On July 14, 2008 AD the homepage of Sam Harris’ website made one of the funnies statements you will ever read.
The homepage was describing a project to transfer Steve Wells’ “Skeptic’s Annotated Bible Qur’an, and Book of Mormon” to the Reason Project.
It is stated,
Steve spent the better part of a decade annotating these holy books and highlighted all passages notable for their historical inaccuracy, internal contradictions, scientific errors, absurdity, injustice, cruelty, sexism, intolerance, etc. (he also flagged the good parts).
The bottom line is described thusly,
to refine Steve’s work in a section of our website entitled “The Scripture Project” where we will have religious scholars, historians, scientists, and other qualified people continue to annotate these texts on a Wiki.
And now comes the knee slapping, bent over in convulsions, comedy,
With the input of the right scholars, we are confident that the Reason Project website will quickly become the preeminent place for scriptural criticism on the internet.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen this project can only succeed “With the input of the right scholars.”
Obviously, the logical questions are: “Who are the ‘right scholars’?” and “How is it determined who are the ‘right scholars’?”
These questions were not answered but I believe that an educated guess would be something to the likes of…
If you hold to a materialistic worldview – you might be the “right scholar.”
If your purpose in reading/studying the Bible is to cherry pick the bad and the ugly (ok, and perhaps the occasional rare good [according to whom?]) – you might be the “right scholar.”
If you would not know grammatical, historical or cultural context if your title as “scholar” or “skeptic” depended on it – you might be the “right scholar.”
If you make a living by expressing your personal prejudice against “religion” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If you believe that the standard for ascertaining the accurate history of the Bible text you are dealing with is anything that will contradict the Bible – you might be the “right scholar.”
If you believe that the church and the rabbinate were the last institution who could accurately establish their own cannon of scripture – you might be the “right scholar.”
If you believe that you, yes you, have finally uncovered the true meaning of the Bible – you might be the “right scholar.”
And just for further fun, I will borrow a few from the “Bible criticism” section of Tektonics’ “You may be a fundamentalist atheist if….“
If “You dislike how liberal theists try to interpret the Bible for themselves, while you create your own interpretations of the Bible for yourself” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If “You can quote from the bible better than most missionaries…at least the parts where someone dies” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If “You label all scholars that actually believe the Bible as ‘biased fundies’ while those who don’t believe it are known as ‘honest’ and ‘accepted scholarship’” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If “You think that Isaac Asimov was a world-class authority in Biblical Studies” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If you believe that “When a Christian’s interpretation of a passage (based on the social/literary context) solves one of your favorite contradictions, it is only their personal interpretation, and can be dismissed as such. But your interpretation (based on a ‘plain’ reading of the text) to arrive at the contradiction in the first place is entirely objective, and is obviously THE correct interpretation” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If “Your only knowledge of The Bible comes from searching ‘bible contradictions’ in Google” or from your future searches of “The Scripture Project” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If “You consistently appear on discussion lists demanding that Christians accept your literal interpretation of various scriptural passages just so you can then launch into the usual ‘argument by outrage’ – despite being told over and over that no Bible scholar or school of Christianity shares your particular bizarre literal interpretation” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If “You pontificate about the Bible as if you are an expert in theology, textual criticism, ancient languages & cultures and much more besides, when your knowledge of the Bible is just cut and paste from atheist discussion lists which cut and paste it from atheist websites which cut and paste it from embarrassingly unscholarly rantings by the likes of Messer’s Freke & Gandy and Acharya S, etc.” – you might be the “right scholar.”
If “Archaeology continually frustrates your attempts to find errors and contradictions in the Bible, but you continually use the same outdated accusations anyway since you’re running out of material” – you might be the “right scholar.”
Yes, ladies and gentlemen this project can only succeed “With the input of the right scholars.” Just send in your application along with a video showing you ripping a page out of a Bible, following in the footsteps of PZ Myers, and will instantly be deemed the “right scholar.”
If you are interested in seeing how the New Atheists fare as “right scholars” please consult my following essays (and these are a mere sampling):
Sam Harris:
Sam Harris’ Mythunderstandings
Sam Harris: Instigator At Large
Let Him Who is Without Faith Cast the First Stone
Richard Dawkins:
The Apostle Thomas: Patron Saint of Scientists?
Planting God More Firmly on His Throne
Dan Barker:
Dan Barker and Bertrand Russell: The Dynamic Duo of Demonstrably Deleterious Delusion
Why Freethought?
Dan Barker’s Scriptural Misinterpretations and Misapplications
Christopher Hitchens:
Is Christianity Loved to Death?
Jesus, the god of War?
Theological Fallacies and Miscomprehensions, part I of III
The Challenges, part I of III
