hatsoff

Indeed. Certainly there must be some places where it would be next to impossible to be hired if you rejected the authenticity of New Testament books, but I'm not sure there's anywhere it would officially necessitate elimination from consideration.

Toto

Places like Asbury Theological Seminary

jgibson000

Let's not confuse things. Accepting the "authenticity of the NT books" is not the same thing as accepting as true the traditional ascriptions of authorship of those books, is it?

And if not, I'd like to see some proof for the original assertion that there are indded seminaries and universities that use "one must accept the traditional ascription of authorship of NT books" as a criterion for hiring anyone.

Jeffrey Gibson

jgibson000

Leaving aside the question of whether you've equivocated here and confused the question of whether the NT was inspired with whether the traditional ascriptions of authorship of the Gospels are historically accurate/true, perhaps you'd like to contact the academic dean and let him know that the NT instructors he (or his predecessor) has hired -- like Joel Green and Ben Witherington -- are "heretics".

Jeffrey Gibson

hatsoff

No, but they do go hand in hand. How can one accept the authenticity of, say, Ephesians, if you don't believe Paul wrote it? We like to throw around terms like "pseudepigraphical," but what it really comes down to is that some of the New Testament is forgery. The authors lied about who they were. If you can believe that but accept "authenticity," I'd like to know how.

Toto seems to have given an example. I'm pretty sure Wheaton College has the same criteria. Whether or not such a prerequisite is official makes little difference.

Toto

I've no doubt that there are a lot of heretics teaching in seminaries. It would increase my respect greatly for Mr. Witherington if I thought he were among them.

And how is it possible to believe that the Bible is inerrant (not just inspired, but "without error in all it affirms") but that the ascriptions of the gospels to particular persons is wrong? Perhaps I shouldn't bother asking. With God All Things Are Possible.

(BTW I'm aware that seminaries could not easily enforce such a requirement. It would leave few besides semi-literates and liars on the faculty. That's why a lot of Bible-believing churches avoid seminary graduates when they recruit their pastors....)

jgibson000

He doesn't feel he is. Nor do any of the academic deans or does the head of the Asbury Seminary feel so either, since what you allege is a criterion for hiring and an article of belief at Asbury simply ain't either.

Because "the Bible" makes no ascriptions whatsoever as to the authorship of the gospels.

Perhaps you should do some further resarch.


Really? And your evidence for this assertion is what?

Jeffrey

Padre Bear

Actually, Toto, Asbury has people like Ben Witherington III on faculty who would understand and accept contemporary understandings of modern criticism concerning gospel origens.

Also, the language of the Asbury statement is not one affirming as conservative a position as it may appear at first glance. That is part of the problem of insider/outsider language.

Essentially it is claiming Christian primacy, truthfulness of scripture (but in what sense, lots of wiggle room), primacy of scripture (special revelation) and reliability of witness (not in tradition or the words, but in what it affirms, i.e. the content of the faith). Conservative, yes, but no problem for professors teaching synoptic theory of source theory for the OT.

Padre Bear

Sorry, I was writing the above as others responded.

Toto

Does their website lie or mislead?

You claim that not all the words on the page are to be taken seriously? What next?

Why? To see how adept believers are in trying to reconcile their beliefs with reality? I've seen enough of that.

Personal experience.