Comments on: Ben Witherington vs. University of Sheffield http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/ a blog exploring biblical studies and the journey through academia Mon, 01 Mar 2010 15:26:37 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: stephanielouisefisher http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-1/#comment-1263 stephanielouisefisher Fri, 13 Nov 2009 23:13:07 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1263 I posted on Witherington here: http://dunedinschool.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/bewithering-is-becoming-bewildering/ I posted on Witherington here:
http://dunedinschool.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/bewithering-is-becoming-bewildering/

]]> By: steph http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-1/#comment-1267 steph Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:46:10 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1267 Rob, Not only are external examiners often appointed in all independent British universities, that never happens at Sheffield. Christian scholars pass atheists students, and secular scholars pass believing students even when they disagree. All that is required is evidence and argument. Witherington made serious allegations in his blog conversation with me which were potentially dangerous if someone took action on them. It's very revealing that he deleted it. Rob,

Not only are external examiners often appointed in all independent British universities, that never happens at Sheffield. Christian scholars pass atheists students, and secular scholars pass believing students even when they disagree. All that is required is evidence and argument. Witherington made serious allegations in his blog conversation with me which were potentially dangerous if someone took action on them. It’s very revealing that he deleted it.

]]> By: robgreid http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-1/#comment-1265 robgreid Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:00:10 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1265 I wonder whether the primary issue that should be of concern, at least in my humble view, is not necessarily the orientation of the Professor toward the historicity, reliability, or correspondence to reality that religious claims made in the Bible may have....but rather, whether said professor, of whatever religious affiliation, if any, prohibits the research interests of individuals that may have or may not have faith in God/Bible/whatever during the process of their development through said program. That is to say, the question is not, in my mind, whether scholars believe or not, but rather, as educators whether they refuse to graduate or abuse their students' faith/lack of faith through grading practices that are perhaps subtly prejudicial. Then again, who is without prejudice? Can a scholar make critical judgments without prejudicing some of the data? I wonder whether the primary issue that should be of concern, at least in my humble view, is not necessarily the orientation of the Professor toward the historicity, reliability, or correspondence to reality that religious claims made in the Bible may have….but rather, whether said professor, of whatever religious affiliation, if any, prohibits the research interests of individuals that may have or may not have faith in God/Bible/whatever during the process of their development through said program. That is to say, the question is not, in my mind, whether scholars believe or not, but rather, as educators whether they refuse to graduate or abuse their students’ faith/lack of faith through grading practices that are perhaps subtly prejudicial. Then again, who is without prejudice? Can a scholar make critical judgments without prejudicing some of the data?

]]> By: Bryan L http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-1/#comment-1264 Bryan L Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:43:08 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1264 Pat: Of course. Like I said I just thought I'd have a little fun. : ) Bryan L Pat:
Of course. Like I said I just thought I’d have a little fun. : )

Bryan L

]]> By: Patrick George McCullough http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-/#comment-1268 Patrick George McCullough Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:14:46 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1268 Interesting analogy, Bryan. There are, of course, profound differences between educators who are employed by a particular institution to guide students through the educational journey and a non-expert making somewhat careless comments to a magazine reporter. But I appreciate comments that put things in a different perspective, so I'll take your analogy for what it's worth :) [By "non-expert," I mean a "non-expert" on this particular topic.] Interesting analogy, Bryan. There are, of course, profound differences between educators who are employed by a particular institution to guide students through the educational journey and a non-expert making somewhat careless comments to a magazine reporter. But I appreciate comments that put things in a different perspective, so I’ll take your analogy for what it’s worth :)

[By "non-expert," I mean a "non-expert" on this particular topic.]

]]> By: Bryan L http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-1/#comment-1266 Bryan L Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:56:41 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1266 Pat: I don't want to get involved in any of this (as in taking sides) but it seems that just as many Christian's view any challenge to their beliefs about the Bible and God from their atheistic professor as an attack on their faith, perhaps many are also seeing any challenge to their beliefs about Sheffield University's biblical studies department as an attack on Sheffield's reputation. Maybe BW3 is really like the college professor calling students to know what they believe about their beloved university department by challenging their cherished beliefs about it. In the end, just like the Christian student, they will either come out stronger in their beliefs about the department or abandon those beliefs altogether. If that's the case then just as Sheffield is being praised for their approach to teaching students about the Bible maybe we should praise BW3 too for getting us to really know what we believe about Sheffield and why. . . ; ) Or do challenges to beliefs and opinions only get praised as being beneficial when they come from highly educated college professors to their young and impressionable undergraduates? Is it not the same outside of that realm? Sorry, just having a little fun with all of this : ) Bryan L Pat:

I don’t want to get involved in any of this (as in taking sides) but it seems that just as many Christian’s view any challenge to their beliefs about the Bible and God from their atheistic professor as an attack on their faith, perhaps many are also seeing any challenge to their beliefs about Sheffield University’s biblical studies department as an attack on Sheffield’s reputation. Maybe BW3 is really like the college professor calling students to know what they believe about their beloved university department by challenging their cherished beliefs about it. In the end, just like the Christian student, they will either come out stronger in their beliefs about the department or abandon those beliefs altogether. If that’s the case then just as Sheffield is being praised for their approach to teaching students about the Bible maybe we should praise BW3 too for getting us to really know what we believe about Sheffield and why. . .
; )

Or do challenges to beliefs and opinions only get praised as being beneficial when they come from highly educated college professors to their young and impressionable undergraduates? Is it not the same outside of that realm?

Sorry, just having a little fun with all of this : )

Bryan L

]]> By: steph http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-1/#comment-1269 steph Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:06:16 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1269 He accused Sheffield of an "adversarial approach" to the historical substance of the Bible. If this is his view of critical biblical scholarship, it is evidence of own pre-critical thinking. There is pastoral support at Sheffield and really, if you're more suited to a Theological Seminary, you're free to go there instead. Nobody destroys anyone's faith at Sheffield. Students are encouraged to form their own opinions. It is a demonstration of Witherington's lack of integrity that he deleted our conversation which exposed so much that is potentially damaging to his scholarly credibility. What hasn't been mentioned here is his assumption that he should dictate who an independent British university should appoint. As Keith or Philip said - I forget - they haven't been allowed to appoint anyone anyway! but that is beside the point... He accused Sheffield of an “adversarial approach” to the historical substance of the Bible. If this is his view of critical biblical scholarship, it is evidence of own pre-critical thinking. There is pastoral support at Sheffield and really, if you’re more suited to a Theological Seminary, you’re free to go there instead. Nobody destroys anyone’s faith at Sheffield. Students are encouraged to form their own opinions. It is a demonstration of Witherington’s lack of integrity that he deleted our conversation which exposed so much that is potentially damaging to his scholarly credibility.

What hasn’t been mentioned here is his assumption that he should dictate who an independent British university should appoint. As Keith or Philip said – I forget – they haven’t been allowed to appoint anyone anyway! but that is beside the point…

]]> By: John Lyons http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-/#comment-1271 John Lyons Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:48:41 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1271 He could be talking about UGs, I suppose. But I find it hard then to believe that he has ever met any of them either - they are home students for the most. So we are back with this all being hearsay if that is the case. To be honest, I think that makes his allegation even more disturbing and damaging. Do Sheffield staff really pick on new UG students and try to destroy their faith? How abusive would that be? I fear Ben can't tell the difference between challenging and destroying, and certainly has no comprehension of how the department actually worked during the 90s when I was there. If Ralph Martin is his source as he implied at one point, then we are going back to the end of the 1980s at the latest(I never saw him there from 1991 when I started). If that is so, then I can't help but feel that the people he likes so much - Andrew and Loveday (plus John Rogerson) - were all around then and would presumably have to share the blame for allowing such abuse to prosper. All I can say, is that I never witnessed anyone trying to destroy anyone's faith. What I did see was people with a certain kind of faith struggling to deal with what they met in their studies. One can support such people, but one cannot shield them from what they will eventually find out as they study, even as UGs. And sad to say, Ben's attitude typifies the belief that you somehow can and should do exactly that. He could be talking about UGs, I suppose. But I find it hard then to believe that he has ever met any of them either – they are home students for the most. So we are back with this all being hearsay if that is the case.

To be honest, I think that makes his allegation even more disturbing and damaging. Do Sheffield staff really pick on new UG students and try to destroy their faith? How abusive would that be? I fear Ben can’t tell the difference between challenging and destroying, and certainly has no comprehension of how the department actually worked during the 90s when I was there.

If Ralph Martin is his source as he implied at one point, then we are going back to the end of the 1980s at the latest(I never saw him there from 1991 when I started). If that is so, then I can’t help but feel that the people he likes so much – Andrew and Loveday (plus John Rogerson) – were all around then and would presumably have to share the blame for allowing such abuse to prosper.

All I can say, is that I never witnessed anyone trying to destroy anyone’s faith. What I did see was people with a certain kind of faith struggling to deal with what they met in their studies. One can support such people, but one cannot shield them from what they will eventually find out as they study, even as UGs. And sad to say, Ben’s attitude typifies the belief that you somehow can and should do exactly that.

]]> By: Patrick George McCullough http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-1/#comment-1270 Patrick George McCullough Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:48:07 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1270 @John: Thanks for the clarification. Was BW3 talking about doctoral students? I assumed this conversation was about undergraduates. My thoughts on sensitivity are mostly about undergraduate students. I think doctoral students, such as myself, should be "treated like adults" and be pushed and stretched in their perspectives as much as possible, in as many directions as possible. If a doctoral student is still hoping his or her advisor will walk on egg shells, there's a problem there. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen, as they say. @John: Thanks for the clarification. Was BW3 talking about doctoral students? I assumed this conversation was about undergraduates. My thoughts on sensitivity are mostly about undergraduate students. I think doctoral students, such as myself, should be “treated like adults” and be pushed and stretched in their perspectives as much as possible, in as many directions as possible.

If a doctoral student is still hoping his or her advisor will walk on egg shells, there’s a problem there. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen, as they say.

]]> By: John Lyons http://patmccullough.com/2009/11/07/ben-witherington-vs-university-of-sheffield/comment-page-/#comment-1272 John Lyons Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:30:15 +0000 http://patmccullough.com/?p=1508#comment-1272 Sorry, Pat, I didn't mean for that to come across as adversarial. What I was trying to say--badly, I grant you--was that there is a danger in being too sensitive to the concerns of your students. Your position seems quite reasonable to me. But BW3 has gone way beyond what is reasonable in a setting like Sheffield. If questioning historicity is defined per se as disrespecting (denying?) the Bible historical substance (which is what exactly?), and we are in any case not to challenge students until they are ready for it (again which means what exactly?), then we have moved into a entirely different world altogether--that is not a Doctoral programme as I understand them. A PhD student must meet all-comers and doesn't have the right to feel slighted by any opponents. They must argue their case, and must do so in person in a viva. There they must have an answer for the hard questions. Any supervisor who takes any other line with a student does a grave injustice to his/her programme, institution, and the student, it seems to me. A crisis of faith--like any other crisis--requires support if it happens, but we are not to mollycoddle students in the vain hope of avoiding them having one. So, by ideological blank cheque, what I meant was that it seems to me that accepting BW3's views effectively means our accepting his view that there is a sacrosanct historical essence to the Bible, the challenging of which = disrespect, and also agreeing to not challenge the views of conservative students when they start their PhD (and perhaps never doing so if they are weak). I can't agree to do that, I am afraid. So I won't be signing anything :) Once again apologies for the misunderstanding. Sorry, Pat,

I didn’t mean for that to come across as adversarial. What I was trying to say–badly, I grant you–was that there is a danger in being too sensitive to the concerns of your students. Your position seems quite reasonable to me. But BW3 has gone way beyond what is reasonable in a setting like Sheffield. If questioning historicity is defined per se as disrespecting (denying?) the Bible historical substance (which is what exactly?), and we are in any case not to challenge students until they are ready for it (again which means what exactly?), then we have moved into a entirely different world altogether–that is not a Doctoral programme as I understand them. A PhD student must meet all-comers and doesn’t have the right to feel slighted by any opponents. They must argue their case, and must do so in person in a viva. There they must have an answer for the hard questions. Any supervisor who takes any other line with a student does a grave injustice to his/her programme, institution, and the student, it seems to me. A crisis of faith–like any other crisis–requires support if it happens, but we are not to mollycoddle students in the vain hope of avoiding them having one. So, by ideological blank cheque, what I meant was that it seems to me that accepting BW3’s views effectively means our accepting his view that there is a sacrosanct historical essence to the Bible, the challenging of which = disrespect, and also agreeing to not challenge the views of conservative students when they start their PhD (and perhaps never doing so if they are weak). I can’t agree to do that, I am afraid. So I won’t be signing anything :)

Once again apologies for the misunderstanding.

]]>