Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

9255Re: [Synoptic-L] Dunn quotation

Expand Messages
  • Jim West
    Jun 6, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      At 04:28 PM 6/6/03 +0100, you wrote:
      >"The case *against* Q is only as strong as it is because the case
      >*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).

      I think any argument that finds its strength in the weakness of another
      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
      other arguments.

      At least, thats what I think.



      Jim West
      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@...
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic