IMHO biblical studies are more less a beauty contest – who is the smartest and who is the best auto-salesman. The most elegant, sophisticated interpretation can be false. The worst, dirty and unproven explanation can be true. I have feeling that real nature of our choices is an aestetics.
All bible society is stucked because is asking unlegitimate questions. Any answer is a wrong answer because we don’t have methods to prove a corret one and dismiss all the rest.
Robert said
Surely you’re not suggesting that everyone should just choose the view that they find the most aesthetically pleasing, regardless of the overwhelming consensus of qualified scholars.
Robert I think the problem is that many people do not regard Biblical scholarship as an area requiring expertise. It’s the Bible. Scripture. So this gives any yahoo carte blanche to have at it. The Holy Spirit gives them expertise.
With the best expertise and the best tools we still we don’t have answers. Still we have only sophisticated theories. After 100 years basic questions are unanswered. We are stucked.
Who is right? Brandon, Ehrman, Wallace, Crossan, Detering, Ludemann, Mack, Smitchals ……. What is a base of your choice? Which one is good for You ad why?
It is a general problem in professional research. Allan Guth, Roger Penrose, Sean Carroll, Hawking, … Which cosmological theory you will choose and why? Which is right?
As I said for general audience members is a matter of an aestetic choice.
We are talking about LA. How many works you know about Little Apocalypse dating and priority ? There is no final prove or definite evidence. There is a majority guess based on Ockham’s razor principle for whole Mark.
Experise of Detering, his background is in question? Come on…
90% of particle phisics were attached to the SuperSymmetry theory for 40 years. Now they are not. But this is a good info – they need a new theory because old is wrong. 10% were right but for 40 years – it was quite unconfortabe, isn’t it
In biblical studies we have situation much worst. We have number of sophisticated theories and still we don’t have posibility to dismiss or confirm any of those.
Here we are all grupies of Ehrman’s point of view. But is he right? I don’t know
disparaging others ? me too
overwhelming consensus of critical scholars is everything what we can get. So real answer is hidden for us.
Your comment to the 50 pages essay was one line. What wóuld you like to discuss? General denial is not a good starting point. It is ending point for discussion. Which Detering claim is wrong, in question, problematic according to you?
Very good example. How fragile is consensus. The answer is – very fragile.
I don’t see a clear extra value in Detering answer or in consensus answer. There is no winner. Both are good and weak.
Markan priority over Matthew was deducted from comparisons. Block by block. In most of the cases it is more probable – Mark is corrected by Matthew. Linear reading vs parallel reading plus how we define sections for comparison. And more elements like what kind of novum testamentum koine dictionary we will use. But still we have only interpretations, sophisticated prepared by well trained scholars. And finally different opinions shared by different groups.
Let’s assume that our oldest mauscripts of John is from 5th century. Who will recognize that pericope adulterae is late insertion?
Who can destilate from John this fact without manuscript tracing?
Dutch Radical School was a result of the discussion about methods first and interpretations. Using the same methods you can have different interpretations with the same historical value. That’s the answer. Consensus is based on something different – personal choices.
Let’s take comparison of the sections reffered to Martyrs.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them. 10 And the gospel must first be published among all nations. 11 But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost. 12 Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents, and shall cause them to be put to death. 13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
I don’t see Markan priority at all. But also I don’t see Matthew priority. Why? I am ignorant. In my opinion we have the same historical value in both cases.
I don’t see Markan priority at all.
Do you understand the arguments for Markan priority? They’re not based on select verses but a careful consideration of the entire texts. Still, there’s no mandate that you agree but you should at least understand the point of view you are disagreeing with.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)