Scholars

[Truth in love]

How do Biblical scholars today measure up to Biblical scholars of the past?

Paul

he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving by references. . . Acts 17:2, 3​

Jesus

starting with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them things pertaining to himself in all the Scriptures. . . Luke 24:27​

Of course we cannot exclude the fact that we have information from one of the greatest historians.
Luke

"Seeing that many have undertaken to compile an account of the facts that are given full credence among us, just as these were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and attendants of the message, I resolved also, because I have traced all things from the start with accuracy, to write them to you in logical order, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know fully the certainty of the things that you have been taught orally." - Luke 1:1-4​

Is there any good reason why one should accept the opinions of Biblical scholars today, over the Biblical scholars of the past. (That list being quite long)?

I think we need to make room for errors of transcription and translation.
However, when the Bible says X and some preacher says it’s not X, I ignore the preacher.

The actual words of Prophets and Apostles matter a lot more to me than the oft well meaning opinions of people who read the Bible (even for a living).

 

[nPeace]

Thought it was Scripture, or is it something else you had in mind?

Well it seems you have something in mind other than what I had in mind, since you claimed that Judaism, Christianity Islam and others existed prior to scripture.
So I wanted to know what scripture you had in mind, since that statement does not agree with the fact that scripture existed before these.
Islam is actually 6 centuries + older than Paul's letters.

 

[pearl]

Islam is actually 6 centuries + older than Paul's letters.

I think you missed my point which is as far as Jewish and Christian Scriptures are concerned there existed a community of believers prior to anything written. The texts follow this writing what has already occurred. I do not know whether one may say the same concerning Islam.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Generally speaking, I agree, but often even the best of scholars interject their opinions, which can be quite variable, and this is also found in Judaism that gets reflected in the commentary system. Not everything is cut & dry.

The rule of thumb that logic requires is that it is rational to appeal to authority when the experts are in agreement. If they were just voicing their sundry opinions, you would not have a consensus.

 

[metis]

The rule of thumb that logic requires is that it is rational to appeal to authority when the experts are in agreement. If they were just voicing their sundry opinions, you would not have a consensus.

Generally speaking, I agree, but as a scientist we always leave some wiggle-room.

 

[nPeace]

I think you missed my point which is as far as Jewish and Christian Scriptures are concerned there existed a community of believers prior to anything written. The texts follow this writing what has already occurred. I do not know whether one may say the same concerning Islam.

I don't think I missed your point.
From what you said here, this is what I figured you believe.
However, let's start with Judaism. When did Judaism originate, and when did scripture originate?

 

[metis]

When did Judaism originate...

Depends on where one draws the line, but it appears through archaeology that it started with the "Cult of YHWH", which was one of the gods believed in the southern Arabian Peninsula that some ancient Jews began to believe in and brought their belief north.

Sorry, but I had to inject that into your conversation as "the Devil made me do it!".

 

[nPeace]

Depends on where one draws the line, but it appears through archaeology that it started with the "Cult of YHWH", which was one of the gods believed in the southern Arabian Peninsula that some ancient Jews began to believe in and brought their belief north.

Sorry, but I had to inject that into your conversation as "the Devil made me do it!".

Do you have a source... with a date.
Or do I have to ask the Devil? Since I don't talk to him, I have to ask someone whom he uses.

 

[metis]

Do you have a source... with a date.

Check the latest copy of BAR, but if you can't find it then let me know and I'll get back with you sometime tomorrow as I'm leaving shortly.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The rule of thumb that logic requires is that it is rational to appeal to authority when the experts are in agreement. If they were just voicing their sundry opinions, you would not have a consensus.

Unless they all had the same sundry opinions. Then they'ld all agree.
And then you're back to square one, even with a consensus.

So, this consensus should not be seen as merely "agreeing with eachother", but should rather be also validated / underpinned with solid reasoning for why they agree on what.

If they agree merely because they share the same ill-informed opinions, then their perceived expertise in the field is of no consequence.

In other words, there should be a clear distinction between their mere opinions and their actual scholarly conclusions - which should be solidly underpinned by research and sound reasoning, and subject to independent verification.

 

[metis]

Do you have a source... with a date.
Or do I have to ask the Devil? Since I don't talk to him, I have to ask someone whom he uses.

As I said, it is found in BAR and is a finding by archeologists who worked that area. The oldest reference to the "Cult of Yahweh" is around 1400 b.c.e. with references of "Shasu", which is an early Egyptian name for Jews who were trading in that area of the southern Arabian Peninsula. It then appears to have spread to Judah and eventually to the north in eretz Israel.

If you have a copy of BAR for this fall, you'll find a more detailed accounting there.