I was thinking that there are a great number of double standards that Brown uses in his arguments and I thought we might, as a group formalize and analyze them.
One for instance I thought of on top of my head is that Brown claims that there is no such thing as the Oral Law because it is never mentioned in Tanach.
Nonwithstanding that there are many places where we believe that the Oral Law is at least indirectly mentioned, is this fair considering he would not accept our argument that:
1) Jesus is never mentioned in Tanach.
2) The idea of the necessity of blood sacrifice is never mentioned in Tanach.
3) The idea of G-d being comprised of multiple "persons" is never mentioned in Tanach
I feel that there are many more examples.
In fact, I hypothesize that for every argument that Brown makes in an attempt to disprove an objection, in another place, he does not consider the argument itself valid that he previously used. I think it would be interesting to collect these examples in this forum. Unfortunately, I don't have his books.
Can people think of other similar examples to what I mentioned above.
One for instance I thought of on top of my head is that Brown claims that there is no such thing as the Oral Law because it is never mentioned in Tanach.
Nonwithstanding that there are many places where we believe that the Oral Law is at least indirectly mentioned, is this fair considering he would not accept our argument that:
1) Jesus is never mentioned in Tanach.
2) The idea of the necessity of blood sacrifice is never mentioned in Tanach.
3) The idea of G-d being comprised of multiple "persons" is never mentioned in Tanach
I feel that there are many more examples.
In fact, I hypothesize that for every argument that Brown makes in an attempt to disprove an objection, in another place, he does not consider the argument itself valid that he previously used. I think it would be interesting to collect these examples in this forum. Unfortunately, I don't have his books.
Can people think of other similar examples to what I mentioned above.
