Journal: Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
Volume: JBMW 01:4 (Oct 1996)
Article: Ponder This
Author: Anonymous

---

Ponder This

Why does InterVarsity Press repeatedly sponsor this kind of poorly researched, carelessly argued, tendentious blend of “scholarship” and shallow journalism? While this publisher doubtless also produces many books of excellent quality, its published materials on gender roles in the church, albeit well-written, are often scholarly lightweight. Rather than taking account of all the evidence and consulting all the available relevant literature, these authors increasingly put soundbite over substance, dismissing their opponents’ argument by mere assertion without adducing evidence to support their view. A case in point is Dodd’s The Problem with Paul, which, according to IVP’s catalog, is characterized by “scholarly rigor.’’ Dodd refers to Gillman, Women Who Knew Paul, as an “authoritative treatment” on Junia in Rom. 16, and to Colin Kruse, “Human Relationships in the Pauline Corpus,” in In the Fullness of Time, ed. D. Peterson and J. Pryor (Homebush, Australia: Lancer, 1992) for a “more text-centered interpretation” of 1 Timothy 2:9–15.

Why does Dodd select these marginal, obscure pieces as his sole sources from the wealth of available literature on the subject? This enigmatic procedure is certainly not in keeping with the standard canons of scholarship. In our postmodern environment, rational discourse is increasingly being replaced by a style of argumentation that aims at affective appeal, frequently at the expense of substance.

The promotion of shallow, semi-scholarly literature by certain North-American publishers, such as the one reviewed above, caters to the general cultural climate of tolerance, inclusivism, and egalitarianism. The products resulting from such efforts should not be considered serious works of scholarship.

—ANDREAS KÖSTENBERGER

...
visitor : : uid: ()