Deletion of Suppression of dissent

Comment: per nom, SPECIFICO,  and most importantly our deletion policy. The article meets points 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13 and 14 of -REASON, and Andrew's point, which essentially amounts to "Yeah, but at least it doesn't meet #8" shows a misunderstanding of our deletion policy unbecoming of an experienced AFD contributor. Citing the ''editing'' policy in an AFD in order to overrule a ''deletion'' policy argument is https://www.google.co.jp/search?q=%22The+Genesis+passage+that+Jesus+quotes+here+is+not+about+divorce,+it%27s+about+marriage.%22&client=safari&hl=ja-jp&prmd=ivsn&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwix5p25sKjbAhUKhrwKHYf8DocQ_AUIDigA&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2 Mark 10 Jesus on divorce levels of pre-Enlightenment textual interpretation. It also seems highly unlikely he's read all , or even any, of those books, most of which unsurprisingly show up in the first couple of pages of GBooks search for the title of this article: some of them may be unreliable, or may contain nothing of use for our article, or... it doesn't matter. Netoholic's ad hominem argument, which essentially says this AFD should be closed because Netoholic doesn't feel like abiding by AGF, does not even merit a response
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:DEL)

Comment: per . The nom admits that the article's topic "is probably legitimate for Wikipedia" though he says the current article should be deleted. But if the topic is legitimate, the article should be improved and not deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:RUBBISH)

Comment: This editor is actively engaging (check 27 May contributions) in a  campaign to remove citations/mentions of Brian Martin (social scientist)|Brian Martin who wrote about JzG in an analysis titled ''http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0894439317715434 Persistent Bias on Wikipedia: Methods and Responses'' in a peer-reviewed journal (paywalled, but available http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/17sscr.html here). Note the aspersions about the author in the AfD justification and lack of any actual guidelines or policies which would justify deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLPCOI)