[b-hebrew] Septuagint vs Hebrew, effect on Christianity
schmuel at nyc.rr.com
Mon Oct 16 14:49:22 EDT 2006
>> So you are defending the blatant and obvious mistakes and misrepresentations
>> that Richard Anthony makes in order to cry 'liar, liar' ?
>HH: I admit that Anthony misunderstood Jones' argument about Methusaleh, and Jones was right on
So a writer, based on his own errors, stridently accuses another writer of a 50-page article,
well-documented and thought out and expressed (whether one agrees or not) of being a 'liar'.
Again and again.
Does it get much worse that that ?
>HH: I did not read the whole Anthony article. My point was that people found much to criticize in
>Jones' article, so Jones' article did not seem good on that basis.
Then you should be much more careful in your research.
One could find 'much to criticize' in anybodies scholarship, using the Anthony methodology.
>HH: You made a strange assertion and then backed it up with an article that I found lambasted.
And you forgot to check the lambasting.
You did not even read the whole article of the 'critic', much less yet notice that it
was full of huge holes.
>Your article turns out to have some significant factual problems. Neither source seems reliable, Anthony or Jones.
That is like an "even-handed" approach to a crazed loony versus a person who may make an error or two. And you really have shown little of import versus Floyd Nolen Jones, although I will happily agree that a couple of points may be off.
Do you know any 50-page articles on such a difficult subject where this is not true ?
>HH: Anthony evidently regards the Septuagint highly and does not like to see it smeared. There
>is no doubt that this article by Jones smears the Septuagint.
There is plenty of doubt about that. Jones writes very cautiously and carefully and quite accurately. And some of his analysis of particular verses is among the very best I have seen. Even if he is wrong on some points he does not "smear" anything, he does call people "liars" stridently to try to buttress his case.
You should simply disown Anthony and go on.
You do better discussing from scholarly sources like Robert Kraft, who at least offer substance.
Your 'even-handed' approach between honestly and dishonesty in writing does not wash.
You can have (likely) the last words linking yourself to the Richard Anthony article
versus Floyd Jones if you really think that is the smart thing to do for your own credibility.
More information about the b-hebrew