The subreddit had an "ask me anything" March 7 with Bart Ehrman. I find it "interesting" that none of the reverential genuflectors there asked Bart why he went Marcionite in his latest book. (I'm not alone in that observation or similar ones by any means.) I didn't scroll through all comments, but Apple-F returned no hits for "Marcion." I also searched for "Old Testament," as in, the Marcionite/Ehrmanite god of the Old Testament is a god of wrath, and the three hits were all in one question, and "Tanakh" did not come up.
In the same AMA, Naugrith the Nazi asked what I see as leading/rhetorical question, trying to peddle Delbert Burkett's multi-source theory onto two-sourcer Ehrman. I've already looked at Burkett and found him wanting, with not only an overview, but 1 (bad framings), 2 (minor agreements and verb forms), and 3 (minor agreements of omissions) breakouts of how he's wanting in his later proto-Mark book. (Someone else at r/AB recommended, IIRC, the earlier book to me, then, after I got the later book on ILL and I offered my critique, tried to push again the earlier book that Naugrith references; I refer to that in breakout 3.) Ehrman has his own answer.
And, of course "Mr. Didache" there is Alan Garrow, the nutter who claims the Didache is as old as 1 Thessalonians and other stupidities, all debunked by me. He, like Naugrith, is asking a rhetorical/leading question, and dudes, it's obvious. Garrow asks if, should we set aside Q — as I presume is his wont with his Not.Even.Wrong. dating of the Didache — but keep Marcan priority, is Matthew borrowing from Luke more likely right than the other way around? NO. Even if we indulge your rhetorical stupidity, Luke is most likely about a decade younger. Maybe more. And, ex-Mormon there smokes some Garrow too.
Side note: There's a LOT of people at Reddit's r/academicbiblical who have a hard-on for Ehrman. Ditto Gary the ex-Lutheran, whose blog may disappear from my blogroll, which needs other tweaking, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment