Do Critical Biblical Scholars Have “Fundamentals”?

An entry in a book known as a gospel parallels. This one includes a parallel passage from the Gospel of Thomas, a gospel not included in the New Testament. See an article about gospel parallels and this edition.

Print version: PDF

More discussion about this topic is included in Podcast 4, a conversation with Linda Hodges

Website user Craig Wagganer (US) asks, “Do you adhere to a statement of core beliefs? If so, what are they?” In a word, the answer is no. This was actually the response Mr. Wagganer was hoping to receive.

Yet this question offers another angle on the desire for alternative “Fundamentals” that initially sparked what has become the Bible Search & Rescue project.

Could We Have “Biblical Scholars’ Fundamentals,” Please?

This website started with a desire for a set of “Fundamentals” that would offer an alternative to the statements of doctrine that gave rise to the Fundamentalist movement. The Fundamentals were a reaction to biblical scholarship that was challenging dogmatic interpretations of the Bible. (See “Just Read the Bible?” for more information.) As clear statements of doctrines that claimed to be based on a literal reading of the Bible, the “Fundamentals” became tracts and easily shared educational materials. Some people have wondered whether similar statements could be offered about principles and beliefs based on academic biblical scholarship. Once again, the quick answer is no.

Why Not?

It’s apples and oranges, or maybe it’s more like magpies and kayaks. The “Fundamentals” approach declares finalized answers. Critical biblical scholarship develops ways of questioning.

Academic biblical scholarship does not produce doctrines. Critical scholarship began in an effort to free the Bible from dogmatic interpretations. Scholars began to explore and analyze biblical texts to understand them as part of human history. The “Fundamentals” project that asserted biblical literalism and listed doctrines was a reaction to that effort.

Critical scholars engaged in this academic work represent a wide range of religious and non-religious beliefs and faiths. Their varied perspectives widen understandings of biblical texts. When scholars represent differing viewpoints, they can also provide a corrective to the individual scholars’ biases. They do not agree or even attempt to agree on doctrines, however.

The “Fundamentals” project opposed the work of critical biblical scholarship. By reading the Bible without dogmatic interpretations, critical biblical scholarship threatened those whose power relied on those dogmas. This was not a conflict of dogmas, however. Critical scholarship advanced new ways of approaching the Bible, not new doctrines.

What Are “Fundamentals” of Biblical Scholarship?

Academic biblical scholars do not subscribe to a clear list of religious beliefs. Yet the work of critical scholarship relies on a base of knowledge and methods that have developed over centuries. Some approaches and results can be seen as fundamental for critical biblical scholarship.

Posts on this website will explain such approaches and results to make them accessible. Some examples may be helpful.

~ Tools of Analysis

Critical scholarship offers some fundamental tools for analyzing and understanding biblical texts. Comparing passages in the gospels that are similar has been one important focus. Questions scholars bring to those comparisons could be considered one kind of fundamental tool.

Books known as “gospel parallels” that line up the similar passages help scholars make detailed comparisons. These books are another fundamental tool. Watch for a future post about how scholars use gospel parallels, the role these books play in what is known as the “synoptic problem,” and how the parallels have changed as additional parallel texts have been discovered. These are just a couple of examples of scholars’ fundamental tools.

How many similarities can you note in the passage in the picture above from a gospel parallel? How many differences? When you start to consider what these similarities and differences could mean, you are beginning to learn a fundamental tool of critical scholarship.

~ Cumulative Results

Centuries of biblical scholarship have also produced some cumulative results. For example, painstaking and detailed analysis using the gospel parallels led to what is known as the Two Source Theory generally, although not universally, accepted among critical scholars. This theory explains the comparisons and differences in the synoptic gospels. According to this explanation, the authors of Matthew and Luke both relied on the gospel of Mark and another source known as Q. Q stands for the word “source” in German, Quelle, and has nothing to do with recent social media conspiracies. Most scholars thus view Mark as the earliest of the gospels in the New Testament. This is an example of a result of centuries of scholarship that is commonly accepted as a fundamental result. Scholars who disagree and propose other explanations nevertheless address it as a current fundamental result of critical scholarship. A future post will explain the Two Source Theory in more detail and consider critiques currently emerging in scholarly discussions.

~ Clarifications of What the Bible Doesn’t Say

Results of critical scholarship can also include clarifications of some commonly held assumptions about what the Bible says. Posts available on The Rescue page offer some examples. Notions of hell as a place of eternal torture are not as biblically based as many assume. Opposition to abortion is not found in the Bible, either. Even the notion of “The Bible” needs to be clarified. Future posts will address how biblically based other common assumptions about what the Bible says actually are. Methods for evaluation of such assumptions and claims could be considered another fundamental set of skills for critical scholarship.

Questions Are Fundamental, Not Doctrinal Answers

Critical biblical scholars do not hold core religious beliefs in common. Scholars join instead in continuing to pursue questions based on a legacy of centuries of scholarly inquiry. Questions also lead to new answers and new questions. In scholarship, answers may not be permanent. Here we hope to share some “fundamentals” for engaging in the study of the Bible using the tools and results of critical biblical scholarship.

Additional Resources

 “What is a Critical Scholar?” Westar Institute website, n.d.