Apart from the time, the money and the travel, that is.
Last year I remember feeling overwhelmed and not a little sickened by the sheer number of people making their comfortable living off the back of God’s word. Around 5000 conference delegates were supplemented by the many hundreds of vendors, publishers, agents and so on. I have no idea how many of these people are motivated in the studies or their business by a true desire to honour God and serve his people, but judging from what I observed, it’s probably a minority.
So it’s particularly pleasing to find one such biblical scholar admitting to deep feelings of unease about his own part in this. Hector Avalos thinks that the Bible has no more intrinsic merit than Shakespeare, yet he is a biblical scholar at Iowa State University. He spends his working life studying a book which he does not believe. In this article he notes how biblical studies departments are finding it increasingly important to justify their own existence. He is pretty blunt about this:
I have come to see the SBL as having a self-serving ideology that must be confronted if the SBL is to survive at all. Given the ever-growing irrelevance of biblical studies in academia, the SBL has increasingly become charged with stemming the death of a profession. The vast majority of SBL members are engaged in an elite leisure pursuit called “biblical studies,” which is subsidized through churches, academic institutions, and taxpayers. Keeping biblical scholars employed, despite their irrelevance to anyone outside of faith communities, is the main mission of the SBL.
Now, I fundamentally disagree with Avalos about the worth of biblical studies. I think that there is nothing the world needs more than to hear and understand properly the texts I spend my days studying. My motivation is not to make money (!) nor a name for myself, but to serve the church. And I’m glad to be studying with and under people who have similar goals.
But I can’t help feeling that there are some parallels between the majority of SBL delegates and the moneylenders whom Jesus threw out of the temple.
Stumble It!
5 Comments
Good thoughts, Ros. Is there value in proper Bible students holding their noses and getting involved in things like SBL, or do you think it’s too far gone?
I can’t see what one could hope to achieve by getting involved, but maybe I’m missing something.
Well, I can imagine that able, committed conservative scholars could make an impact on something like SBL over time, and not just contribute to the debate, but actually shift the terms of debate, at least to some extent. Speaking as an outsider, istm that Tom Wright has done that in e.g., quest for historical Jesus stuff. And he’s done it in part because he’s willing to engage with the libbos on their turf (and show why it’s really Christ’s turf). I suspect Oliver Crisp could do something similar in systematics/historical theology. And how much more could a group of committed evangelical scholars achieve working together. As fewer secular universities do proper biblical languages etc…
But that’s not everyone’s calling, of course. And maybe it’s better anyway to deny the terms under which something like SBL operates, and function exclusively in a more Christian/biblical setting. Dunno. Thinking out loud.
Yes, I don’t doubt that Tom Wright has made an impact, nor that other scholars could follow that lead. And I think there’s certainly value in engaging liberal scholars critically and seriously.But I’m not sure that my problems with SBL are just to do with the parameters of the academic debate. More it’s just the hypocrisy of those who peddle God’s word for money and/or glory.
And did he do it (mainly or in part) by going to SBL or by writing big books?