Good points that should not have to be made.
Question:
When Muslims quote the Bible, or quote scholars like Bart Ehrman who disagree with what Muslims believe, isn’t that cherry picking, a double standard?
Answer:
This answer can apply to any topic, regardless of the source or reference that a Muslim uses. When Muslims use sources like the Bible, it is not cherry picking nor a double standard to use it in their argumentation. This is because we have a standard of consistent truth. Regardless of what a source says, we agree and affirm when that source is correct. Consider the example of a flat earther (a person who does not believe the earth is a globe). If a flat earther told me that humans lived on the earth or that gravity was real, I would affirm those truths. I would not reject everything the flat earther says, simply because he is wrong in some of what he says.
View original post 301 more words
Categories: Islam
Blogging Theology 
If a conclusion on a matter of scholarship is considered be to true does this not mean that the methodology and initial assumptions that led into said conclusion should not be accepted as well considering they are not at all isolated?
LikeLike
Patrice could you give me an example?
LikeLike
The prophecy of the destruction of the temple as a way of dating the Gospels post 70. According to Wansbrough this is a good reason to consider a later date due to it being not too long afterward (Wansbrough is a member of the biblical pontificate commission).
My second example would be the argument from Jimmy Dunn about the virgin birth as being unlikely due to a rejection of the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke which is in turn interpreted through the lens of critical realism, a post enlightenment philosophy that assumes a purely naturalistic interpretation as necessary to understand historical events. It is this that has spurned much criticism to his work in ‘Jesus Remembered’.
Both of these examples demonstrate a conclusion based on a prevailing anti-supernatural epistomology.
LikeLiked by 1 person
could you quote these scholars please?
LikeLike
Of course
The examples he provides are regarding the parallels between the birth of Jesus and the story of Moses including the relationship with Egypt as a result of the slaughter of the innocents by Herod (Herod acting as Pharoah)
For Luke it becomes more about the songs of Mary and Zechariah as evidence of a developed tradition because of what they say as not being contemporary with either:
“But when did the songs emerge and where and in what
circumstances? Their use if not their creation implies a recognition among those
singing the songs of the significance already attributed to the events or people
celebrated in the songs” – Jesus Remembered pg 341
in conclusion Dunn says:
“What the core tradition affirms (Matthew and Luke) is that Jesus’ birth was
special — ‘from the Holy Spirit’ (Matt. 1.20), by the power of the Holy Spirit
(Luke 1.35). That of itself need not imply a virginal conception,but a virginal
conception could well have been an elaboration of the basic affirmation,especially when Isa.
7.14 was brought into play” – Jesus Remembered pg 347
As far as Wansbrough is concerned sadly i don’t have the book on me anymore and can’t seem to find it online, however if i remember right it was from his introduction to Mark found in the CTS New Catholic Bible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why do muslims use sources they don’t believe in?
Translation : Why are you holding me up to the standard of the Bible?
Another classic is “you can’t understand the Bible without the Holy Spirit”
Which translates into “I’m going to disregard the Bible when it clashes with my beliefs”
LikeLike