Sorry, -57, but you are way, way off here. Modern biblical studies, something called “Higher Crticism,” came along way before the “theo-evs.” It introduced a whole new , more objective study of the Bible. Laity often come to Scripture, with the assumption that it is inerrant, tells the truth and just the truth, that things happened just the way the Bible said they did. Biblical scholarship approaches Scripture, from a completely different angle. Biblical scholarship says we should come to Scripture , with an open mind. Maybe it is all true, maybe not. Let us see. So the Higher Criticism has a considerable advantage over traditional attitudes,since it far more objective. Granted, the conclusions of reached though the Higher Criticism might displease and disappoint many laity. However, you need to remember that the world of academic biblical scholarship is a wholly separate world from that of the laity. It goals are different, its methods are different, its priorities are different. Hence, in biblical studies we reserve the right to offend laity. We do not intend to live up to their standards, we will not allow them to sit in judgment upon us, and, honestly, we really don't give a hoot what they think; you cannot get anywhere if you are gong to sit around and worry how your research may offend others. Also, when we go to work in biblical studies we have tools the laity do not. To be a major biblical scholar, you must be fluent in the biblical language and also ancient culture.
Where many laity have trouble is the issue of the inerrancy of Scripture,a biblical studies seriously challenges this. However, it needs to remember that this is the inerrancy theory of Scripture. This concept is purely a human-based theory or collection of guesses as to how God may be related to Scripture. Like any theory, ,maybe it is right, maybe it is wrong. Let's test it out. In so dong, it has been weighed in the balance and fund wanting. Naturally, many have complained that this seriously questions God, defames Scripture,etc. However, one needs to remember that it is God per se or Scripture per se that is under fire here, it is simply a collection of human-made opinions. As many fundamentalist Christians have said, we should no put our standards on God. Hence, If God is content with an errant Scripture, as appears to be the case, then so am I. I admit this does seem like a very strange way for God to relate to Scripture, but he never explained this to me, because he felt I didn't need to know the reason, and so I simply simply accept it.
