Friday, December 23, 2011

It's Not the Size of your Footnotes, It's What You Do With Them

Am I the only person who thinks a 800 page book on miracles that is loaded with another 400 pages of appendices, footnotes, bibliographies etc is trying a little too hard to appear rigorous? In other apologetic books, footnotes and bibliographies have been stocked with references to the author's own works and books that had nothing to do with the topic at hand or were referenced out-of-context.

The hype surrounding Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts by Craig Keener is already touting its authoritativeness based on its size. I just know that no christian is going to verify the contents of the bibliography and I can't shake the feeling that Keener's enterprise relies on that fact.

[edit: I had 400 pages of text and 800 of references when it should have been the other way around]

2 comments:

Andyman409 said...

Keener's book is gonna definatley cause a stir. From what I've read, the Chrismatic crowd is making a bit of a come back. I hope that the more popular skeptics (like csicop) will put a heavier emphasis on debunking these religious "africa miracles".

Steven Carr said...

If African Christian testimony about miracles is credible, so must be at least a few of the African Christian testimony about the existence of child witchcraft.