tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post2627876957179634645..comments2024-03-14T08:15:15.207-07:00Comments on CADRE Comments: A Response to Neilgodfrey on the Genre of Acts (Part 3)BKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01967809861892681780noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-45885119029987877072008-01-21T09:30:00.000-08:002008-01-21T09:30:00.000-08:00It's Marian Soards, by the way. And it's all too e...It's Marian Soards, by the way. And it's all too easy to claim misunderstanding as a way out of responding to critical comments. How about something more substantive?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-27630528282724344352008-01-18T16:39:00.000-08:002008-01-18T16:39:00.000-08:00At least I am in good company.At least I am in good company.Laymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11761410435140602771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-41791954379592850762008-01-18T13:36:00.000-08:002008-01-18T13:36:00.000-08:00P.S. Layman's argument that Pervo (and I) claim th...P.S. Layman's argument that Pervo (and I) claim that Acts is a romance (or other) novel is a complete straw man and not worth responding to.<BR/><BR/>Neither Pervo (nor I) have made any such claim. Pervo cites Sourd's review -- Marion Sourd's review similarly misrepresents Pervo's argument by contradicting the very words of Pervo in his book. It appears that both Layman and Sourd have merely Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-15211959885274133992008-01-18T13:35:00.000-08:002008-01-18T13:35:00.000-08:00P.S. Layman's argument that Pervo (and I) claim th...P.S. Layman's argument that Pervo (and I) claim that Acts is a romance (or other) novel is a complete straw man and not worth responding to. <BR/><BR/>Neither Pervo (nor I) have made any such claim. Pervo cites Sourd's review -- Marion Sourd's review similarly misrepresents Pervo's argument by contradicting the very words of Pervo in his book. It appears that both Layman and Sourd have merely Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-85665832291189381792008-01-18T04:57:00.000-08:002008-01-18T04:57:00.000-08:00I have written my reply to Layman or Chris Price's...I have written my reply to Layman or Chris Price's so called review of my posts on Richard Pervo on my Vridar blog. -- Woops, I mentioned my blog here on Cadre. Does that mean this post will be deleted? I wonder.<BR/><BR/>(I see some reply was made to my previous post here, but only from the corner of my eye. You all know I have expressed utter contempt for Layman and have no intention of readingNeilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12887786896056573371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-49409081463041048842008-01-16T21:30:00.000-08:002008-01-16T21:30:00.000-08:00Vridar,So you agree that the preface of Acts is so...Vridar,<BR/><BR/>So you agree that the preface of Acts is some evidence that Acts is a piece of ancient historiography? If not, how is my understanding of your argument wrong? You say I am wrong about your point but notably do not make clear what your point really is.<BR/><BR/>In any event, you left out this argument by you which was the thrust of what I was responding to:<BR/><BR/>"The Laymanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11761410435140602771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-64521574648173006812008-01-16T19:53:00.000-08:002008-01-16T19:53:00.000-08:00In response to my statement "The prologue of itsel...In response to my statement "The prologue of itself cannot assign Acts to the genre of historiography" Layman concludes in this piece, "The point is that the mere thread of a doubt or alternative does not render prefaces worthless as indicia (sic) of genre." Classic non sequitur once again from this author. The conclusion does not logically relate to or address my statement. My statement simply Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com