Comments on: “Slaves, Women & Homosexuals”: Some Thought’s on Webb’s Book http://www.rustyparts.com/wp/2006/07/10/slaves-women-homosexuals-some-thoughts-on-webbs-book/ : Blogging Linear Interstellar Points : Thu, 09 Sep 2010 03:00:13 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Eric http://www.rustyparts.com/wp/2006/07/10/slaves-women-homosexuals-some-thoughts-on-webbs-book/comment-page-1/#comment-15606 Eric Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:45:21 +0000 http://www.rustyparts.com/wp/2006/07/10/slaves-women-homosexuals-some-thoughts-on-webbs-book/#comment-15606 When writing "some thoughts on" there is no need to insert an apostrophe in there somewhere. "Some thought's on" would mean "some thought is on" or "some on, belonging to thought", neither of which make sense. I really like your portmanteau "alternaïve". Just casually slipped it in with no fanfare. Very nice. Otherwise I think this is a very helpful review and can definitely side with you on the "we can see where this road is leading" issue. When writing “some thoughts on” there is no need to insert an apostrophe in there somewhere. “Some thought’s on” would mean “some thought is on” or “some on, belonging to thought”, neither of which make sense.

I really like your portmanteau “alternaïve”. Just casually slipped it in with no fanfare. Very nice.

Otherwise I think this is a very helpful review and can definitely side with you on the “we can see where this road is leading” issue.

]]> By: dave http://www.rustyparts.com/wp/2006/07/10/slaves-women-homosexuals-some-thoughts-on-webbs-book/comment-page-1/#comment-12847 dave Sun, 28 Jan 2007 15:16:29 +0000 http://www.rustyparts.com/wp/2006/07/10/slaves-women-homosexuals-some-thoughts-on-webbs-book/#comment-12847 Hi Jason (I think?) I am new to this whole blog thing so forgive me if I got your name wrong. I use Dr. Webb's book on the graduate level at a Seminary where I teach. I was scanning the web for reviews when I cam across yours'. You subordinated the thesis to a minor point and confused a discussion on ethics with one on hermeneutics. Also, as you conclude, you do the very same thing you point out Dr. Webb's wrong for doing. You just choose a different standard for sifting. I guess this forum isn't for thoughtful, nuanced communication. However, your Oprah-like approach to book review marginalized a ground-breaking book that crosses a number of disciplines. While Richard Hayes' book is decent and worth reading, it isn't the same kind of book. Hi Jason (I think?)

I am new to this whole blog thing so forgive me if I got your name wrong. I use Dr. Webb’s book on the graduate level at a Seminary where I teach. I was scanning the web for reviews when I cam across yours’. You subordinated the thesis to a minor point and confused a discussion on ethics with one on hermeneutics. Also, as you conclude, you do the very same thing you point out Dr. Webb’s wrong for doing. You just choose a different standard for sifting. I guess this forum isn’t for thoughtful, nuanced communication. However, your Oprah-like approach to book review marginalized a ground-breaking book that crosses a number of disciplines. While Richard Hayes’ book is decent and worth reading, it isn’t the same kind of book.

]]> By: isaac http://www.rustyparts.com/wp/2006/07/10/slaves-women-homosexuals-some-thoughts-on-webbs-book/comment-page-1/#comment-4436 isaac Tue, 11 Jul 2006 02:47:10 +0000 http://www.rustyparts.com/wp/2006/07/10/slaves-women-homosexuals-some-thoughts-on-webbs-book/#comment-4436 Jason, great book review. I guess I won't read the book. It doesn't sound too helpful. To be honest, the book doesn't really register on my radar screen. But, I just checked out the reviews on Amazon.com for this book, and yours is a whole lot more interesting then those posted. I think you should post this (with some minor revisions) on Amazon.com. Jason, great book review. I guess I won’t read the book. It doesn’t sound too helpful. To be honest, the book doesn’t really register on my radar screen. But, I just checked out the reviews on Amazon.com for this book, and yours is a whole lot more interesting then those posted. I think you should post this (with some minor revisions) on Amazon.com.

]]>