Nick asked an interesting question on his blog, a question that I often consider. Is there any person (”scholar, theologian, pastor, or just regular person in your life”) with whom you agree almost all the time? How about the reverse? A while back, I was answering one of my father-in-law’s theological or biblical questions. We were talking about some author and I said, “I don’t agree with him on everything, but I think he’s got a lot of good ideas.” My father-in-law asked me if there was any one author with whom I agree all the time. I couldn’t think of anyone, but the question stuck with me.
I think I have an answer. I put it in a comment on Nick’s blog, but I’d like to share it here as well: Thomas Yoder Neufeld. Tom is the son-in-law of the late (and legendary) John Howard Yoder. But for my proverbial money, Tom is the better scholar when it comes to the biblical text (not really fair, as JHY was not primarily a biblical scholar). At least, he’s the one I agree with more.
Tom is a Harvard-trained, Mennonite New Testament scholar, teaching up at the University of Waterloo. He has three books out, that I know of, showcasing his scholarly prowess: ‘Put on the Armour of God!’ The Divine Warrior from Isaiah to Ephesians, an Ephesians commentary in the Believers’ Church Bible Commentary Series (check out his treatment of the household code!), and most recently, Recovering Jesus: The Witness of the New Testament. He is currently working on a book addressing violence in the New Testament, which he predicts will be published in 2010 by Westminster/John Knox and SPCK.
Though I had known of his work, I had not yet read it until I saw him present in the Mennonite Scholars and Friends group at the 2007 San Diego SBL/AAR meeting (see my play-by-play of the session). That session may be the single most engaging session I have attended while at SBL (though, I have only been two years thus far). In that session, Tom seemed to be the greatest voice of reason on the topic of the Atonement. He showed himself to be deeply committed to Mennonite theology, but also capable of keeping a nuanced perspective of biblical theology in tension with his personal views. That is the mark of intellectual integrity, as far as I am concerned.
That session spurred me on to read Tom’s works. And I had the opportunity to get to know Tom a bit more during his sabbatical at Fuller Seminary, when he attended my church for several months. As a committed Anabaptist, with a nuanced and complex understanding of biblical scholarship, Tom is the model for the type of biblical scholar I aspire to be.
Do you have to get to a place where you have a lot of *answers* before you can qualify for agreement with someone? What if your agreements are essentially negative–i.e., your disagreements are the same as another’s?
I’m not read enough to have formed many thought companions… But I’d have to say that in terms of philosophy, I’m a Francis Schaefferite. I consider his trilogy (The God Who Is There, He Is There And He Is Not Silent, Escape From Reason) to be among the most important things I have read in my life.
When it comes to the NT (again, I have to say I am not very well read), I have found the greatest point of contact thus far with Tom Wright (particularly his Christian Origins and the Question of God series).
In the field of HB which I am far more familiar with, I have unfortunately rarely read the same author more than once. But I’ve found John Barton’s methodological and presuppositional investigations most stimulating, Phyllis Trible’s feminist investigations incredibly illuminating, Thomas Overholt’s cultural anthropology vital, Dennis Pardee’s Ugaritic/Hebraic studies necessary, Umberto Cassuto’s commentaries on Genesis and Exodus incredible, and Scott Noegel’s ancient Near Eastern background to the HB essential.