Wanted: things people have claimed about the majority of Biblical scholars

Since William Lane Craig makes such a big deal about most scholars supposedly agreeing with him about everything important, it would be nice to accumulate examples of scholars claiming the majority is against Craig on various issues.

It doesn’t matter if there’s any evidence backing up the claim about what the majority says, since Craig isn’t terribly careful about that himself. The point is just to be able to say, “okay, you’ve got one guy saying one thing, but here’s another guy saying otherwise.”

For example, I think John Dominic Crossan actually claimed, somewhere, that the empty tomb (or perhaps the burial traditions) is rejected by most scholars. Can anyone find the source for that? I think it may have been in the Craig-Crossan debate book, but I’m not sure. Anyone have access to a copy of that book?

  • Bob Seidensticker

    examples of scholars claiming the majority is against Craig on various issues

    You mean like on evolution? The guy shamelessly picks and chooses his science like he’s in a buffet line. He likes the Big Bang because it points to a beginning for the universe (in its current form, anyway), and beginnings fit into his theology. But evolution? A smart guy like WLC should be able to evaluate the evidence, decide what makes sense, and give evolution a thumbs down.

    • Chris Hallquist

      Oh, of course there’s evolution. But I’m interested in things like the quote that was, apparently from Spong.

  • andyman

    I believe it was John Shelby Spong that claimed that most scholars reject the empty tomb. Habermas is the only person I’m aware of who has done anything close to a census on the matter- and as we all know, it seemed rather flawed. Plus, the guy hasn’t even released the raw data. Talk about shoddy scholarship…

    BTW, Licona once made the bizare claim that most resurrection scholars aren’t christian. Don’t know which interview it was in, but I suspect it was one done within the last 2 years (as he was promoting his book on it).

    • Chris Hallquist

      Ah, thanks. Do you know where Spong said this? Was it in his debate with Craig?

  • ildi

    According to this blogger, it’s at time stamp 50:30.

    http://xcntrik.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/the-great-resurrection-debate-john-shelby-spong-vs-william-lane-craig/

    Spong also smacks down Craig’s claim of the gospels as biography at 53:30.

    I normally don’t like listening to debates or presentations online, but I found Spong to be the exception. What a teacher! He talks about how Jesus could only have been seen as the new temple if the writers had lived in a time after the temple had been destroyed, which happened in 70 AD (57:40).

    His discussion of anti-semitism keeping Christian scholars from understanding Jesus through the context of the liturgical life of the synagogue was fascinating (58:40).

  • hf

    Have you asked Richard Carrier? He definitely says (online, but likely in one of his books too) that scholars reject the miracles of the Gospels. He also says that in Is This Not the Carpenter? The Question of the Historicity of the Figure of Jesus, “Crossley defends the wider mainstream consensus, that the Gospel of John is a fabrication and of no use in reconstructing the historical Jesus”.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X