Sometimes biblical scholars can be…well…a little snobbish when it comes to systematic theology. And I’m saying this as somebody who is one. Nevertheless, I have observed that many biblical scholars view their work as primarily historical and cooly detached from the theological implications of their work. The irony is that even some Christians regard this detachment as praiseworthy and good. That is why Tom Schreiner’s words in the video above need a wide hearing in our guild. We are far too Gablerian. If you are a biblical scholar, it is no virtue to ignore theology as if our work is purely descriptive. If we would be faithful to our calling…

I am in hearty agreement with Fred Sanders’ critique of Larry Crabb’s new book on gender. The connections that Crabb makes between Trinitarian doctrine and gender roles seem to be entirely speculative and not founded in what the scriptures actually say. In short, Crabb’s paradigm is unmoored from the Bible, and Sanders has shown the flawed basis of Crabb’s thesis. Having said that, there’s one detail in Sanders’ critique that I would take exception with. I’m reluctant to mention it because I’m a big fan of Sanders. He’s one of the bright lights of evangelical theology and has produced some remarkable work on the Trinity. If you haven’t read his…

I think John Dickson may have written the most devastating review of Reza Aslan’s book that I have seen yet. It’s lengthy and does not pull any punches. He catalogues the errors and exaggerations and shows how Aslan’s conclusions are well outside the mainstream of historical scholarship on Jesus. But there is one particular bit at the end that I thought was telling. Dickson writes, For a brief moment, Reza Aslan will be heralded as a breakthrough author. In a month or so, some other theory, equally unsubstantiated and certainly contradictory, will get the same kind of airtime. Such works are generally ignored by working scholars, who tend to be…

Craig Evans is at the top of the heap as far as scholars of the Gospels go, and he has a review at Christianity Today that eviscerates Reza Aslan’s book Zealot. Evans says Aslan’s book makes numerous historical errors, relies on an outdated thesis, ignores the testimony of eyewitnesses, and forces Jesus and Paul into a theological cagematch. In short, it’s a bad book. Here’s an excerpt from the review: There are numerous problems with Zealot, not least the fact that it heavily relies on an outdated and discredited thesis. But it also introduces a number of its own novel oddities and implausibilities. Aslan has canvassed much of the responsible scholarship…

“But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.” -Isaiah 53:10 “God put [Christ] forward as a propitiation in His blood through faith, in order to demonstrate His righteousness.” -Romans 3:25 “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us– for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.’” -Galatians 3:13

About a week ago, a reporter asked me to comment on the Reza Aslan dust-up. I told the reporter that I had not read Aslan’s book, and I thought that would be the end of that. Nevertheless, he still wanted my comments, so I agreed to talk narrowly about the infamous interview, which I did watch. Even though my academic specialty is New Testament studies, I still haven’t read the book, and I don’t have any plans to do so. Why? We have to make our priorities when we read, and not every book that comes down the pike is worth the time. You have to have some ability to…