I will here catalogue the proof demonstrating the gross dishonesty and deception on the part of one anti-Saint, Travis Morgan. After this exchange was first brought to light on Facebook, Travis opted to start creating multiple new profiles under pseudonyms both there and on YouTube in an effort to hide behind anonymity (but has shown himself not to be creative enough to conceal this very well). This posting serves the dual purpose of discrediting Mr. Morgan as an objective or reliable source of information in future encounters, while simultaneously serving as one of many witnesses to the spirit of animosity and bigotry common to both the ancient pagan critics of the early Christians and their modern counterparts who bring the same spirit against the restored Church of Jesus Christ on a level which none of the other churches I've fellowshipped with have ever come remotely close to drawing from what critics they may have had.
Some background: Travis Morgan attempted to appeal to the 'Declaration of Faith' pseudepigraphally attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus in an effort to prove that the post-Constantinoplian/Pseudo-Athanasian model of the Trinity was taught in the pre-Nicene period, not knowing that modern patristic scholars have rejected the writing in question as the spurious product of a much later writer. This exchange then transpired:
The quotation you used from Michael Slusser is incomplete and is missing a footnote.
ReplyDelete"As doubtful or spurious I have included To Tatian, a Glossary on Ezekiel, and the famous Creed, which appears in Gregory of Nyssa’s oratorical Life of Gregory Thaumaturgus.23 For comparison, here are the lists of works accepted as genuine by two other modern students of Gregory: Henri Crouzel, in the introduction to his edition of the Address, accepts the Address, Creed, Canonical Epistle, Metaphrase, and To Theopompus, and questions To Philagrius, To Tatian, and the lost dialogue cited by Basil of Caesarea, ep. 210. Constantinos Fouskas agrees with Crouzel on the first five items, but he would add To Philagrius to the genuine works." (Slusser, Father's of the Church, 98:5).
23. Thus I differ from the Clavis Patrum Graecorum which accepts the Creed (with qualification). 1974
Slusser admits that two other contemporary patristic scholars and one of the greatest works of patristic literature take the Creed as authentic. Were you aware of this or did you lift the quote from somewhere else without being aware of Slusser's entire statement on the topic?
No, lifting quotes from somewhere else without being aware of their context is Travis Morgan's modus operandi. I'm furthermore aware that the main source referred to for Crouzel's is his Remerciement, published in 1964, and similarly Fouskas' work is dated 1969. Slusser, conversely, is here published in 1998. And it's a moot point anyway given the recap which we've already see from Simonetti in the 2014 publication of the massively peer-reviewed Encyclopedia of Ancient Christianity, viz., "Crouzal attempted to reply to this devastating criticism [from Abramowski in 1976 and Nautin in 1977], but with little success, since some of the arguments put forth by the other scholars were quite strong: the Exposition of Faith is certainly inauthentic in its last part," etc., to which part Mr. Morgan was attempting to appeal.
DeleteWhy, if you were aware of the scope and breadth of Slusser's entire statement, did you feel the need to manipulate the quotation? This makes you look at least as dishonest as your opponent in this Facebook spat.
ReplyDeleteWhat don't you understand about the paradigm shift among patristic scholars which I've chronologically laid out for you here? It makes you look just as ignorant on the subject as Mr. Morgan does. And the fact that said ignorance led you to the dubious conclusion that I supposedly, "manipulate[d]," the text as purportedly making me, "at least as dishonest," as Morgan, who blatantly lied about our exchange having transpired and even attempted to project his own dishonesty onto me, only demonstrates that you don't have a balanced or objective opinion on the matter. Please make the effort to be more thoughtful and reasonably informed when commenting on my blog; contributions of substance are appreciated, but this kind of nonsense is not constructive.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete