An issue you may sometimes run into is to find arguments by someone online, be unsure about them, and attempt to search to see if you can find answers. In many cases you can do so, but in others it may be harder. Sometimes this is because no one has given a response (this is not necessarily because the argument is so good, but rather that the person is not well known enough to bother). However, sometimes there are are responses that can be difficult to find. Perhaps they are older works, perhaps they are not available online anymore and can only be read via an archive, or perhaps they for whatever reason simply do not show up easily on a search engine. The hope is that someone attempting to find information may stumble upon this page and therefore get answers. Therefore, if something is listed on this page, it is probably in one of those above categories that makes it harder to find via a search; things that pop up right away will generally not be listed.
This is made more for reference. I do not necessarily endorse everything that the respondents have to say, either in their refutations or elsewhere in their writings. In any event, now we begin:
Bill Cooper:
Attempts to claim that Codex Sinaiticus, an old Biblical manuscript, is actually a fake. For this, see "A Review of 'The Forging of Codex Sinaiticus' by Dr W.R. Cooper against detailed background of the discovery of the Codex."
David Daniels:
Like Bill Cooper, asserts that Codex Sinaiticus, one of the
oldest full Biblical manuscripts we have (there are ones that are even
older but only contain part of the Bible), is a fake. His main work in this area is "Is the "World's Oldest Bible" a Fake?" This is addressed at "Is David W. Daniels' "Codex Sinaiticus Evidence" a Fake?"Another review can be found here.
It is true this is from a forum post, but it is fairly detailed and may
be useful for those who want a quicker version than the linked one
above.
George Stanley Faber:
Also known as "George S. Faber" or just "George Faber," this was an
18th/19th-century theologian. I believe he was right about some things
and wrong about others--but this is not meant as a general examination
of him, but specifically his claims regarding the Waldensians/Waldenses
(referred to him as the Vallenses). The Waldensians were a group founded
in the 12th century that defected from the Catholic Church, but some,
usually utilizing his arguments, have attempted to argue they went back
much further, to the fourth century if not the apostolic age, as an
attempt to show where the true church was. Most commonly this is done in
order to try to point to some belief of the Waldensians supposedly held
and then claim that this shows its antiquity or apostolic connection.
When this is done, Faber's works are very frequently cited (Peter Allix,
an earlier writer, may also be mentioned, as Faber made some use of
him).
Faber's main work concerning this view was titled "An Enquiry into the
History and Theology of the Vallenses and Albigenses, as exhibiting the
Perpetuity of the Sincere Church of Christ" though he advanced this
theory in other words, such as "The Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, or a
Dissertation on the Prophecies of
the Grand Period of Seven Times, and of its Second Moiety, or the latter
three times and a half." According to my understanding Faber's views
have largely been discarded among historians (the 1989 "The Waldensian
Dissent" on page 7 only mentions it briefly, claiming "No-one today can
subscribe to this point of view either. Such debates are no longer
valid; it is now unanimously accepted that the Poor of Lyons date back
to the twelfth century."), but a reader may still be confused by them or
arguments based on them.
To that end, I would like to put forward a critique of Faber's views from his own time period, "Facts and documents illustrative of the history, doctrine and rites, of the ancient Albigenses & Waldenses"
by Samuel Roffey Maitland. And yes, you may notice that works around
that time frequently had very wordy titles. This work by Maitland is
technically not a response to Faber's main work on the subject ("An
Enquiry into the History and Theology" and so on) but of the other one
noted ("The Sacred Calendar of Prophecy" and so on). However, the same
general points are covered, including him pointing out errors of Faber
that some still use to this day.
Kersey Graves:
Author of "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors," a 19th-century work which attempts to claim that the life of Jesus did not exist and Jesus's life was simply taken from a bunch of prior pagan gods. Even Richard Carrier (a proponent of the "Christ myth" theory himself) has dismissed the work as unreliable, but unfortunately some still use it. However, for quite a while I thought there had never been a direct response to it. As it turns out, there was. John T. Perry wrote a work called "Sixteen Saviours or One? The Gospels not Brahmanic". This work is actually a compilation of several lengthy letters published in The Richmond Telegram; a letter by John Perry criticizing the work, a response by Kersey Graves, and then a response to that by John Perry.
Lucien Gregoire:
Lucien Gregoire is writer of a book called
"Murder in the Vatican". Somewhat confusingly, he has multiple versions
of it available with different subtitles. For example, there is "Murder
in the Vatican: The Revolutionary Life of John Paul and the Vatican
Murders of 1978", "Murder in the Vatican: Pauper Who Would Be Pope",
and "Murder in the Vatican: The CIA and the Bolshevik Pontiff." Some
publications seem to be taking that and another work and combining them.
A later edition was titled "The Vatican Murders." He has also written
other books essentially covering the same subject, such as "White Light
Dark Night: The Revolutionary Life of John Paul I."
The thesis, if
one wishes a summary, is essentially that John Paul I was an extremely
liberal Catholic who wanted to reverse the Catholic Church's teachings
on issues like contraception and homosexuality, and was killed to try to
stop it. Conspiracy theories that John Paul I was killed aren't exactly
anything new, but the claims of Lucien Gregoire seem even wilder than
your typical ones.
Sherry Shriner:
While probably better known for her conspiratorial theories involving things like aliens, she also wrote up a list of criticisms of St. Paul that I've seen distributed. In regards to that, see here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20111128135523/http://lookinguntojesus.net/20041219.htm
(this is a several page long answer, when you reach the bottom move to "Next Article")
Skeptic's Annotated Bible:
This was the creation of Steve
Wells, who took the Bible (specifically, the King James Version) and
added a bunch of "annotations" pointing out the things he saw as
contradictory or immoral in it. There are several critiques of it
of varying quality and depth available online that can be found fairly easily, so there is little need to link to those, and of course all the specific contradictions claimed in it can be offered by people on an individual basis. However, a fairly notable in-depth response has gone offline, so I felt I should
add this so that I could link to its archived form. It can be found here (also here).
Uriel ben Mordechai a.k.a. Uri Marcus:
Uri
Marcus is a Messianic Jew (albeit a bit of an atypical one) who also puts
forward claims of being persecuted and also claims that, in order to put forward what he sees as erroneous doctrines, the New
Testament is translated incorrectly by Christians. You will also find his name attached to groups such
as "Above & Beyond", "Chut Ham'Shulash", and the "Nehemiah
Threefold Cord Foundation (NTCF)". But the point in question here is his
book "If? The End of a Messianic Lie" in which various such claims are advanced. For an examination/critique of that, see here:
https://www.restorersofzion.org/LT_review-IF.htm
Douglas del Tondo:
Writers of "Jesus' Words Only", which attempts to claim Paul was a false apostle. A response to his work, which demonstrates fairly blatant cases of out-of-context quoting, is here.
Craig Winn:
While better known for founding failed businesses, he is also writer of a number of idiosyncratic theology works, including "Questioning Paul", an anti-Paul book. A response is available here.
More things may be added to this "Answer Index" in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment