contradicting Erhman's theory, which you are parroting without accredation:




...and lets not forget that Zervos' theory includes the absurd idea that the Pericope de Adultera was derived from the Protevangelion of James, even though that 'apocryphal gospel' can only be traced back to the late 2nd century (with the earliest known copy being a late 3rd century papyrus, Bodmer V), while the testimony of Papias in Eusebius is from sometime between 90 and 120 A.D.

As for the 'differences' between Didymus' version and the standard version of the PA, these can be accounted for most easily by the fact that Didymus is quoting from memory, paraphrasing, and is being recorded second-hand (he was blind!) orally, as well as the fact that all the early fathers typically quote only samplings of any passage they mention in passing when commenting on another passage of scripture.

That is, Didymus' omissions are understandable since he is only referencing the passage briefly in passing. Didymus' differences are accounted for by the fact that he is completely dependant upon his own memory, which is compressed by 50 or 60 years of sermonizing on top of the scriptures, which is exactly what he is doing in the commentary on Ecclesiastes.

That all you got? Zervos' strained arguments? Its pretty weak.

Nazaroo

Nothing could illustrate more plainly what an ass Allegro made of himself than your version of events expounded here, in spite of its obviously biased coloring.

Allegro 'gave us the copper scroll'? Wow. What a prize: a 2000 year old 'treasure map' that no one knows how to read, and concerns treasure long lost or pilfered. Thanks Mr. Allegro, for spoiling the treasure hunt.

The price he paid "for being a competant scholar was to have his career ruined"? Boo hoo. You mean what, he lost his cushy $100,000/yr university research job because he betrayed his fellow pig-troughing bottom feeders?

My tears are welling up, I can hardly hold them back thinking Allegro might have been forced to get a REAL job, building houses or mending garments, like 90% of mankind, instead of sucking off of the tit of the tax-system through the academic fraud called 'research'.

But wait, Allegro was saved from flipping burgers at McDonald's after all, because he was willing to write bear-faced lies about a religion unpopular with academic know it alls. Thank God Allegro could live off writing pulp-fiction, ironically, this being exactly what all his 'training' was good for.

Perhaps we don't need to mourn so much after all.

Allegro is alive and well and sitting on the shelves of academics all over the world, like in Ray Bradbury's story about Mars.

spin

I do understand that you are somehow offended by Allegro, but at least you agree with him about there having been a treasure, which is more than the crones could do for decades.

He wasn't American, so his academic position had no financial support from some fundamentalist religious organization with deep pockets.

As crocodiles go, that's not bad.

His academic fraud was to publish the scrolls when nobody else could.

Then don't use the fruits of that 'training'. Ignore all the peshers and other texts he published because pulp-fiction was all it was good for. Use all the texts that John Strugnell and those other original editors published instead.

Most scrolls scholars have Allegro on their shelves.


spin

Nazaroo

Of course there was a treasure. Grown men under attack by Roman legions don't have time for bedtime children's games.

If I hear yet another story about how 'poor old professors survive on their modest stipends', I think I will vomit.

While we are re-writing history a la 1984, lets write out the two clever Jews who REALLY broke the scrolls and delivered them to the public by reverse-engineering them from the cross-references.

Allegro did squat.

I will not deny I have one book of Herr Allegro on my shelf: "The Chosen People". Its in my special section on anti-Semitic crap, along with Arther Koestler's "Thirteenth Tribe" (another favourite of the KKK reprints division), right next to the Protocols of Zion.

I admit having these curiosities for research purposes, but not the kind of research you mean.
This last book by Allegro was probably the real reason the ADL or Mossad killed him. I doubt the Catholics really cared enough to do anything about his big mouth.

spin

Deception? You impute that Ehrman does not believe his own espoused views but is trying to deceive people. Once again you seem to be in the territory of libel. It would be nice if you could control your invective a little more wisely.


spin

Nazaroo

What is with the 1984 newspeak? If we remove all adjectives from English, there will be nothing to say, and no way to say it.

You'd think that here at "internet infidels" at least, open debate and free speech would be a fundamental principle and jealously guarded commodity.

First 'fraudulent' was ruled by the 'politically correct' as 'libelous' (what rot: I have been posting on the internet since the 80's and have never been sued or even threatened, and I have certainly said more than a few adjectives of opinion on public figures), and now the word 'deception' is out of bounds?

I don't think so.

Sue me.

I first spent months meticulously investigating Ehrman and his entire body of work, before posting huge multi-page articles detailing his public exploits. I have a lawyer and come from a family of lawyers.

Ehrman has never even so much as had his solicitor or publisher send me a letter asking me to retract a single statement I have publicly posted on hundreds of boards.

Ehrman I think relishes in the fact that someone thinks he is important enough to document. If there were any serious errors in reporting in my articles, you can believe that Ehrman, his publishers, his lawyer, the NPR (National Public Radio), FOX, CNN, the COLBERT REPORT, and the DAILY SHOW would all have quickly stepped in to squash me like a bug.

But they haven't because their lawyers can't find anything wrong with my articles.

Good luck with that.

Steven Avery

It is a bit humorous to see this counsel from spin.
Heartening .. if he will take it to heart.

Anyway, anybody who looks at the evidences should be able to see that the Ehrman Pericope Adultera presentation is very deceptive. We even saw the fruits of the deception on this forum, when the unwary was confronted with text extracted from his <edit> course.

irrelevant material removed


Shalom,
Steven Avery[/COLOR]

Toto

I suspect that's because he doesn't want to give you any publicity, and your obvious bias means that no one really takes you seriously.

In any case, II tries to balance free speech with at least a minimal standard of civil discourse.

jgibson000

Shades of the Yuri Kuchinsky criterion for determining the truth of what one writes! "Nobody has found anything wrong with what I've written"!

Problem with this criterion is that it entails not only delusions of grandeur, but also egregious petitio principii in its assumptions that those whom one claims as having been "unable to find anything wrong" with what one has written

(a) have actually read what one has written (did you ever send it directly to Ehrman? Have you ever had the courage of your convictions and tried to get it published in an academic journal or other professional venue?) or,

(b) if they have, that they think (as scholars do of Yuri Kuchinsky's "published" "work") that it actually warrants any response.

Have you sent your "work" directly to Erhman, etc.? If not, why not? Have you ever submitted it for publication anywhere other than forums on the internet? If so, where?

JG

S.C.Carlson

He probably has better things to spend his money on, like burning dollar bills just to see how it looks.

Stephen