tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post3756315555823381043..comments2024-03-20T12:35:12.828-04:00Comments on The Text of the Gospels: N. T. Wright and the Ending of MarkJames Snapp Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-18034442888467748392023-02-10T19:33:56.378-05:002023-02-10T19:33:56.378-05:00"barry
Isn't it intellectually dishonest ..."barry<br />Isn't it intellectually dishonest not to consult all the evidence even if it requires going through all the available resources? THat's not scholarship. It's just sloppiness."<br />-------------Is it intelletually dishonest when a Christian takes a certain position on biblical theology before examining "all the available resources"?<br /><br />How do you determine the point at which an unbeliever has consulted enough sources to be intellectually justified to take the position they do? What if an atheist who accepts the short ending of Mark as original, has a busy life? Must she objectively refuse to take a position merely because she hasn't consulted all possible sources of rebuttal? If so, doesn't fairness dictate that Christians be put under the same constraint, and be required to objectively refrain from "accepting Jesus" until they have consulted "all the available resources"?<br /><br />Gee, how many Christian scholars have made arguments in support of Christianity?<br />How many Christian and non-Christian scholars have disagreed with those arguments?<br /><br />Consulting "all the available resources" would be absurdly impossible, and you don't really know under what conditions the short-ending advocates can justify concluding that they have done "enough". So you forfeit the right to balk if they decide that question for themselves in a way you don't think is optimal.Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16013576722577804783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-24199768803734034652023-01-26T22:13:46.863-05:002023-01-26T22:13:46.863-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03466078139557295311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-31953387476084108672020-04-13T21:41:26.989-04:002020-04-13T21:41:26.989-04:00barry
Isn't it intellectually dishonest not to...barry<br />Isn't it intellectually dishonest not to consult all the evidence even if it requires going through all the available resources? THat's not scholarship. It's just sloppiness.John Podgorneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16454541136553094470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-73388658792504915182018-04-09T19:59:31.529-04:002018-04-09T19:59:31.529-04:00Let's say an atheist thinks the resurrection o...Let's say an atheist thinks the resurrection of Jesus is mere legend, by way of the argument that the Christian scholarly consensus is that Mark is the earliest gospel, and that what Mark had to say, ended at 16:8...and while not infallible, the consensus of Christian scholars is reasonable to adopt.<br /><br />How much more study into the controversy do you say the atheist is intellectually obligated to bother herself with, before she can be reasonable to believe that Mark likely never mentioned any resurrection appearances? <br /><br />Must the atheist get her ph.d in NT studies? Must she cobble together everything the scholars of the last 100 years have said about it, then publish her own book refuting what the advocates for the originality of the long ending had to say?<br /><br />Can we be "reasonable" to hold a position even if we cannot refute all forms of opposition against it...sort of the way you think Christians can be "reasonable" to believe in Jesus, while nevertheless being incapable of refuting certain skeptical arguments?barryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04877091907733008310noreply@blogger.com