Bishop Spong's Argument from Ignorance

Bishop John Shelby Spong - the episcopalian minister who was recently elevated to Bishop despite an active homosexual relationship - apparently has out a new book where he challenges many of the "assumptions" of modern biblical authorship. It will come as no surprise to regular readers that I tend to find the allegations in the book reported by the New York Times suspect at best.

Bishop Spong particularly denounces preachers who selectively quote Scripture against homosexuality. He also cites various textual reasons for concluding (not very persuasively) that St. Paul was "a frightened gay man condemning other gay people so that he can keep his own homosexuality inside the rigid discipline of his faith."...The bishop also tries to cast doubt on the idea that Judas betrayed Jesus. He notes that the earliest New Testament writings, of Paul and the source known as Q, don't mention a betrayal by Judas. Bishop Spong contends that after the destruction of Jewish Jerusalem in A.D. 70, early Christians curried favor with Roman gentiles by blaming the Crucifixion on Jewish authorities - nurturing two millennia of anti-Semitism that bigots insisted was biblically sanctioned.

I have not read the book, so my ability to form opinions about it are limited. But it sounds to me like the arguments are the logical fallacy called "Argument from Ignorance." Essentially, it is an attempt to form an argument based on a lack of evidence to the contrary, rather than using existing evidence. It appears to be more wishful thinking than actual logical argument. Another attempt by men to twist scripture to fit their agenda, rather than using scripture and taking it at face value. Ironically, this is exactly what Spong accuses his critics of.