[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: orion Cave 7 Fragments

dwashbur@nyx.net wrote:

>A big part of O'Callaghan's (and now Thiede's) complaint about such
>responses is that they are form/source critical assertions, not
>paleographical ones.  If in fact these fragments did turn out to be
>what O'Callaghan says they are, then such judgments would either have
>to be re-evaluated (i.e. tossed out) or held in spite of paleographic
>evidence to the contrary.  While I have no opinion either way on the
>Cave 7 fragments, I do think that O'C has a legitimate gripe here.
>He made his suggestions based on paleography, and it seems reasonable
>to me that refutation of them should follow the same track.

It may well be that O'Callaghan/Thiede's _complaints_ have to do with "form
critical" responses.

However, it is fair to point out that virturally none of the serious
criticisms of this conjecture have followed this track.  All of the ones
that I'm aware of deal _precisely_ with the Paleographic short-comings of
their claim.

(See, for instance, my note from earlier in this thread for discussions by
Bruce Metzger and the arguments summarized by Stanton.  Or Gordon Fee's
article on this topic from some 20 years ago --unfortunately I can't find
the precise reference; perhaps someone else here has it handy.)

nichael@sover.net               deep autumn   my neighbor what does she do
http://www.sover.net/~nichael/                                 --Basho