nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 62:
Line 62: + +
Talk:Essay:Adulteress Story (view source)
Revision as of 10:45, April 9, 2008
, 10:45, April 9, 2008A very poor argument
:: I'm not aware that Bruce Metzger was a [[conservative]], though he may have rejected [[professor values]] of his academic colleagues. His reasoning above does not persuade, as there were many "oral traditions" (like the "Gospel of Thomas") that were properly rejected as not authentic. In the case of the adulteress story, the hoaxsters (vandals?) were more clever about it, appending or inserting it into an authentic work. It is analogous to clever vandalism on wikis today.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:07, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
:: I'm not aware that Bruce Metzger was a [[conservative]], though he may have rejected [[professor values]] of his academic colleagues. His reasoning above does not persuade, as there were many "oral traditions" (like the "Gospel of Thomas") that were properly rejected as not authentic. In the case of the adulteress story, the hoaxsters (vandals?) were more clever about it, appending or inserting it into an authentic work. It is analogous to clever vandalism on wikis today.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:07, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
::: It's quite inappropriate to describe those three individuals as "liking" the story, as though they had a gooey feeling rather than good research. I've answered below about Jesus writing, but how is any of the story "disproved" by other portions of the New Testament? Your 17:07 post is mainly mere assertion, and does nothing to support your case. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:45, 9 April 2008 (EDT)
== What Constitutes Gospel? ==
== What Constitutes Gospel? ==