Re: [John_Lit] Re: canonical writings (was: Beloved Disciple passages in ms Pepys)
Since I have been in on this discussion all along, I
suppose I have a responsibility to comment.
1) You propose an analogy:
"In this case, the more you [= Richard], Yuri, and
anyone else hollers 'all the more loudly' that the
Testament of Job cannot be canonical, the more they
agree that Pepys ms. cannot be what Yuri claims it is
since the two constitute the same line of reasoning."
I agree that there would be an analogy between arguing
for the "Testament of Job" as the Vorlage to the "Book
of Job" and Yuri's arguing for the Pepys manuscript as
the Vorlage to John's Gospel, but there is no logical
connection between a strong or weak argument for the
one and a strong or weak argument for the other --
though I think Yuri's argument is not strong.
2) You explain the strategy that led you to make an
"In any debate including court trials, it is always a
strategic ploy to get your opponent into an argument
where they lose whether you are right or wrong."
Yes, debate does work this way, but academic
discussions should avoid this strategy -- in my
opinion. Why? Because I think that the strategy would
distort discussion into debate and lead to fundamental
distrust among scholars.
Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
Hanshin University (Korean Theological University)
447-791 Kyunggido Osan-City
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger