Took advanced Greek and intro to Hebrew at the same time. Challenging semester, but also very rewarding.

You honestly present all of this like you’re better than everyone in scholarship. You keep claiming “they” know nothing, they can’t review you, and they need to forget everything they have lear ed. Perhaps you should reconsider your approach, as you are talking like your sh*t don’t stank.

Honestly man, here I am encouraging you to submit your stuff to the academy, giving you book recs, & you keep saying you’re better than that, & no one is on your level. My previous tweet is pointing to what you already have stated, you’re beyond peer review. That’s for chumps. Guess I am a chump. 🤷‍♂️

Ah, I see now, you have no peers.

You should go to the SBL conference and see what critical biblical scholarship actually looks like. I am not sure what scholarship you have been reading, but to assert that “they have NO knowledge of how to study” is pretty hilarious. www.sbl-site.org/meetings/ann...

You should submit your scholarship for peer review. You realize anyone can submit, right? Try sending your stuff to the Journal of Biblical Literature, or New Testament Studies, or Novum Testamentum. In fact, I have published with NovT, and know exactly what their peer review is like.

No one is objective. We live in a postmodern world man, catch up. And in none of these posts am I “defending Christianity.” I am merely pointing people, including you, to actually engage with critical biblical scholarship that is peer reviewed, published by scholars in the field, and so on.

You should go read some Richard Horsley. You would appreciate this book, and it would help you see what biblical studies actually looks like: www.amazon.com/Galileans-un...

Many in “biblical scholarship” are not religious. Moreover, the origins of “critical biblical scholarship” was driven by breaking away from ecclesial and religious assumptions and conclusions. This is why I suggest reading the history of scholarship, as you are seriously missing a lot of info.

This betrays how little you know about “so-called scholars,” as academia is actually more like an all consuming thankless job. Hahaha. Getting a PhD and publishing research through peer-review is grueling.

I would really recommend reading the history of New Testament scholarship, here is a great overview in 3 volumes: www.amazon.com/History-New-...

These 6 assumptions that you claim people have are not assumed in critical scholarship. For example, the assumption of authorship has been thoroughly investigated in biblical scholarship, they are discussed often. Or, rhetorical features that are not explicit are often investigated, and more.

Roman Piso’s analysis is not what the overwhelming majority of scholars think about the NT. If you want to know what scholarship actually thinks about Rome and the New Testament, I would recommend this book: www.amazon.com/God-Empire-J...

To your point though, I would agree that “the church” has certainly participated in psyop campaigns, and the Christian scriptures have been used by the powerful to “control” people. I would merely point out, however, that those uses are a misunderstanding of “Christianity’s” foundation.

As I understand psyop, it’s something done by political powers to control the masses. In contrast, the NT was written in a context where the early Jesus followers—the marginalized masses—were actually subverting political powers. I wouldn’t call that a psyop.

My use of “or” was not meant to be restrictive, but additive and specifying a smaller group within right wing Christianity. So, yes, both.

Probably more accurate to say that right wing Christianity or Christian Nationalism is a psyop. You can see more what I mean in this video: youtu.be/A-gKDjUVRiM?...

Looks interesting!