« Constantine Didn’t Influence the Canon | Main | Textual Variants Aren’t a Problem »

January 09, 2015

Comments

One more key difference: Ancient scribes believed accuracy was a matter of life or death. If we want the "Telephone" analogy to work, we'd have to include loaded guns at the heads of the participants.

Josh - this seems like a great point. Do you have any supporting references? (I'm not disagreeing, I'd just like to add as much supporting evidence to the claim, if the need arises use this argument in the future.)

There was a movie... Arnold the Gubenator and Danny DeVito... called "Twins". In it there is this line where Danny says to his twin brother .."I love it when you hit people" Why I found that so funny back then I do not know but it is the line that popped into my head while reading Daniel's response to the article. I read the article myself... read being a loose term..I skimmed over it a lot focusing in on a few key things. Mainly because I had read all of these arguments before and I know they have been refuted over and over again. I like to watch Daniel Wallace refute them though. Talk about a person over qualified to answer an article of that caliber. Yet he did it and it was brilliant to read. It is kind of like watching a major league baseball player take on a kid from tee ball. If Eichenwald truly wanted to learn about Biblical transmission or anything about the Bible then why wouldn't you go to the foremost expert in the filed and get his views. He didn't though and I think I know why. Kind of like why many people won't dig for answers... they don't want to find the truth. If they knew the truth then they would feel like they needed to be held responsible for their actions. Who needs that kind of guilt trip... right. Eichenwald will be held accountable one day but until then I hope he reads Daniel's response to him and digs deeper next time.

James White responded to it on his podcast, too, and went into a bit more detail that Dan Wallace.

The comments to this entry are closed.