Specialization in Biblical Studies

Introduction

Specialization in Biblical Studies is the norm. Scholars will be “Old Testament” or “New Testament”; perhaps “Intertestamental Judaism” or “Second Temple Judaism”, and possibly some topic in the area of “The Bible and the Modern World”. A quick glance at the University staff lists will show this sort of grouping. However, matters are more specialized than this grouping would suggest. Scholars will teach Old Testament but within Old Testament Studies they will be specialists in Isaiah, or the Minor Prophets, or the Prophets, and so on. The same point can be made in respect of New Testament Studies and Second Temple Judaism; a New Testament scholar might be a Pauline specialist; a Second Temple scholar might be a specialist in the writings of Enoch. Why is there such specialization? Is this a good or a bad thing? What are the advantages and disadvantages? Does anything matter here to the man in the street?

Causes of Specialization

There is an obvious cause of specialization. Scholars need to make an ongoing contribution to some field of knowledge. The university system is large and the number of publications each year in the whole field of Biblical Studies is significant, never mind the growing back catalogue. In order to make a contribution to knowledge, it is necessary to cover the published material of some field in order to comment in that area. The logistics of the situation require specialization: whereas it is reasonable to cover a narrow field it is impossible to cover a larger area.

There is a further factor. World class athletes who specialize in the 100m and 200m distances measure their success in hundredths of a second. There is an analogy in Biblical Studies: in order to make a contribution, the “race” chosen has to be restricted and in order to find the hundredths of a second, intensive training and preparation has to be undertaken. With a specialism, a scholar can secure his/her position and from such a secure base, extend their horizon to encompass other nearby fields, albeit in a more general way. Once an area is narrowed by a publication, more publications are engendered in that field. The process of specialization is easy to kick-start and perpetuate. For example, a new literary method and terminology produced in Russian literary criticism can (and has) engendered a specialism in Biblical Studies. Human creativity gives rise to a specialism, and specialization is deepened by human creativity.

The Man or Woman on the Street

The man or woman in the street uses specialists all the time: doctors, dentists, lawyers, accountants, plumbers, and so on. The religious person will view the professional clergy as a specialist and defer to their views and opinions. Of course, second opinions may be sought, but there is a fair amount of trust and deference to specialists.

An example of such deference can be seen in television documentaries on aspects of the Bible. These usually appear at Christmas or Easter and they have an expert visiting the Holy Land and talking to other experts about the topic of the documentary. Such programmes are aimed at the person at home and so the invited specialists make their contribution at a dumbed down level and the television presenter likewise “dumbs down” their material for the audience. In this process their viewpoint will be presented as the most reasonable construal of the selectively presented relevant data, and the audience is expected to take the information on trust.

The problem is that in the area of Bible, this “dumbing down” process leaves out all sorts of complications and caveats, not to mention other pertinent data, and the presenter’s viewpoint will seldom be one that cannot be challenged, and it is likely to be one that is culturally of the age. Standards may differ across the world, but UK sourced documentaries on Biblical subjects have been poor over the years.

Another area of danger where a consensus in specialist knowledge is made readily available is the “Study Notes” in Study Bible Editions. For example the chronology of the Divided Monarchy in the Harper Collins Study Bible (p. 537) presents a critical consensus view that differs from the standard conservative harmonization. It is conveniently placed for bible reading groups to reference and so it has an advantage in forming opinion.

The warning in these two examples is not difficult: the man or woman on the street needs to be wary and diligent in searching the scriptures to see whether things are as people say. Space forbids mention of the dangers inherent in popular books on the Bible that can be bought in Christian bookshops.

The Body

There is specialism in the body of Christ insofar as Paul uses the metaphor of a body and its parts to describe an ecclesia. There are those who are mouths and there are those who are feet. The idea of a body and the goal of purposive co-operation is Paul’s point. Specialization within the ecclesia in biblical study therefore has value; it is a kind of service to the body. As such it has no intrinsic value above or below any other kind of service; it seeks to increase knowledge and understanding.

There are disadvantages to specialization. Within academic studies one disadvantage is that it restricts the ability of a person to contribute to wider topics of investigation. Another drawback is that the specialist relies on the consensus results of scholarship in related areas of study. This means that s/he perpetuates a consensus to which he does not contribute and which may be in error. Specialists can suffer from tunnel vision and fail to see the wider picture; they can develop a specific jargon – communication with a wider audience can be poor.

Within the body the main problem of specialization is the damage it does to an individual’s spiritual balance. All scripture is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16, KJV). Spiritual balance is a matter of reading all of scripture. Further, given the fact that scripture is inspired, concentrating personal studies on Paul or the Minor Prophets inevitably misses many of the echoes, allusions and quotations that exist across the Bible.

A second problem is pride; “knowledge puffeth up” and a specialist has spent years acquiring knowledge and expertise in a restricted domain. Others look to this person for knowledge – the occasions for prideful thinking are obvious. The pride of life attaches to all human endeavours as a danger and a temptation. Whether a person is a mouth in the body, or a hand, or a brain, prideful feelings can intermingle in the service to the body.

As it is there is relatively little specialization in Biblical Studies within the body; certainly there are no specialized publications or journals, or even a back catalogue of specialized studies in various topics; there has been no engagement with what is published about the Bible by the churches. Publications have been restricted to the general and introductory, the devotional, the homiletical and the preaching genres. While these are necessary areas for writing, advanced written Bible Study has had to be sought outside the community, and this is saturated with error and contrary opinion. Swimming in this sea is perhaps the third problem attending the brother or sister who seeks to specialize in an area of biblical knowledge. S/he is faced with a substantial array of technical studies and monographs, a technical jargon, a panoply of cited authorities in a forest of footnotes, and the return on an investment in time can often be poor.

Conclusion

There is a need for specialist and advanced writing in the body; precise and detailed, and eschewing the general. It is not clear how such a project can be realized.