Peter Kirby wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:15 am The question becomes which arguments are persuasive that it was:
"a modern, later, anomalous imitation of c.18th-century handwriting"
Search found 7633 matches
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:51 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
I'm suggesting that "deflection" could characterize how we've gone a whole page without answering this:
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:41 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
So you are claiming motive and misrepresenting me to claim that I'm misrepresenting T.
Bravo. Much scholarship.
Bravo. Much scholarship.
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:34 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
Your koans are deflection. I don't know why we're even typing here lol.
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:29 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
What's correct according to you?
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:25 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
If I understand correctly, the "18th century" paleographical conclusion - which could be imitation or genuine - isn't the main concern.
If I understand correctly, paleography does not include the study of whether a hand is instead a deliberate attempt at imitation.
If I understand correctly, paleography does not include the study of whether a hand is instead a deliberate attempt at imitation.
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:15 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
The question becomes which arguments are persuasive that it was:
"a modern, later, anomalous imitation of c.18th-century handwriting"
"a modern, later, anomalous imitation of c.18th-century handwriting"
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:14 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
his answer was that it was a modern, later, anomalous imitation of c.18th-century handwriting. To me, this answer can be described as stating that it is a forgery. Perhaps you think differently. I agree that it doesn't have to be complicated by additional hypotheses: "Did person X have an acco...
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:53 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
- Replies: 27
- Views: 168
Re: Distinguishing some questions about the "Letter to Theodore"
Seems like a reasonable request...Secret Alias wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:34 am Tell me which arguments for forgery that Tselikas brings up which you found persuasive.
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:47 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: The Antitheses and the origin of Luke
- Replies: 22
- Views: 283
Re: The Antitheses and the origin of Luke
Alright, then I still tend to think Basilides is best explained as knowing Luke. And I'm still not clear on what renders proto-Luke more than just a possible hypothesis. I addressed the issue of Basilides somewhere, but I can't find it. I think my point was that these comments about Basilides are c...
- Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:43 am
- Forum: Christian Texts and History
- Topic: The Antitheses and the origin of Luke
- Replies: 22
- Views: 283
Re: The Antitheses and the origin of Luke
Alright, then I still tend to think Basilides is best explained as knowing Luke. 3) There is a third text in which Basilides appears to be commenting on the text of Luke, which is found in (Pseudo) Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, given here with David Litwa’s translation: ὁπότε οὖν ἔδει ἀρθ...