I see that John Loftus successfully lured Craig Blomberg to do a guest post at DC. From Loftus’ perspective, the purpose of this exercise was to gain some vicarious respectability. Not being a serious thinker or scholar in his own right, Loftus craves the attention and validation of men who are.
Blomberg later admits that he should have studied DC a bit more thoroughly before accepting the invitation. Perhaps Loftus’ invitation was deceptive. The whole transaction reminds one of Hansel & Gretel–if you know what I mean.
Blomberg is a sophisticated proponent for the historicity and inerrancy of the NT. On a related note, he’s also been defending the historical Jesus for many years now.
In that regard he’s rendered a great service to the church over the years. We salute him for his service to the cause.
Given his field of specialization, Blomberg’s post and subsequent replies are strong where you’d expect them to be strong, and weak where you’d expect them to be weak. There's some useful material, but it also suffers from some predictable limitations.
We can get different things from different thinkers and scholars. The wisest course of action is to mix and match the best that each has to offer in relation to the others.
Steve Hays: "Given his field of specialization, Blomberg’s post and subsequent replies are strong where you’d expect them to be strong, and weak where you’d expect them to be weak."
ReplyDeleteBlomberg: "Why am I still a Christian all these years later? First, I have to stress what I don’t mean by the word “Christian”. I don’t mean someone who has to be politically conservative. On many issues, I am not; I voted for Obama. I don’t mean someone who has to be a creationist; I believe in an old earth and theistic evolution."
I think Blomberg was weak in voting for Obama and for believing in theistic evolution.
The import of this weakness? Related to what Steve said above about Loftus' perspective.
"From Loftus’ perspective, the purpose of this exercise was to gain some vicarious respectability."
Blomberg gives vicarious respectability to Christians voting for Obama or for believing in theistic evolution or both.