The End of Biblical Studies?

by slimboyfat 35 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  slimboyfat

  A while ago I read a book called The End of Biblical Studies by evangelical turned sceptical academic Hector Avalos. I thought it was really interesting perhaps because it mirrors some of the stages I went through as regards how I viewed the Bible as I was leaving the Witnesses.

  At first I still believed the Bible was inspired by God but learned to use different methods to interpret it than Witness eisegesis. Then I thought many parts were not to be taken literally, but at least most of the New Testament was reliable. Then I reasoned that even if most of the Old Testament was mythological at least Jesus was a real person who was sent from God to deliver his message. Then I thought that even if Jesus was just a man he was a great ethical teacher, and the Bible as a whole was an incomparable ancient source of wisdom. Then I thought that even if the ethics of the Bible were a bit suspect at least it was beautiful literature that can tell us a lot about the history of humanity. Avalos pursues and strikes down all such lines in the sand, so that no vestige or any traditional basis for claims of authority for the Bible remain.

  Textual basis: isn't the Bible the best preserved of any ancient book by far? Not really. True thousands of manuscripts exist which is more than for other works, but most are late and the text of the Bible was most fluid in its early stages which are not well represented by manuscripts. As sacred literature it was also subject to greater revision due to controversy in its early stages than literary and historical texts. Its text cannot be relied upon.

  Historical basis: even if it includes some mythology, doesn't the Bible contain a lot of genuine history found nowhere else because it is so ancient? Not really. Trying to match the biblical narrative to the archaeological record has been a long, laborious and largely fruitless task, leading up many blind alleys and obscuring knowledge of the ancient near east rather than illuminating it. Worse than that the ideological "history" of the Old Testament has been used by modern sates to justify aggression and repression. Biblical history is worse than misleading, it is dangerous.

  The figure of Jesus: at least we know Jesus was a real person who we know a lot about what he said and did and was a great ethical teacher? Not really. So many of the sayings of Jesus in the gospels are thought by various scholars to be additions that there is really little if anything left for certain. The parts that are most likely to come direct from Jesus are the most neurotic: ramblings about the end of the world and instructions to abandon parents and families and follow him.

  Impressive literature: even if the Bible has nothing to do with a divine being it is still among the most impressive literature from mankind's history. Even this can be disputed. Avalos argues that much of the poetry is repetitive, poorly constructed, grammatically problematic and ethically and aesthetically unsuccessful. Worse than that, fixation on the biblical text above all others has caused scholars to relatively neglect many other great works from mankind's early history. Works that are arguably of better quality and more deserving of scrutiny from a historical, literary or even semi-devotional point of view.

  Avalos is relentless. By the end of the book you wonder if there is any reasonable basis for respect for the Bible left.
• 

  cofty

  Sounds interesting thanks. Not cheap though £24- on Amazon
• 

  slimboyfat

  Cofty you can catch him on YouTube debating your old nemesis William Lane Craig. Although Avalos does come across as a bit aggressive in that debate (I think that was WLC's game plan) his book is better and more reasoned.
• 

  Qcmbr

  Looks good.

  This sort of information helped blow away any thought of biblical divine authorship.

  http://dwij.org/forum/amarna/2_cmndmts_book_of_the_dead.html
• 

  undercover

  Interesting sounding book.

  I had similar enlightments the further I got away from the JWs and religion in general. Okay, the JWs are wrong, but the Bible is inspired by God. Well, maybe the Bible isn't so holy and inspired, but there are some good lessons and some history. And Jesus. He was cool. Well, maybe Jesus didn't work miracles but he was a revolutionary character. Okay, well there isn't enough evidence to really know what Jesus was, man, myth, combination of legends...

  And I had given thought to how the Bible, so revered and worshipped by so many, could no longer mean anything to me, someone raised to accept it as holy, inspired writings of God. Surely there must be some value to it. But I eventually accepted that like many works of literature, knowing something about it, reading it even, gives you some insight into the subject of it, but it's not imperative to have it in your daily life in order to have a fulfilling life. It's no more imperative than say, the works of Hemingway. Enjoyable to some, painful to others, not really required reading to get by in life.
• 

  Pistoff

  While all of the above may be true, the Bible and the three Abrahamic faiths have the cultural footprint in most of the western world and the mideast.

  It may matter little if the Bible or the Quran is true when they are holding the gun.
• 

  OldGenerationDude

  "Yes, I've heard those claims," a professional writer in Biblical studies told me, "but we don't believe in those things either."

  While it's not a work that obviously should not be considered lightly, The End of Biblical Studies (I recommend it myself), unfortunately as learn the hard way (and very embarassingly too, I might add) it doesn’t apply to the Jewish, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and other Eastern Catholic traditions and their view of Scripture.

  You bet that it applies to the Jehovah's Witnesses and their view of the Scriptures--and to the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, or one of the many “Bible-believing” Fundies groups out there--but the actual view of those who believe in Scripture (I'm talking about mainstream religion and your professors and doctors of theology that teach you when go to college and take ancient literature and Biblical studies--two different courses in some places)...

  Have you ever had to endure the disapproved look from a 100 year-old rabbi who was one of the first persons in the 20th centuries to read the Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah (well, maybe he wasn't that old--he looked older...much, much older..."knew-Jesus-as-a-boy" older)? This Jew learned one lesson very quickly when studying the real stuff after leaving the Watchtower behind--nothing, I repeat, nothing that the Watchtower teaches about the Bible--even those that seem harmlessly in support of the texts--is accurate. They are so wrong because they are so uneducated. (Again, I see that rabbi and his evil-eye look at me in front of an auditorium of students and educators of all denominations--and a few mean looking nuns--when I said something along these lines argued against in the book under discussion that I learned from the pages of the Watchtower.)

  While the Jehovah’s Witnesses and many Fundamentalist Christians repeat claims such as the Bible is the best preserved of any ancient book by far, etc. this is not the claim of the mainstream religions or scholarly academia.

  As a Jew I know that my people couldn’t possibly care less how Tanakh compares to the writings of the Goyim. It is definitely not possible to argue that the centuries work of sopherim through the ages compares with something a heathen preserved in stone. Where do the Jews make the claim that the Bible is the best of all preserved ancient books? We don’t.

  Catholics don’t either. While they make claim to preserving their New Testament, their religion is not dependent on being defined by Scripture. Like Judaism their religion existed in full form and liturgical function centuries before a collection of books written by adherents were raised to the status of inspired of God. Official canonization, though a list matching what is agreed upon today appeared in 367 CE, did not occur until the Council of Trent in the 16th century. No claim has ever been made by the Church regarding it being the best preserved of all ancient writings.

  There are likewise no claims made by these faiths from which the Scriptures originated that state:

  • The Scriptures contain genuine history found nowhere else.
  • The gospels are historical accounts containing the transcribed words of Jesus Christ.
  • It is the most impressive of all literature.

  You'll get this from real Bible scholars as to whether they believe such: "Nope," "uh-uh," and "Bite your tongue--Gone With the Wind is the most impressive of all literature!"

  I side with Lord of the Rings myself.

  Point is, despite being a good book, the book's arguments are unheard of in the real world of religion outside of the shadows of the Watchtower. You may not believe me, but it's true.

  If you’ve never done so, I suggest you read a current modern translation of the Scriptures with study and translators’ notes (both). The recent release of the Roman Catholic translation New American Bible Revised Edition (especially the study edition., ISBN: 9780195297751) and the New Jerusalem Bible with original translators’ notes will show how practically nothing in the book The End of Biblical Studies would even apply or even be considered as accurately describing claims made of the Scriptures by actual scholars.

  You eyes will bleed in unbelief as you wonder how, with such critical approaches, any of these non-JW folk come to believe in the Scriptures as inspired. Alas, they do.

  In fact since both the NABRE and the NJB were created by scholars from various denominations, you may also want to compare it with the NRSV in The New Oxford Annotated Bible (ISBN-13: 978-0195289558). Modern mainstream scholarship makes none of these claims, and in fact holds to views quite opposite of the points raised in The End of Biblical Studies--which, by the way, was written by someone exposed to nothing but the Fundamentalist/Evangelical views...which (sadly) are synonyms at university for "uneducated" views.

  I’m not saying that this isn’t a good book. It’s a great read. But again it’s views are based on the non-scholarly, never-studied-outside-of-one’s-comfort-zone Fundie-blinders-on experience...one which is practically identical with the JWs. It's arguments will work well on Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Fundies, but as I learned the hard way from experience, holding on to these type of claims about the Bible as if they are taken seriously by any accredited academic scholar of theology or ancient literature or as if officially ascribed to by any religion besides the JWs, —I wish I had a picture of that rabbi....Brrrr!
• 

  Sulla

  OGD, very quick question. And, I simply have to ask: were you ever a) a Circuit Overseer or b) in the Art Department at Bethel? Maybe I should ask as a PM...

  I have thought it interesting to see that so many XJWs still hold what is essentially a JW outlook when it comes to scripture. One result seems to be that, having rejected the JW viewpoint, XJWs seem to conclude that they should also reject the Bible entirely. So, they reject the particular conclusions while still holding to the approach to scripture, missing the important idea that it is the entire approach that is wrong with the JWs.

  So we read lots of, 'The Adam and Eve story is obviously impossible, so Judiasm and Christianity are obviously stupid,' or something similar from XJWs. Which is, as they say, not only not right, it isn't even wrong. Still, the folks who say that never had the grace of being humiliated by real experts.
• 

  EntirelyPossible

  So we read lots of, 'The Adam and Eve story is obviously impossible, so Judiasm and Christianity are obviously stupid,' or something similar from XJWs. Which is, as they say, not only not right, it isn't even wrong.

  Care to show where you see ex JWs saying that at a greater rate than ex-Christians, Jews or Muslims? Or specifically where someone on this forum wrote that?
• 

  Sulla

  Not to derail the thread, EP, but you must surely have come across a thread or two like that by now. Search the forum on "Flying Spaghetti Monster," or "Sky Wizard," and let me know. But, really, there have been far too many believer-atheist decadent threads to consider. For that matter, re-read the initial post on this thread. The End of Biblical Studies is making pretty much the argument I've tersely described.