Talk:James Tabor

message: Dr. Tabor has a very controversial background and in light of his recent appearance on the Discovery Channel with Ted Koppel concerning the Tomb of Jesus, Wikipedia should present his entire CV and not selected portions that do not reflect this controversy, otherwise the article drifts from NPOV to public relations puffery. Exambassador 20:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, however extremist views and polemic as well as vandalism will be removed. Also, please create a username and sign your entries.  Fair and square 17:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The anonymous user did not cite references, thus the text will be removed until references are cited, given the controversial nature.Reverend Mommy 19:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dr. Tabor left the faculty of Ambassador College and employment by Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God during the first wave of departures after 1972. In February of 1972 Herbert W. Armstrong's Church had published many articles to show that it would depart for Petra, Jordan as a Place of Safety prior to the Tribulation that was supposed to take place shortly afterwards. Armstrong did not believe in the Rapture but in a physical protection. His 1956 booklet called 1975 in Prophecy! illustrated his timeline. Dr. Tabor was a part of the educational arm that supported these beliefs. Many who departed went to other colleges and universities and some like such as Dr. Robert Kuhn joined Ambassador College and helped to create the Ambassador International Cultural Foundation. Others such as Dr. Ernest L. Martin formed other organizations that independently picked up where they had left off with Armstrong. Martin was the person who began the Ambassador College digs in Jerusalem in conjunction with Hebrew University beginning in the 1960s. These digs continued until Armstrong's death in 1986 and they covered the period of James Cameron's current film. In other words Dr. Tabor brought with him his prior knowledge of Armstrong's undertakings in Jerusalem and Martin's ongoing interest. The Internet has many links showing that Dr. Tabor maintained his contact with many former Armstrong members. Exambassador 20:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? Kornbelt888 (talk) 02:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Dr. Tabor and Herbert W. Armstrong and Ernest L. Martin THIS MATERIAL DOES NOT BELONG HERE BUT IN A PERSONAL WEBLOG.

message: Please take the time to reference the article on James Tabor, as stating that it is on the internet is not really sufficient for citing of references, especially on a controversial topic.  Also, you misspelled controversial.  This does not lend your editing credibility. Please look at the article, "The Five Pillars of Wikipedia."
Thanks.
Or rather, I've had the account for a while but never had anything on either the talk pages or the user page.  I'm sorry that my previous posting came across as harsh -- it was not intended that way.
I'm just confused and honestly want to understand why you feel so passionately about this topic.  From my perspective, I see his credentials from University of Chicago and know that U of C is very rigorous and the PhD is very difficult. (I say this from the perspective of a PhD student.)  It appears from his statements and the websites surrounding his University webpage at UNC, that he is currently spouting the standard party line of the SBL.  
I just want to know what your perspective is.
Thanks,
Reverend Mommy 23:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the discussion to your page in order to keep the conversation in one place. Exambassador 03:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the entire discussion has now been moved here I have also moved the originating discussion here and placed it within context. Exambassador 14:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yes, I'm a newbie

message: *The following extract is cited here:
"....I was raised in the Church of Christ and graduated from Abilene Christian University in 1966 with a B.A. in Greek and biblical studies. I had begun to listen to GTA/HWA back in high school and followed them with some interest through college. After graduation I spent a year in Europe in the mission field, working with Christian believers behind the Iron Curtain (Yugoslavia, Poland, Russia), smuggling in Bibles and literature. I returned to the States in 1967 and was determined to go out to Ambassador College to investigate things there firsthand. Over the years I had continued to study the Bible, and more and more had concluded that the Armstrongs had something nearer the truth than my own background of the Church of Christ. I was baptized (2nd time) by Tony Hammer around Passover, 1968 and that fall entered AC, Pasadena. I spent two years there, 1968-70, and divided my time three ways: teaching the first Hebrew and Greek classes (David Albert was in my Hebrew class) at AC; getting a second B.A. in Theology from AC; and going to Pepperdine University to get an M.A. Basically my experiences at AC were positive. I was never mistreated in any way, and left voluntarily in 1970 with no hard feelings or regrets. Remember, this was in 1970, before all the disruptions of the '70s, and in the absolute heyday of the WCG. I left because I could plainly see that those people were not open-minded seekers of God's truth."  (Hightlighting added for emphasis) Exambassador 21:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The References probably need to be on the article page?  and I like the text on this page better than on the article page - it's more factual and informative.  I don't understand why it's "Controversial" background, too.  And controversial is misspelled. Fair and square 22:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The typo has disappeared (I am sure that you know the difference between a typographical error and a spelling mistake), and the necessary information added to the article. It is a pity this did not exist when Ted Koppel sat down to discuss this topic. It might have shed a little more light on matters all round. Exambassador 22:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've rmeoved the highlighting since I feel Dr Tabor's words should speak for themselves.  IMO the most important sentence was the final one -- but let the reader decide. --Michael C. Price talk 09:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing as much of the material in the quote was summarised in the background section I have removed the quote and moved the link. --Michael C. Price talk 20:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dr. Tabor in his own words about Ambassador College

message: Now what do we have here? Dr. Tabor or his friend? It would seem that you have just appeared and received a welcome and then did the same for me. As for the typo we are all guilty of that from time to time and it has nothing to do with credibility. However, the links are now there because in his own words Dr.Tabor freely admits how he listed to Garner Ted, became a member of the Worldwide Church of God and attended Ambassador College. Credibility? I think that Dr. Tabor may also be lacking just that. Its a pity that Ted Koppel had not read Tabor's true CV before he began talking to him last night. Exambassador 21:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: You're welcome!

message: Indeed it's true, I'm pretty new around here -- rather, I've had the account for a while but have never really done anything with it.  I'm sorry my comments hit you the wrong way.  Offense was not intended.
As a Methodist, I tend to lead with grace rather than judgment. He was COG and he was associated with Ambassador College.  He is not any longer, but on the Faculty of a well-respected university.  Thus I would like think that perhaps he has some amount of scholarship.  He seemed pretty moderate last night.
And I am
:Hi again. No offense taken. Sometimes I find that the misspelling line is used to deflect away from the issue at hand. I type content knowing that others on Wikipedia love to come along with their bots and fix things. So I suppose I don't spent time to check in the way that I would if I was in the middle of writing an article for publication by an academic journal. When it comes to plain messages I tend to become even more sloppy since I try to express myself first and worry about presentation later. Anyway, back to your question.
:Well the problem with the WCG and AC is that it was a conditioning machine. It sucked in a variety of people, some smart, some not so smart and some who obviously qualified for the management of Mensa. HWA was an adman who had been a Quaker and who morphed into a hodge-podge of beliefs that were all wrapped up in prophecy illustrated by Basil Wolverton. The day came when all of this fell apart and then something very strange took place. While the organization looked the same it had really split into two factions: one hewing to quotes from the Bible and the other trying to become all things to all people that sounded Buddhist, looked cultural and which had an attorney guiding it who belonged to a synagogue.
:Ted Armstrong was just a playboy who needed a church to gain access to easy money, but he also had his followers and one of them was another extremely well educated man who happened to attend the same synagogue.
:Into this mixture add Dr. Tabor (and a lot of others just like him who also come with valid credentials.)
:The problem is that this strange HWA hybrid created a challenge to either cut and run and get out of the religion business, or try to reinvent the religion business. Note that Dr. Tabor came from a reasonably mainstream church background, certainly had the qualifications to attend accredited universities, complete their coursework and of course obtain a PhD. But what else? Well we learn from his own words that he not only listened to HWA/GTA, but that he became convinced that they had the "truth" that he was seeking. So he joined them, became educated by them and assisted with the education of others. This tale is not unique because others have recited the same biographical tale. Once one leaves the mainstream because of conviction that the "truth" is elsewhere, how does one go back to that which they scorned because they had found it to be untrue? HWA prided himself on asking the same question over and over again: where would you go if you left (me)?
:Now jump ahead to the Discovery Channel program and we are once more in the field of Ambassador College and Dr. Ernest L. Martin, etc., etc. Not only that but Dr. Tabor has maintained his contacts with these people. He also became involved with Dr. Arnold - who was also no stranger to Ambassador and the WCG and who obtained his PhD from Rice. That was at the time of David Koresh and all of that nonsense. There are many Tabors and Arnolds out there with similar stories to tell.
:It would therefore have been extremely useful to both Ted Koppel and the producers of the Discovery Channel program, if they had been aware of Dr. Tabor's complete CV.
:I am not advocating any conclusion by the addition of this information, because like Wikipedia I am NPOV, but I like to see all sides of an issue before I reach a conclusion. Hopefully then, others who are prompted to look up Dr. Tabor will see his words of explanation together with the addded links that will assist readers in making sense of what he has written when they follow the various links and read the addtional material for themselves. What readers do with this knowledge is up to them. The producer of the Discovery Channel program said that he hoped that he had commenced a discussion. Hopefully then, this information has added to that discussion. The conclusions reached must be individually obtained.
:Sorry that this is a rather long-winded reply, but I wanted to answer your question properly. May I then ask you why you are interested in this matter? (God! I hope that I have left a trail of typos.) (Joking, just joking.) Exambassador 23:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I'm a newbie

message: You started a page on James Tabor a while back.  Could you come over and look at the talk page and weigh in on the discussion.  Thanks. Reverend Mommy 03:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry but I'm not interested in getting involved in this discussion. --Loremaster 04:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I've never talked to another user so I'm unsure if I'm using the right thing, but I'm trying to reply to your message. I looked at the James Tabor page but I am unsure what you want me to look at or do in particular. I did notice that someone had incorrectly linked something on the page. Tabor is not the "Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina". He is the Chair at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Those are two very different entities. That is the only thing I found that I objected to. I can't really make any further contributions because I know very little about Tabor. If I can help you in any other way, let me know.Charlottedude 06:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  James Tabor 

message: The copy from Dr. Tabor and your objections to his credibility? I'll go ahead and combine the two with a heading  something like "Background and Involvement with Church of God" Reverend Mommy 13:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that you moved all of the discussion here, good idea, I followed your lead. Your question about "your objections" is not directed towards anyone in particular, but since we are the only two who have any interest at all in this article (everyone else keeps bowing out), let me state quite clearly that I am not "objecting to his credibility". I am attempting to keep this article NPOV in order to avoid objections to the credibility of this Wikipedia article. If the article appears to be self-promotion it will fail the Wikipedia standards test. This article needs to be a balanced presentation. Quite frankly I cannot see why Dr. Tabor's own words, his explanation of his own background, are not satisfactory. I have absolutely no objections to what Dr. Tabor wrote in order to explain his background because it does put things in a concise form and reflects the development of his life and his thought patterns. I have not added anything about Koresh, but if the article starts to tilt again by the inclusion of material on Koresh, then it needs to be balanced by showing his relationship to others who came from a similar background as Dr. Tabor. Let's keep this article NPOV and not diminish balanced material that even Dr. Tabor endorses, since he wrote it! Exambassador 15:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why not include both?

message: and removed the caveat placed on the page earlier because the information I added was not obtained from James Tabor but from University of NC, Charlotte.  Reverend Mommy 23:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if it were from Tabor's CV it would for anyone who contested it to provide an alternative sourced history, instead of adding weasel words and poisoning the well. --Michael C. Price talk 00:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Michael, I concur.   Reverend Mommy 01:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I have reverted

message: I have added a few more links and rearranged the page.  I don't know what that blockquote is all about except that someone is bringing up controversial stuff from 30 years ago to try to discredit Dr. Tabor's work today.  This seems to be the worse sort of an Ad hominem argument.  I would like to remove it entirely, as I don't think that kind of personal reflection stuff belongs in an encyclopedia entry.  Reverend Mommy 14:45, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed it - the link remains - since much of it was already paraphrased elsewhere. --Michael C. Price talk 20:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I have rearranged

message: I am concerned that Reverend Mommy misunderstands the idea of NPOV and is attempting to remove anything that might seem at all critical from this entry.  I certainly can't understand why an encyclopedia entry should not have 30 year old biographical stuff.  And, given that James Tabor is not exactly mainstream even now in some of his ideas, it might even be relevant to his ideas today, although the entry if meant to be biographical should cover the past as well.
Dougweller 18:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with your statement about the NPOV.  NPOV does not advocate zero opinion, but a fair and balanced opinion.  We must strive to present the information accurately and within context.  What I have been removing is 1) the comments that condemn Dr. Tabor on basis of the book of Acts and 2) a contorted couple of paragraphs which did not make sense within the context of the article. I asked several times for the author of that opinion to tell me what he was trying to say, with no response. I would whole-heartedly encourage you to re-write whatever you wish as long as you present it fairly and cite reliable sources.  I don't think that an extract like this expresses that clearly.  "30 year old biography stuff" is entirely appropriate, but I don't understand the context here, nor would anyone else not not familiar with the issue. I believe you have a dedicated interest in discrediting Dr. Tabor, as your stated opinions on your website stand in opposition to his, thus I don't think you have perspective to say what is NPOV. I don't have a dog in the fight and see the repeated arguments "but he's a bad person!" to lack validity.  Tell me WHY it lacks validity. Reverend Mommy 19:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I am concerned

message: *Biblical Greek: Living Biblical Greek for Everyone (with R. Buth), 2003,  
this book was written by Randall Buth alone, Amazon has it attributed incorrectly. (Information via lists.ibiblio.org)Reverend Mommy 13:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: removed book

message: The link the Mr. Weller added a few days ago, when compared to his own site and when comparison is made of the profile to his own profile on his site is made a striking similarity emerges and causes me to wonder if Mr. Weller is the author of both sites and if the link is self-referential.  Just hazarding a guess.  Reverend Mommy 13:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I retract.  I re-read that site and yours and I agree that they do not resemble as much as I thought. That site is WEIRD. Reverend Mommy 20:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: also

message: This is not meant to be a fan site. I'm not happy with people deleting links they don't like because they are critical of James Tabor. I don't think he'd be happy with this either.
I've restored the last one, but if this continues, what should I do?  Delete the rest of the links is tempting but destructive. Dougweller 12:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a Fan Site

message: I am reading "The Jesus Dynasty" at the moment so would like to know exactly what is controversial about Prof. Tabor?  These names above mean nothing to non-americans.  Can you please explain?  Mike0001 (talk) 14:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pussy Footing

message: The tone of this article seems completely inappropriate. It sounds like it was written by his student. At the least it has a sort of fawning tone. Whole Wheat Ιγνάτιος (talk) 20:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Better now? Dougweller (talk) 21:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite a bit, well done. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

text: I concur! Fantastic job. Whole Wheat Ιγνάτιος (talk) 22:50, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Tone of the Article

message: 321- GO 174.240.67.36 (talk) 00:38, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  get of your keister and get to work 

message: Tabor wrote and discussed online (there is even a youtube video) the problems with the reports about the skeletons.  see here
It is obvious that Yadin's lack of exact reports, change of tone, and contradicting evidence are all due to the fight with the Jewish religious authorities who wished the skeletons buried in an official Jewish burial. Tabor notes that it is not clear where the original skeletons are today, or where those that were buried are found today. 
He was not able to find a source for the actual finding. But here is one (with 15 skeletons mentioned):  in commentary magazine by Daniel Gavron dated Friday, October 18, 1963 פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 13:00, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Massada skeletons and cave