Majority of scholars? Who, and where?

[SteveB]

Over the past several years, it's been a common practice for certain atheists to claim that there are a majority of scholars who claim that the Bible isn't actually a reliable document.

The other day one such atheist made the claim so I asked for names.
Not their writings/works, just their names.
After a bunch of banter, they finally gave me 2 names.

I'd never heard of the second one, so I went and looked them, and their works up.

While she was a very attractive woman, and her bio picture was flirtatious in her look, I found myself thinking....
Really? And?

So, I decided to do some further research on this topic of Bible scholars.

The list of them from the atheist side isn't very impressive.
The list of those who believe that the Bible is valid and YHVH can be trusted is better, but, apparently, they're rejected, because they didn’t act stoically or "scholarly" enough to satisfy the atheist beliefs about what a scholar is and should comport themselves as.

I found an article that I think deals with the problem rather simply.

A List Of Conservative And Liberal Bible Scholars

Modern atheists often say that “a majority of scholars…” say certain things regarding the reliability of the Bible. When we press these individuals on precisely who these scholars…

robertcliftonrobinson.com

Modern atheists often say that “a majority of scholars…” say certain things regarding the reliability of the Bible. When we press these individuals on precisely who these scholars are, we find that they are most often atheist of progressive scholars who do not believe God exists in the first place.

We might wonder why a person would seek an advanced degree in Biblical studies, only to spend their life and work trying to impeach the Bible.

Unknown to a majority of people is the existence of the atheist New Testament scholar. These are people who don’t believe God exists, or that the Bible is true, yet seek to write about these important subjects as experts. Imagine going to a doctor for medical advice and he tells you that he doesn’t believe in medicine. Today many people accept the conclusions of atheists regarding whether the New Testament is a reliable record of truth.

Who Is Qualified To Be A Biblical Scholar?
The Ruse Of Atheist New Testament Scholars


The methods that atheist scholars use to try and prove their assertions that Jesus was contrived by the writers of the New Testament, are the fundamentals of New Testament criticism. The problem is that they do not use these methods in the same way that they were intended, but to further their attempts at discrediting Jesus and the testimony about Him in the books of the New Testament.



So, all y'all atheists who have this collection of Bible scholars who give you justification to disregard the Bible, how about providing the list.

Thank you!

 

[SteveB]

A book review, of Bible scholars who still believe in Jesus.

I (Still) Believe: Leading Bible Scholars Share Their Stories of Faith and Scholarship - Christian Scholar’s Review

I (Still) Believe: Leading Bible Scholars Share Their Stories of Faith and Scholarship John Byron and Joel N. Lohr, eds. Published by Zondervan in 2015 239pp / $25 / 9780310515166...

christianscholars.com

 

[Whatsisface]

Over the past several years, it's been a common practice for certain atheists to claim that there are a majority of scholars who claim that the Bible isn't actually a reliable document.

The other day one such atheist made the claim so I asked for names.
Not their writings/works, just their names.
After a bunch of banter, they finally gave me 2 names.

I'd never heard of the second one, so I went and looked them, and their works up.

While she was a very attractive woman, and her bio picture was flirtatious in her look, I found myself thinking....
Really? And?

So, I decided to do some further research on this topic of Bible scholars.

The list of them from the atheist side isn't very impressive.
The list of those who believe that the Bible is valid and YHVH can be trusted is better, but, apparently, they're rejected, because they didn’t act stoically or "scholarly" enough to satisfy the atheist beliefs about what a scholar is and should comport themselves as.

I found an article that I think deals with the problem rather simply.

A List Of Conservative And Liberal Bible Scholars

Modern atheists often say that “a majority of scholars…” say certain things regarding the reliability of the Bible. When we press these individuals on precisely who these scholars…

robertcliftonrobinson.com

Modern atheists often say that “a majority of scholars…” say certain things regarding the reliability of the Bible. When we press these individuals on precisely who these scholars are, we find that they are most often atheist of progressive scholars who do not believe God exists in the first place.

We might wonder why a person would seek an advanced degree in Biblical studies, only to spend their life and work trying to impeach the Bible.

Unknown to a majority of people is the existence of the atheist New Testament scholar. These are people who don’t believe God exists, or that the Bible is true, yet seek to write about these important subjects as experts. Imagine going to a doctor for medical advice and he tells you that he doesn’t believe in medicine. Today many people accept the conclusions of atheists regarding whether the New Testament is a reliable record of truth.

Who Is Qualified To Be A Biblical Scholar?
The Ruse Of Atheist New Testament Scholars


The methods that atheist scholars use to try and prove their assertions that Jesus was contrived by the writers of the New Testament, are the fundamentals of New Testament criticism. The problem is that they do not use these methods in the same way that they were intended, but to further their attempts at discrediting Jesus and the testimony about Him in the books of the New Testament.



So, all y'all atheists who have this collection of Bible scholars who give you justification to disregard the Bible, how about providing the list.

Thank you!

"Dr. Daniel Wallace is a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary and is considered an expert on ancient / Biblical Greek and New Testament criticism. Without putting forth the idea of New Testament eclecticism I’d like to post a quote from one of his recent blog posts about the the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature" :

As remarkable as it may sound, most biblical scholars are not Christians. I don’t know the exact numbers, but my guess is that between 60% and 80% of the members of SBL do not believe that Jesus’ death paid for our sins, or that he was bodily raised from the dead. The post-lecture discussions are often spirited, and occasionally get downright nasty.

Found here.

 

[SteveB]

"Dr. Daniel Wallace is a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary and is considered an expert on ancient / Biblical Greek and New Testament criticism. Without putting forth the idea of New Testament eclecticism I’d like to post a quote from one of his recent blog posts about the the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature" :


Found here.

Rather curious that the "blog posts" quoted gave me the following result.


HTTP Status: 404 (not found)

the article you linked too was very brief and had nothing but the general claim "that most scholars aren't Christians."

I'm looking for a list WiF.

seems like this should be easy to provide.

you're claiming ubiquity.
I'm not seeing anything even remotely close to a half-dozen yet.

 

[Whatsisface]

Rather curious that the "blog posts" quoted gave me the following result.


HTTP Status: 404 (not found)

the article you linked too was very brief and had nothing but the general claim "that most scholars aren't Christians."

I'm looking for a list WiF.

seems like this should be easy to provide.

you're claiming ubiquity.
I'm not seeing anything even remotely close to a half-dozen yet.

I will post articles in this thread as i have done, but due to your appalling lack of reasonableness, I won't be discussing anything with you.

 

[SteveB]

I will post articles in this thread as i have done, but due to your appalling lack of reasonableness, I won't be discussing anything with you.

And yet here you are posting.
It was your source, but it fell short because the link in the reference was dead.


Btw, I'm still waiting for the quote from Francesca Stavrakopoulou's book where you said she explained WHY she's an atheist.

This op is about giving you and the other atheists on this forum the opportunity to provide corroborating evidence for the claim that "most Bible scholars are not Christian."

So, at this point, because you leave me with the distinct impression that I'm having to pull teeth on a topic that you have explicitly stated you're basing your eternal state on..., I think I'm being exceedingly reasonable, patient, gracious, and understanding.

Please don't make it that difficult.

Just present your list of scholars.

Remember.... you are the one who opened this door.

 

[Furion]

This op is about giving you and the other atheists on this forum the opportunity to provide corroborating evidence for the claim that "most Bible scholars are not Christian."

Goodness, most bible scholars are unbelievers eh?

That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of being a bible scholar.

Wouldn't that make them a bible skeptik?

L to the O to the L

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Goodness, most bible scholars are unbelievers eh?

That's probably because biblical scholarship for the purpose of becoming "scholarly" is an impediment to belief. True belief is trust in the Person of Jesus, not mental assent to His attributes conveyed in the Bible or especially not expertise on the historical canonization of the Bible. One meets Christ personally through the divine revelation conveyed by the scriptures.

We all know the old test of trust when one intentionally falls limply backwards into the arms of another to determine if true trust is there. Suppose we think about a specific historical personage known for his decency and honesty, let's say Honest Abe himself as the catcher behind. Who is more likely to grow trustworthilly limp in our experiment: Abe's six year old son Tad or some intellectual Lincoln scholar?

We must enter the Kingdom as a child, not as a scholar. Some rural uneducated toothless backwoods Kentucky 85 year old woman with her hair done up in a pentecostal bun, sitting quietly in a church pew is likely to have a closer acquaintance with our Lord than a "Bible Scholar" having done his PHD dissertation on comparisons of speculative datings of ancient biblical manuscripts.

 

[SteveB]

Goodness, most bible scholars are unbelievers eh?

That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of being a bible scholar.

Wouldn't that make them a bible skeptik?

L to the O to the L

Skeptik or sceptic, not sure which.

I'm still waiting for the list I'd asked for.
And the quote from Francesca Stavrakopoulou which says why she became an atheist. Apparently WiF thinks that it's a good way to promote atheism by quoting people whom he's not actually using.

 

[Tiburon]

Goodness, most bible scholars are unbelievers eh?

That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of being a bible scholar.

Wouldn't that make them a bible skeptik?

L to the O to the L

You mean it's not a ringing endorsement of the Bible don't you?
If a scholarly approach doesn't lead someone to believe, then there's obviously something lacking in the "Word of God".

 

[SteveB]

You mean it's not a ringing endorsement of the Bible don't you?
If a scholarly approach doesn't lead someone to believe, then there's obviously something lacking in the "Word of God".

No actually.

Biblical faith is something that is transcendent to basic intellect.

It's all too easy to stop with the mind, and never go further.

Biblical faith requires a step into the world described in the gospel of Jesus.

It's like the difference between eating a cheap chocolate candy bar and eating the finest chocolate on earth.

The former is common, and the latter surpasses the superlative.

Some people prefer basic candy. Others want more. They want to enjoy the finest.

Jesus is transcendent to the nth degree.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

If a scholarly approach doesn't lead someone to believe, then there's obviously something lacking in the "Word of God".

No. The "Word of God" is Christ Himself, the Logos presented in the Gospel and Epistle of John. "Approaching" (your word) Jesus Christ as a scholar is not the way of truth. Who among all who approached Him and obtained an audience with Him came as scholars? Did Zacchaeus? The Samaritan woman at the well? Peter? Were any of the disciples who were fishermen scholars? Was Mary Magdalene? The woman caught in adultery? The woman with the issue of blood? No, the scholars were the scribes and Pharisees, whom Jesus spurned.

 

[mikeT]

Over the past several years, it's been a common practice for certain atheists to claim that there are a majority of scholars who claim that the Bible isn't actually a reliable document.

[...] she was a very attractive woman, and her bio picture was flirtatious in her look

That's irrelevant to her credentials, and to this thread's subject. Sounds like you were committing adultery in your heart there, Steve.

Modern atheists often say that “a majority of scholars…” say certain things regarding the reliability of the Bible. When we press these individuals on precisely who these scholars are, we find that they are most often atheist of progressive scholars who do not believe God exists in the first place.

No we don't, and nothing you've written here suggests otherwise. This is just you complaining, and providing your subjective opinions.

 

[Tiburon]

No. The "Word of God" is Christ Himself, the Logos presented in the Gospel and Epistle of John. "Approaching" (your word) Jesus Christ as a scholar is not the way of truth. Who among all who approached Him and obtained an audience with Him came as scholars? Did Zacchaeus? The Samaritan woman at the well? Peter? Were any of the disciples who were fishermen scholars? Was Mary Magdalene? The woman caught in adultery? The woman with the issue of blood? No, the scholars were the scribes and Pharisees, whom Jesus spurned.

"Approaching Jesus Christ as a scholar is not the way of truth." You mean it doesn't provide a way to convince people to believe what you believe?
We don't know that anyone approached Him and obtained an audience with Him. All we have is what's presented in the Bible. All of which may just be stories. Maybe Jesus was approached in a scholarly manner and soundly defeated. That wouldn't make a good story though would it?

 

[Tiburon]

No actually.

Biblical faith is something that is transcendent to basic intellect.

It's all too easy to stop with the mind, and never go further.

Biblical faith requires a step into the world described in the gospel of Jesus.

It's like the difference between eating a cheap chocolate candy bar and eating the finest chocolate on earth.

The former is common, and the latter surpasses the superlative.

Some people prefer basic candy. Others want more. They want to enjoy the finest.

Jesus is transcendent to the nth degree.

Biblical faith fills the hole in that which the intellect finds wanting.
If "It's all too easy to stop with the mind, and never go further." that would seem to be a Biblical shortcoming.
What world is described in the gospel of Jesus? The Levant of the first century? A world filled with superstition?

 

[Whatsisface]

Over the past several years, it's been a common practice for certain atheists to claim that there are a majority of scholars who claim that the Bible isn't actually a reliable document.

The other day one such atheist made the claim so I asked for names.

This refers to me, and for the record I did not make this claim, nor have I seen anyone make this claim as the OP has stated, and there are no links to anyone saying as much. But then the OP has a history of misrepresenting what people say. Here is how the conversation went down, discussing a recommended book in the Why I Trust the Bible thread ...

After asking what a key point of the book might be ...

The key take away from the book is that a guy who has been studying the Greek language, and the bible has found that the Bible is actually a reliable document and can be trusted to be God's Word to the human race.

My response:

...; there are those who also study the Greek language, and the bible and has found scripture isn't reliable.

... and from this we get the inaccurate claim that certain atheists "...claim that there are a majority of scholars who claim that the Bible isn't actually a reliable document".

I have since found a link, see post #3, that has hints in that direction, but it also says that the exact figures aren't known.

 

[Whatsisface]

Over the past several years, it's been a common practice for certain atheists to claim that there are a majority of scholars who claim that the Bible isn't actually a reliable document.

The other day one such atheist made the claim so I asked for names.
Not their writings/works, just their names.
After a bunch of banter, they finally gave me 2 names.

I'd never heard of the second one, so I went and looked them, and their works up.

While she was a very attractive woman, and her bio picture was flirtatious in her look, I found myself thinking....
Really? And?

So, I decided to do some further research on this topic of Bible scholars.

The list of them from the atheist side isn't very impressive.
The list of those who believe that the Bible is valid and YHVH can be trusted is better, but, apparently, they're rejected, because they didn’t act stoically or "scholarly" enough to satisfy the atheist beliefs about what a scholar is and should comport themselves as.

I found an article that I think deals with the problem rather simply.

A List Of Conservative And Liberal Bible Scholars

Modern atheists often say that “a majority of scholars…” say certain things regarding the reliability of the Bible. When we press these individuals on precisely who these scholars…

robertcliftonrobinson.com

Modern atheists often say that “a majority of scholars…” say certain things regarding the reliability of the Bible. When we press these individuals on precisely who these scholars are, we find that they are most often atheist of progressive scholars who do not believe God exists in the first place.

We might wonder why a person would seek an advanced degree in Biblical studies, only to spend their life and work trying to impeach the Bible.

Unknown to a majority of people is the existence of the atheist New Testament scholar. These are people who don’t believe God exists, or that the Bible is true, yet seek to write about these important subjects as experts. Imagine going to a doctor for medical advice and he tells you that he doesn’t believe in medicine. Today many people accept the conclusions of atheists regarding whether the New Testament is a reliable record of truth.

Who Is Qualified To Be A Biblical Scholar?
The Ruse Of Atheist New Testament Scholars


The methods that atheist scholars use to try and prove their assertions that Jesus was contrived by the writers of the New Testament, are the fundamentals of New Testament criticism. The problem is that they do not use these methods in the same way that they were intended, but to further their attempts at discrediting Jesus and the testimony about Him in the books of the New Testament.



So, all y'all atheists who have this collection of Bible scholars who give you justification to disregard the Bible, how about providing the list.

Thank you!

Again, for the record, this is from the OP's link to an article ...

List of Atheist And Progressive New Testament Scholars​

1. Bart Ehrman, Wheaton College
2. Mitchell G. Reddish, Southern Seminary
3. Marcus Borg, Union Theological Seminary
4. Robert Price, Johnnie Colemon Theological Seminary.
5. Robert Funk, Vanderbilt University
6. John Dominic Crossan, Patrick’s College, Maynooth
7. Burton Mack, Claremont School of Theology
8. Barbara Thiering
9. Harold Attridge
10. Lloyd Geering
11. Stephen Harris
12. Karen King
13. James F. McGrath

This supports my point that there are those who study greek and the Bible and yet come to the conclusion that the Bible isn't historically reliable.

That the author of "Why I trust the Bible", William Mounce, studied greek and the Bible was the OP's criteria for the Bible being trustworthy, ....

The key take away from the book is that a guy who has been studying the Greek language, and the bible has found that the Bible is actually a reliable document and can be trusted to be God's Word to the human race.

.... when there are those who also study the same, but come to the opposite conclusion.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

"Approaching Jesus Christ as a scholar is not the way of truth." You mean it doesn't provide a way to convince people to believe what you believe?

No. I mean it is not the Way to commune with the Living God.

We don't know that anyone approached Him and obtained an audience with Him. All we have is what's presented in the Bible. All of which may just be stories. Maybe Jesus was approached in a scholarly manner and soundly defeated. That wouldn't make a good story though would it?

Correct. It wouldn't. It could not compare with the truth as related in scripture. It's pretty lame that to refute all of my examples (and there are many more (the rich young ruler, Jairus, Mary, Martha, etc.)) you've now been reduced to discounting ALL of them with "they may just be stories." Yeah, sure. Keep telling yourself that.

 

[Furion]

You mean it's not a ringing endorsement of the Bible don't you?
If a scholarly approach doesn't lead someone to believe, then there's obviously something lacking in the "Word of God".

It may be nearly impossible to unwrap your ignorance.

If God needed scholars He could just use a rock. In other words, your scholars are meaningless and superfluous.

However, unbelieving scholars are your priesthood.

 

[Furion]

Skeptik or sceptic, not sure which.

I use both as it tickles my fancy. I personally look for intelligence rather than grammer.

I'm still waiting for the list I'd asked for.
And the quote from Francesca Stavrakopoulou which says why she became an atheist. Apparently WiF thinks that it's a good way to promote atheism by quoting people whom he's not actually using.

I stopped looking for intelligence there. Oh wait, too mean?

It just gives me giggles when I see someone 'promoting atheism'.

I think of all the times atheists claimed they don't have religion.