9255Re: [Synoptic-L] Dunn quotation
- Jun 6, 2003At 04:28 PM 6/6/03 +0100, you wrote:
>"The case *against* Q is only as strong as it is because the caseI think any argument that finds its strength in the weakness of another
>*for* Q has been overstated" (James D. G. Dunn, "Altering the Default
>Setting: Re-envisaging the Early Transmission of the Jesus
>Tradition", _NTS_ 49 (2003), pp. 139-75, p. 172, emphasis original).
argument is itself a weak argument if it has to be propped up on a weaker
one. Such an argument simply leads to a series of theses based on the
rather silly premiss that "this theory is at least a little bit better than
the one it contradicts and for that reason should be believed"! Not really
a good basis for logic now is it?
I think arguments are proven on their own merits, not in comparison with
At least, thats what I think.
Quartz Hill School of Theology
Adjunct Professor of Biblical Studies
Biblical Studies Resources
"Illum oportet crescere, me autem minui"
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>