Grazer
Member
- Jun 22, 2012
- 1,955
- 1
In light of recent discussions, I think this sums it up all brilliantly:
http://resurrectingraleigh.com/2012/07/13/our-own-worst-enemies-why-evangelicals-have-to-be-able-criticize-each-other/
Some very sobering thoughts, I don't like reading this things especially when they apply to me. I'm not using this as a dig at anyone since I've just said, a lot of what's said applies to me, but I think we could all do with being a little more open to assessment and engage with the questions. I love the below comments;
When I say that Evangelicals should participate in critical peer review, I mean that they should be submitting their work for publication in mainstream academic journals and publishing houses (e.g., Oxford University Press, Yale University Press, etc.) where their work will face the critical scrutiny of their not-necessarily-evangelical academic peers.
Some folks will say that that’s crazy and that evangelicals can’t get published in the wider academy because of anti-Christian bias and I’m asking them to sell out to meet godless academic standards blah blah blah whine whine whine…. That’s just not true. Plenty of faithful Christian scholars are doing work that passes peer review muster, and that is both getting published through these avenues and receiving critical acclaim. Mark Noll, Nathan Hatch, Alvin Plantinga, Nick Wolterstorff, N.T. Wright, George Marsden, etc., to name a few…and to say nothing of countless Evangelical scholars quietly working away in the hard sciences…and to say nothing of some of our conservative Catholic and mainline friends.
Evangelicals submitting themselves only to the soft-ball, in-house criticisms of other Evangelicals is not the solution to this problem.
In-house conversations can be good and even necessary from time to time. But our faith needs to be able to stand up to good critical questions, which means getting out of the house every now and then.
Just some food for thought
http://resurrectingraleigh.com/2012/07/13/our-own-worst-enemies-why-evangelicals-have-to-be-able-criticize-each-other/
Some very sobering thoughts, I don't like reading this things especially when they apply to me. I'm not using this as a dig at anyone since I've just said, a lot of what's said applies to me, but I think we could all do with being a little more open to assessment and engage with the questions. I love the below comments;
When I say that Evangelicals should participate in critical peer review, I mean that they should be submitting their work for publication in mainstream academic journals and publishing houses (e.g., Oxford University Press, Yale University Press, etc.) where their work will face the critical scrutiny of their not-necessarily-evangelical academic peers.
Some folks will say that that’s crazy and that evangelicals can’t get published in the wider academy because of anti-Christian bias and I’m asking them to sell out to meet godless academic standards blah blah blah whine whine whine…. That’s just not true. Plenty of faithful Christian scholars are doing work that passes peer review muster, and that is both getting published through these avenues and receiving critical acclaim. Mark Noll, Nathan Hatch, Alvin Plantinga, Nick Wolterstorff, N.T. Wright, George Marsden, etc., to name a few…and to say nothing of countless Evangelical scholars quietly working away in the hard sciences…and to say nothing of some of our conservative Catholic and mainline friends.
Evangelicals submitting themselves only to the soft-ball, in-house criticisms of other Evangelicals is not the solution to this problem.
In-house conversations can be good and even necessary from time to time. But our faith needs to be able to stand up to good critical questions, which means getting out of the house every now and then.
Just some food for thought
