tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8478227.post3162649855237677687..comments2023-07-23T11:18:06.500-07:00Comments on In the Corner with Matt: Nanos on HagnerJ. Matthew Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02599013442666547304noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8478227.post-82129424385011463862007-12-23T15:01:00.000-08:002007-12-23T15:01:00.000-08:00I agree with you Pat; I'm going to have to do some...I agree with you Pat; I'm going to have to do some more work on Nanos. I guess his polemic was so strong that I had to deal with it first.<BR/><BR/>I do look forward to dealing with other issues that he raises, especialy his interesting interpretation of Phil 3!J. Matthew Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02599013442666547304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8478227.post-17084629594396120052007-12-22T22:27:00.000-08:002007-12-22T22:27:00.000-08:00Hey Matt, I just got around to reading both of you...Hey Matt, I just got around to reading both of your posts on this. Nice job. I haven't received the book in the mail yet, but I look forward to engaging the same issues myself. Even though I'm swinging from the other side the tree (leaning more on the New Perspective side), I really appreciate your review of Hagner and some of your observations about Nanos.<BR/><BR/>Indeed, at San Diego, the room was tense. Nanos gave a brutal review.<BR/><BR/>I look forward to hearing more on Nanos from you, since you've mostly covered his faults. I'd like to see where you might appreciate any of his points, if you can make it past the polemic. Honestly, I think that he has a point about using the terminology of "Christianity," even if he's wrong about Hagner's motivations. I don't think that convenience is reason enough to use "Christianity." At bare minimum, I think it is too confusing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com