10-16-2012, 08:04 PM
Dear Luc,
I agree. I noticed on the Hegg's critique the assault on AP claims that Peshitta texts are the "oldest" manuscripts. Reference Paul Younan's response, Paul has identified that type of argument as a "usual" GP retort. The reason being, the AP and HRM movement is guilty of exaggerating the claim that it is the oldest. I read the AENT and as a novice, that is certainly the impression I got from reading it too- it does seem to spin it that way. However, it turns out that there is no proof of such a claim, but as long as the claim is made, the GP will continue to remind APs of how inaccurate and UN-scholarly they are. Its called ad-hominem arguments, and while they are not logical, they can be distracting from the real issues.
But if APs began to admit this shortcoming, then the GP platform would have less to stand, because there is no proof that the Greek mss are original either- and that's the real issue! So that's where textual criticisms (poetry, ambiguity, idioms, etc) would clearly show AP supremacy- on an even playing field. APs just have to stop making claims they can't prove. Just because something is PROBABLY true, doesn't mean its CERTAINLY true, and GPs will use that against APs until the cows come home. With textual criticisms, on the other hand, that will lead to a more accurate degree of certainty and scholarship.
I agree. I noticed on the Hegg's critique the assault on AP claims that Peshitta texts are the "oldest" manuscripts. Reference Paul Younan's response, Paul has identified that type of argument as a "usual" GP retort. The reason being, the AP and HRM movement is guilty of exaggerating the claim that it is the oldest. I read the AENT and as a novice, that is certainly the impression I got from reading it too- it does seem to spin it that way. However, it turns out that there is no proof of such a claim, but as long as the claim is made, the GP will continue to remind APs of how inaccurate and UN-scholarly they are. Its called ad-hominem arguments, and while they are not logical, they can be distracting from the real issues.
But if APs began to admit this shortcoming, then the GP platform would have less to stand, because there is no proof that the Greek mss are original either- and that's the real issue! So that's where textual criticisms (poetry, ambiguity, idioms, etc) would clearly show AP supremacy- on an even playing field. APs just have to stop making claims they can't prove. Just because something is PROBABLY true, doesn't mean its CERTAINLY true, and GPs will use that against APs until the cows come home. With textual criticisms, on the other hand, that will lead to a more accurate degree of certainty and scholarship.