Wrong must be laughing in biblioblog heaven. Or up there in his premier seat in the theatre of the absurd. Yes, the best thing to happen to blogging has caused another stir! This time over a naughty hobby.
Mark Goodacre liked the interview but appears to have reservations:
The interview is actually very entertaining, and the anti-bishop reveals a bit more of his voice. He is clearly enjoying trying to see what he can get away with, though, since there is an obscenity of the kind that is surprising (and frankly not entirely welcome) in an academic venue.
I don't see why such language should be a problem in an academic venue. Who decides what is welcome or not? And is biblioblogs.com (where people have been more 'relaxed' and 'jokey' to be fair) and biblioblogging really that much of an academic venue? Maybe, maybe not. I dunno. And what about some of the more naughty seminars at SBL where, I'm reliably informed, even naughtier things are openly discussed? It's welcome there so...
Anyway, I'm a bit surprised people have been bothered
by this. It's not like anything racist has been said. I think
some of the negative reaction is serious, though I could be wrong. If it isn't serious, I'll have to simply admit that, not for the first time, I'm the victim of the humour. The most dramatic and entertaining attack has come from David Ker
. Again, I think
this is serious (oh, God help me if I've misread all this...)
Ok, David says,
It’s one thing to slaughter a pig on the sacred altar. It’s quite another to fall down and worship it. But that’s in fact what has occurred at Biblioblogs.com. This august blog highlighting the best of Biblical scholars has featured a reprobate heretic and pervert as their featured blogger of the month...He confessed in the interview with Jim West that he has a special addiction for the most reprehensible sexual practice while claiming to be a husband and father.
Ok, I'm going to suggest that maybe Wrong might not be into such naughty things and it might have been a joke. I dunno. But if Wrong is into such things, consenting adults and all that...
And rather than run screaming from the temple, our academics are applauding themselves and the latest object of their affection.
I'm guilty of the latter certainly. In a strictly intellectual way.
Who is this supposedly note-worthy blogger? Who should we as bloggers interested in the finest in Biblical studies look to as the apex of academia? It is the pseudonymous NT Wrong. NT Wrong is an excellent writer. He is a scholar of some distinction
I agree (should anyone care).
But wait...'there are several reasons why his inclusion in the highest ranks of Biblical studies should give us cause us to rend our garments and throw dust in the air' And these include:
1. He writes under a pseudonym. No self-respecting scholar will long tolerate a blogger who publishes his opinions under the cover of a false name.
A largely indifferent matter (for me at least). If it's right, it's right or wrong it's wrong. On the other hand, as pointed out in the interview, it allows him to be funnier and it allows him to say things people wouldn't say under a real name. A sad state of affairs perhaps but it is what it is.
He is vulgar in the extreme. Not satisfied to pepper his posted with the most disgusting language, Wrong actually wrote a summary post proudly listing his wretched vocabulary.
Again, I can only shrug. Why does it matter? Some of us find it funny...
Actual evidence of his scholarship is sketchy in the extreme.
To be fair, he seems to be the most broadly learned of any biblioblogger.
Why, I ask you, should Jim West not interview Ted Haggard, a man who he has repeatedly slandered and ridiculed despite his repentance and desire to change his way?
Presumably because Haggard isn't a biblioblogger. I mean if he were, then Jim and biblioblogs.com might...?
Instead he positively slobbers all over a flaming pervert and two-bit scholar...
An interesting image. Jim's interview was structured and written in a similar way to his usual interviews so if he's slobbered over Wrong, he's slobbered over all of us. If you see what I mean.
...who does not even claim to be a believer in the Bible or the God of the Bible!
A requirement of biblioblogger...? That means that at a couple more interviews (perhaps) ought not to have taken place.
If you have been awarded a “Top 50 Biblioblogger” award by NT Wrong I ask you to consider if this is really a distinction worth bragging about. If the Devil calls you a saint, what are you?
I'm no longer a top 50-er and haven't been for two long and lonely months so I'm afraid I don't recall what it really feels like. :-(
Biblioblogs.com and in fact the whole of biblioblogdom is completely compromised and morally bankrupt.
A bit too apocalyptic perhaps...?
The glory of the Lord has departed. If those who claim to know the Bible best have sunk to this depth to whom shall the people of God turn?
Come and read Earliest Christian History. It'll get me in the top 50...
Please tell me the general negative reactions were a joke...