View Single Post
Old 02-16-2019, 03:28 AM
Steven Avery Steven Avery is offline
Registered Member

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,333
Hastings Dictionary Bible -wild shoddy scholarship

Originally Posted by FlamingZword View Post
Hastings Dictionary of the Bible (1898), (1963) Volume 1 “Baptism into the name of the Trinity was a later development.” ... The cumulative evidence of these three lines of criticism (Textual Criticism, Literary Criticism and Historical Criticism) is thus distinctly against the view that Matt. 28:19 represents the exact words of Christ."
Originally Posted by Scott Pitta View Post
So who penned the article for the Hastings Dictionary quote ? Each article is signed at the end.
Good point, now and when you made it earlier.

And I do not think FZ can give you an answer. He is plagiarizing secondary and tertiary sources and on the Hastings quotes they are a total mess, with missing "..." and various inserted parenthesis by who knows who, and very unclear sources.

That quote above could be from a Baptism article, or Trinity, or possibly Sacraments.
FZ is including two different editions, and the Hastings Bible Dictionary quotes he gives could include snippets from:

1898 - Alfred Plummer, Baptism
1909 - Charles Archibald Anderson Scott, Baptism
1910 - Kirsopp Lake, Baptism (Early Christians), (Encyclopędia of Religion and Ethics, Hastings)
1963 - Andrew Bruce Davidson, Trinity (possibly)

The 1910 by Kirsopp Lake has something similar to the "cumulative evidence" section:
The cumulative evidence of these three lines of criticism is thus distinctly against the view that Mt 28:19 represents the ipsissima verba of Christ in instituting Christian baptism.
Keep in mind that Kirsopp Lake was possibly the strongest ally to Conybeare.

And I dealt with some of the quoting problems involving Hastings Dictionary, just the other day. FZ had another quote that he plagiarized from somewhere.

Originally Posted by Steven Avery View Post
More problems of not having read the section, misrepresentation and apparent plagiarism.

We have the 1898 edition online.
The key pages are 241-242.

Totally different than what was represented. Most of what is given as quotes are not there. A scholastic disaster.


Possibly the missing quotes are in the 1963 edition. We know that FZ has not checked, since he would have quoted more accurately. If they are there, I would like to know who wrote them, since only the first quote can be attributed to Plummer, edited by Hastings and Selbie. And get the larger context.

Clearly "viewed by some scholars as an interpolation into Matthew" is simply reporting the views of Conybeare and some others. So there is nothing special in the quotes. If that had been written in 1898, it would have some interest, since the Conybeare papers came later.
And Tim Hegg dealt with one of the scholarly disasters around the Hastings Dictionary entry here:

Matthew 28:19
εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος'
A Text-Critical Investigation (2006)

Willis also quotes from Hastings Dictionary of the Bible in order to provide proof that scholars generally regard the tripartite phrase of Matthew 28:19 to be a late Catholic addition. However, if one consults the article itself,6 one discovers that the quote given is extracted from a list of four general hypotheses offered by scholars regarding the tripartite phrase, a hypothesis which the author of the article (Alfred Plummer) rejects!

6.James Hastings, ed., A Dictionary of the Bible 4 vols (Scribners, 1905), 1.241–42
Apparently Clinton D. Willis was a major player in creating the scholarship disaster.

And Scott's point is 100% true. The first issue, on any of these Encyclopedia or Bible Dictionary articles, after trying to identify the article, is to identify the author. Generally right at the end, and if it is initials, there is a spot in front cross-referencing initials and names.

None dare call this scholarship.


grace in the wonderful name of Jesus!

Last edited by Steven Avery; 02-16-2019 at 03:57 AM.
Reply With Quote