Farrell Till: Too Stupid to Be Writing Articles

[jpholding]

It has been a few weeks and still no apology from Till for his gaffe on books from the RTS Library, but he did post a new response (yet another new topic, while he continues to fall farther behind on older responses) on one of my Gospel harmony items. And just a few lines in, it's clear to me that Till is just plain getting stupider every day.

He quotes an article of Miller's that I cited:


If the circumstances of the miracle retard any "normal" literacy impetus (e.g., polemical contexts, observers perish), it [Berry's argument] fails.

And THIS is Till's response:

I was tempted just to ask what the :censored: this means and then pass on, because the statement is even more abstract than the parenthetical comments are grammatically unparallel. Just how would the "circumstances" of the feeding of the 5,000 "retard any 'normal' literacy impetus"? I have no idea what Miller meant by "polemic contexts" that would "retard any 'normal' literacy impetus," but the best that I could tell, he meant that the death or "perishing" of observers could cause phenomenal events to go unreported.

He then goes on to babble for lines on end about this idiotic understanding in which he managed to equate "polemical contexts" with the death of observers, adding in a series of extremely foolish comments asking why oral traditions about Jesus would not be preserved by the "general public" as opposed to only the social ingroup of the church.

This is only the latest in a series of blunders Till has committed. The man is a fool in the most extreme sense and in this light my replies to this nonsense will not mention him by name, not even as Skeptic X. As for after that, it's time for a poll. Till is, at this stage, I think, a babbling idiot who is wasting my time. Even Skeptics have told me I ought to ignore him completely (and heck, given how far behind he is on replying to me, what's the shame?). What do ya'll think?

[jpholding]

I can't go ten lines through Till without finding even more stupid statements. Look at this:

Miller, of course, has an explanation. Literarcy was so rare at this time that those other cultures were not "supportive of writing things down." His article is one of those that goes on forever, because like [Holding] and Everette Hatcher he apparently thinks that if he can string together enough quotations from writers who agree with him, he will be proving whatever position he is arguing, so I can't address everything he said in his article, at least not at this time. I can, however, show that literacy wasn't as uncommon in biblical times as Miller wants us to believe. The website article "Ancient Graffiti on the Walls of Pompeii," for example, indicates that literacy was far more widespread at that time than Miller supposes.

The article he links to at http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin_Vulgar/Texts/Pompeii_Graffiti.html just lists some Latin graffiti from the walls of Pompeii. It doesn't say anything about ancient literacy rates, much less does it contravene the figure of 10% given by WV Harris in his book on ancient literacy. Obviously a mere 10% is sufficient to explain these scribblings. But how can Till be so stupid as to think this proves that ancient literacy was "widespread"???? Is this man really this stupid??? Has he been this stupid all these years, or is it growing on him?

He does cite someone who responds to Harris further on, but no figure is given at all.

More stupidity now! Look at this:


Furthermore, the Roman government even published a daily gazette Acta Diurna ("Daily Events"), whose origin was attributed to Julius Caesar in 59 BC. It was handwritten, of course, and was posted in prominent places in Rome and in the provinces. This publication contained news of gladiatorial events, births, deaths, marriages, trials and executions, and even astrological signs. Its obvious intention was to inform the public, but a basically illiterate public couldn't very well have been informed of much of anything by the posting of a daily gazette.

:duh: GOOD GRIEF! He's so stupid here he thinks that this proves the public at large wasn't illiterate. I guess he doesn't have any conception of literate people reading this stuff aloud to the illiterate! Good grief, in prisons many inmates are illterate and literate inmates will read posted material aloud for them. Tilll is also so stupid that he thinks this means dip:

. One of the essays in Literacy in the Roman World, for example, noted that the roster of a corps of camel troops in Egypt contained the signatures of one third of the unit, and this would mean that at least one third of these soldiers were literate enough to sign their names.

PLEASE! There are numerous people who are functionally illterate who can sign their own names, AND THAT'S ALL THEY CAN DO! This means zip in terms of them being able to compose a functional narrative. The man doesn't have any clue about functional levels of literacy -- and he taught English?!?

[Bobby Lewis]

I think you're justified in ignoring him, and I don't see how anyone could fault you for it.

[spiritmech]

Glenn's sentence mentioned isn't terribly clear. It's not my field, I don't know the jargon, so maybe that's the problem. But I would probably ask someone to restate it in a different way just to make sure I'm not misinterpreting their intention.

btw, who is Farrell Till?
sm

[jpholding]

btw, who is Farrell Till?


You probably don't need to know if you already don't. :teeth:

[Bobby Lewis]

Glenn's sentence mentioned isn't terribly clear. It's not my field, I don't know the jargon, so maybe that's the problem. But I would probably ask someone to restate it in a different way just to make sure I'm not misinterpreting their intention.

btw, who is Farrell Till?
sm

He's a former fundamentalist preacher turned atheist who tries to write about Christianity. Farrell Till and JPH have a long, amusing history.

[spiritmech]

He's a former fundamentalist preacher turned atheist who tries to write about Christianity. Farrell Till and JPH have a long, amusing history.

Oh, so he's *completely* ignorant of the concept of Tradition.
sm

[Shadow Phoenix]

No. Personally, I think if he's so amusing, you should keep it up. It kind of reminds me of those Superman cartoons where he thought Mxyzptlk. The guy would never really put him in any danger, but was just an annoyance. The humor was in seeing how Supes would get him to say his name backwards each time.

Nah! I find the refutations amusing. Keep em up!

[jpholding]

Oh, so he's *completely* ignorant of the concept of Tradition.


Even if he were aware of it, he'd wave it off as too biased to be of any relevance. That's the level of his argumentation.

"Klippleskim!" :lol:

Note: Just found another huge blunder; Till, who implies that he reads my stuff carefully, linked readers to http://www.tektonics.org/gk/hearsay.html and told the people that *I* wrote it. As anyone who pays attention can see, it was written by one of my guest writers, a Chuck D.

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

I voted 'no' but I am also aware that Till may start going 'woo-hoo I won' when JP doesn't respond to his work.

Punkish

[jpholding]

More dumb bunny comments from Farrell. In reply to my point that the Gospel writers would make notes before composing, aside from the fundy atheist "why didnt God just give them more paper" canard, we have this:


Anyway, for the sake of argument, let's just assume that this is so. That would mean that [Holding] is arguing that biblical writers were confronted with a limitation on scroll space, and so they solved that by "taking notes" before they began writing. In addition to saying that a biblical writer had to take notes on what to write on a scroll that would contain the "words of Yahweh," he is saying that the writers who had to contend with limited scroll space wasted some of that limited space by taking notes before they began writing.

In other words, he actually thinks that these notes were taken ON the scroll used for composition of the final product!!!

The level of stupidity here is simply appalling.

Oh yes, and he also issues a few of the usual "challenges" to debate him. I guess TWeb isn't a comfy place for him. :lmbo:

Oh, and for fun, here's a sample of one of those "why didn't God buy them more paper" canards:


Okay, I will keep thinking. Why didn't Luke just lay it onto the Holy Spirit and say, "For Pete's sake, why don't you find me another inch or two of scroll material, so that I can sew it on and have enough space to tell about the amazing events that caused the Roman soldiers to declare that Jesus was the son of God! Is this any way to run a divinely inspired library?"

[BronzeArcher]

"And THIS is Till's response:"

The line by Miller is, I think, from his fivefold challenge piece. Off the top of my head I would like to know (well, actually I don't care) how many literate people Till believes were in attendance, how readily they had access to writing materials, and how valued their document of this event was in comparision to other contemporary records, such as oral tradition. I'm kind of having problems imagining a scribe go up to a Pharisee asking for writing materials to record a marvelous work by Jesus. For some reason limited good is starting to cry, so I need to put it to sleep... hush, baby...:lol:

[anewlife]

I didn't know he [Till] was still alive.

Rabshakeh sums it up nicely in Isaiah 36:12... Farrell Till sat on the wall... and finds some Barley cakes.:yummy:

I im in agreement with Nick... Lets letTill feed the fire with more patties. This is priceless... you should actually charge for this fine quality entertainment.

:thumb:

[jpholding]

I didn't know he [Till] was still alive.

I think his brain at least is dead.


I im in agreement with Nick... Lets letTill feed the fire with more patties. This is priceless... you should actually charge for this fine quality entertainment.


Oy vey. Well maybe I'll do what I did with Van Eck in an item today...pass it on to Sheila or one of my other toons to respond. :teeth:

[Bobby Lewis]

I think his brain at least is dead.



Oy vey. Well maybe I'll do what I did with Van Eck in an item today...pass it on to Sheila or one of my other toons to respond. :teeth:

That or get Toby a laptop. :smile: Personally, I'd like to see you spend more time on your commentaries.

[jpholding]

That or get Toby a laptop. :smile: Personally, I'd like to see you spend more time on your commentaries.

Well, the time on those is limited anyway by the number of commentaries I can check out from the library and use at one time. And since the seminary is an 80 mile round trip....

The library limits me to 5 books these days. They lowered it because people were absuing the system. I was lucky that as a ministry I was still allowed to even GET books....

As for Toby, he's more into forums than deep research. Deep research disturbs his sleep... :lol:

Time to post my newsletter, then eat lunch...

[jpholding]

Readers may amuse themselves with Till's latest screed in which he takes on Glenn Miller's item on OT judgments. Looks like nothing but the usual "how do you know" and "he assumes the Bible is true to prove it is true" hayseed. At least it looks like it will keep Till busy for a few months scratching his armpits looking for the latest scholarship.

[jpholding]

I just got by ILL a copy of "Literacy in the Roman World" which Till tried to use to dispute Harris' numbers on ancient literacy (only 10% of people being literate in the NT period). It looks like it may be good for another shaming article, because so far, NONE of the writers dispute Harris' numbers and in fact find them indisputable. They disagree with him in terms of application (ie, what sort of people were literate, and what they used it for) but NOT the numbers.

Unless I find something that does dispute Harris' stats, it looks like Till has been caught in another fraudulent or careless use of a source.

[Darth Executor]

I just got by ILL a copy of "Literacy in the Roman World" which Till tried to use to dispute Harris' numbers on ancient literacy (only 10% of people being literate in the NT period). It looks like it may be good for another shaming article, because so far, NONE of the writers dispute Harris' numbers and in fact find them indisputable. They disagree with him in terms of application (ie, what sort of people were literate, and what they used it for) but NOT the numbers.

Unless I find something that does dispute Harris' stats, it looks like Till has been caught in another fraudulent or careless use of a source.

I think it's time for Till to retire. Might as well make the best of the last years of his life.

[Darth Executor]

Then again, he could be a masochist...