Now that we’ve seen a couple of posts by Jeff Siker (the author of Jesus, Sin, and Perfection in Early Christianity and Homosexuality in the Church) – taking a position quite different from my own on a question of broad importance – and some of the comments that have come back on it, and his reply at length to one of them, I think we are in a position to sit back and see how that “worked” for the blog.   My sense is that it worked very well.  If you think otherwise, please let me know.

I do not want to do this sort of thing every week – but I’m thinking once every three or four weeks might be interesting.   I have received several suggestions for the kinds of things people would like to see, as follows:

      • A Hebrew Bible scholar talking about the historical problems with the Hebrew Bible comparable to those we deal with on this blog for the New Testament;
      • An archaeologist to discuss the evidence that Nazareth really did exist;
      • Another blogger on NT / Early Christianity to post on anything they feel like as a way to show what kind of thing you might find on their blog more regularly;
      • Another “believer” dealing with the kind of question Jeff Siker dealt with, since it seems to be a hot issue.  (Someone suggested I ask Dale Martin, for example).
      • A post by someone (say, Mark Goodacre, the author of The Case Against Q) who doesn’t believe in the existence of Q.
      • A conservative evangelical Christian scholar, like Dan Wallace, author of Reinventing Jesus, or Darrell Bock, author of Dethroning Jesus, for example, to stake out some kind of position that runs directly contrary to mine on one point or another (I wouldn’t debate the person on the blog; but I would reserve the right to indicate where I think he is misreading me if I think he is).
      • A current graduate student (either in my program or some other) to describe in very brief fashion (not easy for a grad student to do!) what his/her dissertation is about.

There are some other ideas that have been floated, but this gives a sense.  If you have any that you are keen on, do let me know.  I think the only restrictions are (1) that I would like the poster to be a creditable scholar and (2) that I am not interested in having a point-counterpoint debate with someone who despises my very being…..