"[Religiologist David] Frankfurter’s central objection is that Kent conflates mythic narratives with historical reality. … Kent’s theory of “deviant scripturalism” posits that fringe groups can use or misuse specific religious texts—particularly those involving incest, sacrifice, or divine violence—to justify abuse. But Frankfurter argues that this approach lacks historical grounding. Kent’s method, he counters, amounts to a kind of speculative anthropology, in which the mere presence of a mythic in scripture is taken as evidence of its enactment in ritual. This is not just a methodological quibble. It strikes at the heart of Kent’s argument. By treating scriptural motifs as behavioral templates, Kent blurs the line between text and practice, belief and action. Frankfurter points out that such motifs are ubiquitous in religious literature, yet rarely—if ever—translated into ritual abuse. Historical data do not support the leap from narrative to crime."