The Marginalization of a Certain Belief - in Today's World?
On Dr. Al Mohler's website today, he entertains a shockingly narrow worldview of biblical scholorship. For the full article click here. Snippets:
"Michael V. Fox doesn't believe that faith-based scholarship of the Bible is possible--and he wants to see such scholars marginalized in the larger world of scholarship. In an essay posted at the Web site for the Society of Biblical Literature [SBL], Fox argues, "In my view, faith-based study has no place in academic scholarship, whether the object of study is the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or Homer. Faith-based study is a different realm of intellectual activity that can dip into Bible scholarship for its own purposes, but cannot contribute to it.
which led to...
""The best thing for Bible appreciation is secular, academic, religiously-neutral hermeneutic."
to which Mohler righly replies...
That is an astounding claim, and one that demands a far more developed argument and series of definitions. Does Fox actually believe in the myth of a "secular, academic, religiously-neutral hermeneutic?" Does he believe in the Easter Bunny?"
concluding with Mohler's thoughts:
"All scholarship is based in some faith and deeply grounded in some set of presuppositions. For the vast majority of those engaged in academia today, that faith is some form of ideological secularism. Christian scholars should always be absolutely transparent and clear about their confessional commitments. As a matter of fact, this should be an absolute requirement of their confessional institutions. At the same time, we should never allow that those who hold alternative worldviews are any less ideologically or intellectually committed. The radical nature of Professor Fox's proposal indicates just how committed he is to his own faith--and how blind he is to his own faith-based perspective. Watch this debate with interest--it is not going away any time soon."
It's amazing the lengths that people will go to push a certain belief out of the realm of reason. Somehow, academia has degenerated to this form of exclusivism, despite existing in a society that has pluralistic answers for so many questions. One might as well re-name secular academia to "Buffet-style" academia because they seem to freely pick, choose, (and even dictate) what is able to be questioned, reasoned, and studied.
"Michael V. Fox doesn't believe that faith-based scholarship of the Bible is possible--and he wants to see such scholars marginalized in the larger world of scholarship. In an essay posted at the Web site for the Society of Biblical Literature [SBL], Fox argues, "In my view, faith-based study has no place in academic scholarship, whether the object of study is the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or Homer. Faith-based study is a different realm of intellectual activity that can dip into Bible scholarship for its own purposes, but cannot contribute to it.
which led to...
""The best thing for Bible appreciation is secular, academic, religiously-neutral hermeneutic."
to which Mohler righly replies...
That is an astounding claim, and one that demands a far more developed argument and series of definitions. Does Fox actually believe in the myth of a "secular, academic, religiously-neutral hermeneutic?" Does he believe in the Easter Bunny?"
concluding with Mohler's thoughts:
"All scholarship is based in some faith and deeply grounded in some set of presuppositions. For the vast majority of those engaged in academia today, that faith is some form of ideological secularism. Christian scholars should always be absolutely transparent and clear about their confessional commitments. As a matter of fact, this should be an absolute requirement of their confessional institutions. At the same time, we should never allow that those who hold alternative worldviews are any less ideologically or intellectually committed. The radical nature of Professor Fox's proposal indicates just how committed he is to his own faith--and how blind he is to his own faith-based perspective. Watch this debate with interest--it is not going away any time soon."
It's amazing the lengths that people will go to push a certain belief out of the realm of reason. Somehow, academia has degenerated to this form of exclusivism, despite existing in a society that has pluralistic answers for so many questions. One might as well re-name secular academia to "Buffet-style" academia because they seem to freely pick, choose, (and even dictate) what is able to be questioned, reasoned, and studied.
posted by Charlie Wallace at
12:42 PM
4 Comments:
I daresay that Biblical scholarship has largely moved in that direction already.
"Does Fox actually believe in the myth of a "secular, academic, religiously-neutral hermeneutic?" Does he believe in the Easter Bunny?"
what does that even mean? does he believe in the easter bunny, um, how bout no. now dr mohler, were is your point going. he doesnt believe in the easter bunny, therefore............
also, the best way to get to relativism is by asserting that there is no such thing as huermenutic neutrality. if you can't fully describe or understand something that you've experienced then how can you condemn it? you cant. and yet somehow despite never experiencing female circumcision, i feel very comfortable is saying it is a bad that and should be stopped. or am i wrong.
ps, in case your rebuttle was going to revolve around whether or not i believe in the easter bunny i'll save you some time and say no i do not.
something 'that you havent expereinced' is what that should say.
also, i dont believe in santa either.
Dantzler,
I'm not sure how to respond to your comments because I'm not sure how it relates to you the post.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home