I am so proud to be at a school that takes the time to recognize our veterans, without whom many of us would not be here. Thank you, thank you to CAB, ASULV, Barbara Mulligan, Paul Alvarez, Mike Nunez and all others who were a part of honoring our very worthy veterans.
Professor of Business Administration
While I applaud the recent lecture by New Testament scholar Dr. Bart Ehrman (“Lecture challenges New Testament legitimacy,” Nov. 11), I find it interesting that an alternative viewpoint was not offered.
The University press release was correct to label Dr. Ehrman as “provocative” and “controversial” – many of his colleagues would agree. As such, one would expect a counterargument from an alternative researcher. As an academic community, we should engage in discussions that involve a diversity of scholarly opinions; during the lecture, however, the audience was served a mixture of scholarship and panicked data – without regard for alternative opinions on the matter. This creates a problem, as many in the audience were not Greek or New Testament scholars and thus were not prepared for many of the claims leveled by Dr. Ehrman.
As Dr. Daniel Wallace, New Testament scholar, points out, “The fact that Bart Ehrman has put forth a trade-book rather than a scholarly monograph on ancient pseudepigrapha allows him the luxury of not having to deal with counter-evidence or peer review…to the unsuspecting layperson, ‘Forged’ looks like a death knell to the New Testament canon. To those who labor in the discipline of New Testament studies, it looks like yet another sensationalist book from Ehrman that is heavy on rhetoric and light on facts.”
Remember, the goal of this lecture series is to “…encourage debate and discussion.” Fortunately, we have made it halfway there; now all we need is the alternate academic opinion – minus the polemical tinge.
Class of 2011