lukeprog

I recently interviewed Mike Licona and said that "Most New Testament scholars are Christian," and Mike flatly denied it: "Most New Testament scholars are NOT Christian."

Has anybody actually counted this up? Is there any actual research on this? For examples, Habermas has counted up people's beliefs on certain facts of the Resurrection - has he also counted their professed faith? Has anyone counted up the professed faith of members of the Society of Biblica Literature? Has anyone done such a survey?

I can't find research pointing either way. All I know is that when I read New Testament scholarship, I am far more likely to be reading a Christian than anything else.

Anybody know?

thedistillers

Surely the majority of NT scholars consider themselves Christians. Maybe Licona doesn't consider liberal Christians to be "real" Christians?

Jeffrey Gibson

Leaving aside the question of what NT scholarship it is that you actually read (Sanders? Ehrman? Crossan? Goulder? Crossley? Carter? Levine? Pagels? Sandmel, Vermes? Allison? Montiforre? Bammel? Kloppenborg? Goodacre? Dunn? Schnelle? Theissen? Ludemann?) you "know" that you are "likely" when you read it to be reading a "Christian's" work how?

Is the implication of your question that NT scholarship can't be any good if it is done by "christians" (an umbrella term if there ever was one) since such scholars do/could not ever put aside their faith commitments and all their conclusions re the NT are/will be predetermined by what they already "know" the Bible has to say?

If so, should we not say the same of MJers who have their own "faith" commitments?

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson

"Surely"?? And you know this "how"?

I take it that you've never been to an SBL annual meeting. Am I correct?

Jeffrey

Toto

I think that, from Licona's point of view, most NT scholars are not Christian enough. His brand of apologetics rejects liberal scholarship about the Bible.

I think it would be difficult to take a survey. Some NT scholars work for seminaries or religious instutions that require a loyalty oath to their particular doctrines, but even in that case, scholars feel a need to at least frame their scholarship in secular terms so that it does not depend on their particular faith, so that they can maintain a dialogue with the broader scholarly community and maintain some intellectual respectability.

Many seem to make a point of keeping their religious stance private. Christian apologists here used to like to refer to Michael Grant as an atheist (as in "even the atheist Michael Grant...") but it turned out that no one could actually pinpoint his religious beliefs.

I think you can make a case that there are some unexamined assumptions that are part of NT scholarship, due to the prevailing Christian culture of this country. But it would depend on much more than a head count.

thedistillers

Common sense?

If we take the US, 77% of the population or so consider themselves Christians. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that, in a discipline related to Christianity, the majority of scholars are going to be Christians.

Jeffrey Gibson

So .. as I suspected, you have no actual, hard, empircal evidence to back up your claim. Just a deduction based upon some question begging assumptions

And where on earth do you get the idea that all/most NT scholars are Americans? Is Wright? Dunn, Theissen, Ludemann, Marshall? F. Watson? U. Schnelle? E. Schweizer? R. Schnakenburg, P. Essler, M. Hooker? J. Kloppenborg? Beaseley Murray? W.D. Davies? M. Goodacre? R. Martin? R. France? F. Bovon? C. Evans? R. Morgan? S. Kealy? R. Baukham? R. Burridge, H. Bond? L. Alexander? R. Watts? M. Hengel? C. Brown? G. Twelftree? U. Luz? E. Ferguson? B. Gerhardson? D. Guthrie? E. Eve? J. Muddimann? C. Rowland? W. Campbell? D. Wenham? S. Walton? M. Davies? D. Catchpoole? H. Koester? R. Nolland? W. Carter? C. Brockmuel? R. Piper? F. Neierynk? J.D. Crossan? G. Vermes? D. Horrell? W. Telford?

Were Dodd? Caird? Montifiore? Perrin? Bultmann? Kaesemann? Dibelius? Lindars? Trocme? Swete? Bruce? Jeremias? Cullmann? C.F. Evans? D. Nineham? Lightfoot? Wrede? Schoeps? Deismann? C.F.D. Moule? C.K. Barrett? T.W. Manson? W. Barclay? V. Taylor? B.H. Streeter? Todt? Bornkamm? J.A. T. Robinson? the authors of the articles in TDNT?

Perhaps you can tell me, based on demographics, how many US Islamic scholars are Muslims, or Buddhist scholars are Buddhists? How many classicists are believers in Zeus?

I'm afraid that on the point above, you are not exhibiting any sense at all, let alone some of the "common" kind, which is often wrong anyway in that it works from prejudice and false premises.

Jeffrey

wordy

I guess some Christians see Liberal Christians as in reality to be atheists cause they are not Born Again Evangelistic.

Markus Borg grew up within a Lutheran Christian faith maybe but he sometimes see himself a bit like Panentheist? So that maybe trigger "True Believers" to see him as an atheist. But he himself see him as a good Christian as far as I know.

thedistillers

Common sense suggests that people who are going to have an academic interest with the NT are more likely to be Christians. Coupled that with the fact that there is a lot of Christians in countries where NT scholars come from (like the US), I think we can make 2 + 2.

Unless you present yourself actual, hard, empirical evidence showing the contrary, I will maintain my position.

Ben C Smith

The Borgs hang out with the Crossans a lot, going together on pilgrimages to various sites that hold historic Christian interest (Skellig Michael, for example). Both of them appear to identify with some sort of what is sometimes called radical Christianity, a focus on the economic, political, and social implications of the message of Jesus (and, for that matter, of the Hebrew prophets).

Ben.