Critiquing: #097 — Christmas special – your Qs about Tom’s life and work

December 23, 2021 | Ask NT Wright Anything – Premier

Key Terms: Personal Study Habits — Research Fellow Duties — Classical Music and Faith — Christmas Reflections — Academic Contributions

---

Episode Assessment:

		Commentary
Degree of Accuracy	B	The episode maintains a reasonable degree of factual accuracy, particularly in areas concerning NT Wright’s personal experiences and his reflections on Christian theology and history. However, some assertions are made without sufficient historical or textual evidence, leading to potential inaccuracies. For example, the discussion on the symbolism of the gifts to Mary and Joseph lacks citation of primary sources or scholarly consensus. This reduces the overall factual reliability of the content.
Degree of Coherence	B-	The episode generally follows a coherent structure, with NT Wright responding to listener questions in a logical sequence. However, there are moments where the conversation shifts topics abruptly, particularly when moving from academic topics to personal preferences, such as in the discussion on classical music. These shifts can disrupt the listener’s understanding and detract from the overall logical flow. More focused transitions between topics would enhance coherence.
Absence of Fallacies	C+	Several subtle logical fallacies are present throughout the episode. For instance, NT Wright’s assumption that the strangeness of the biblical narrative surrounding the gifts implies a deeper symbolic meaning falls into the category of a hasty generalization. Additionally, there are instances of appeal to authority, where Wright’s personal experiences are presented as sufficient justification for certain claims, without additional corroborating evidence. These issues slightly undermine the logical integrity of the episode.
Degree of Evidence	C	The episode relies heavily on personal anecdotes, generalizations, and interpretations without providing strong empirical or scholarly evidence to support the claims. For example, Wright discusses his research methods and organizational habits but does not reference any academic standards or studies that might support the effectiveness of his approach. This reliance on personal testimony over verifiable evidence weakens the argumentation and reduces the content’s overall persuasiveness.
Degree of Testability	D	The content is largely based on subjective experiences and personal interpretations, making it difficult to test or verify. Statements such as Wright’s reflections on the significance of classical music in the Christian worldview are inherently subjective and cannot be empirically tested or falsified. This lack of testability means that while the episode may provide valuable personal insights, its claims cannot be rigorously scrutinized or validated, which limits its utility in a broader academic or theological context.
Rational Confidence	C+	The confidence expressed in the episode is somewhat justified by NT Wright’s extensive experience and recognized authority in his field. However, the lack of robust evidence and the presence of logical fallacies reduce the degree of rational confidence that can be placed in the assertions made. While Wright’s insights are valuable, a more critical approach that includes external verification and avoids over-reliance on personal authority would bolster the rational confidence in the content.

Potential/Apparent Weaknesses:

1. Logical Fallacies:

One of the episode’s key weaknesses lies in the presence of logical fallacies, particularly hasty generalizations and appeals to authority. For example, NT Wright posits that the strangeness of the story of the gifts to Mary and Joseph implies a deeper symbolic meaning:

“Of course some people would say it was all symbolic anyway…but it’s such a strange story.”

This reasoning assumes that the mere strangeness of a story is indicative of symbolic significance, which is a hasty generalization. The conclusion that the gifts must have symbolic meanings is not adequately supported by evidence, leading to a weak foundation for this claim. Additionally, Wright’s reliance on his own authority and experience, while valuable, sometimes substitutes for more rigorous evidence, which can lead to appeals to authority that undermine the logical robustness of the argumentation.

2. Lack of Evidence:

The episode also suffers from a lack of empirical evidence to support many of its claims. For instance, while NT Wright’s discussion of his personal study habits provides insight into his working methods, it does not include any references to established research on effective study or organizational techniques:

“I live with imminent chaos with stuff which I vaguely know where it is…”

This reliance on anecdotal evidence diminishes the academic value of the content, as listeners are given no basis for assessing the effectiveness or general applicability of these methods. In the discussion on the symbolism of the gifts to Mary and Joseph, no historical or scriptural evidence is provided to substantiate the claim of symbolic meaning, leaving the argument unsubstantiated and reducing its persuasiveness.

3. Testability:

The difficulty in testing the content’s claims is another significant issue. Much of the episode is based on NT Wright’s personal experiences and interpretations, which are inherently subjective and not easily subjected to empirical verification. For example, his reflections on the value of classical music within the Christian worldview are deeply personal and cannot be tested or validated through objective means:

“I had a Wagner moment a few years ago…”

While such personal insights are valuable, they lack the rigor needed for broader academic or theological discourse. Without the possibility of testing or falsifying these claims, the episode’s utility in a scholarly context is limited. This lack of testability means that while the episode may offer meaningful personal reflections, it does not provide a robust framework for evaluating the validity of the arguments presented.

---

Formulations of Major Arguments

Argument 1: The Symbolism of the Gifts to Mary and Joseph

1. Premise 1: The gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh are presented in the biblical narrative.
2. Premise 2: Strange or unusual stories in ancient texts are often believed to have symbolic meanings.
3. Hidden Premise: The symbolic meaning of gifts can be inferred from the strangeness of the story.
4. Conclusion: Therefore, the gifts to Mary and Joseph likely have symbolic meanings important to the narrative.

Counter-Argument: The assumption that strangeness equates to symbolic significance is a hasty generalization. The gifts mentioned—gold, frankincense, and myrrh—were valuable commodities in the ancient world, and their presence in the narrative could simply reflect their economic and cultural significance rather than a symbolic one. Furthermore, the narrative context does not necessarily imply symbolism; these gifts could have served practical purposes, such as funding the family’s journey to Egypt. The argument also lacks textual or historical evidence that directly links these gifts to specific symbolic meanings, making the conclusion speculative rather than grounded in rigorous analysis. A more balanced approach would consider alternative explanations, such as the possibility that these gifts were customary offerings to a newborn of perceived royal or divine status, which would align with historical practices without requiring a symbolic interpretation.

Argument 2: The Value of Classical Music in the Christian Worldview

1. Premise 1: Classical music has been historically associated with Christian worship.
2. Premise 2: Many classical compositions were created with theological or spiritual themes.
3. Hidden Premise: Music with spiritual themes inherently possesses greater value in a Christian context.
4. Conclusion: Therefore, classical music holds significant value within the Christian worldview.

Counter-Argument: The argument that classical music holds significant value within the Christian worldview because of its spiritual themes is an appeal to tradition and overgeneralization. While it is true that much classical music was composed for religious purposes, the value of music within Christianity is not solely determined by its origin or intent. The spiritual significance of music is highly subjective, varying across cultures, denominations, and individual experiences. Additionally, the argument overlooks the fact that modern Christian worship often incorporates a wide variety of musical styles, not limited to classical compositions. Thus, while classical music may hold profound meaning for some, it is not universally essential to the Christian faith. A more nuanced view would acknowledge that the aesthetic and spiritual value of music is determined not just by its historical or theological roots but by how it resonates with contemporary believers in their personal and communal worship practices.

◉ Muddy Hermeneutics:

The Incoherence of Christian Interpretative Standards

In the realm of Christian theology, one of the most glaring issues is the lack of rigorous hermeneutical standards. This problem is starkly highlighted in the interpretation of the significance of the gifts presented to Jesus by the wise men—a narrative found in the Gospel of Matthew. The gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh are often subject to speculative interpretations that reflect a broader trend in Christian hermeneutics: a piecemeal approach driven more by doctrinal convenience than by any consistent or coherent method.

Consider the common interpretations of these gifts. Some suggest that gold represents Jesus’ kingship, frankincense his divinity, and myrrh his suffering and death. Others argue that the gifts were purely symbolic, reflecting a deeper spiritual truth rather than any material reality. However, these interpretations are arbitrary—not derived from a rigorous, standardized approach to hermeneutics, but rather from a need to fit these elements into a pre-existing theological framework.

The issue at hand is that there is no single, universally accepted method for interpreting biblical texts within Christianity. Instead, Christian theologians often pick and choose their interpretative strategies based on what suits their doctrinal positions. This inconsistent application of hermeneutics leads to a wide array of interpretations, many of which are contradictory or simply unsupported by the text itself. The result is a fragmented and often incoherent body of theological work that lacks the intellectual rigor seen in other fields of study.

Furthermore, if these hermeneutical methods were applied consistently across all biblical texts, they would lead to doctrinal conclusions that are unwieldy and unacceptable to mainstream Christianity. For instance, applying a literalist interpretation consistently would force Christians to accept problematic texts at face value, leading to doctrinal positions that are at odds with contemporary ethics and morality. On the other hand, a purely symbolic or allegorical approach would undermine the historical claims of Christianity, reducing the faith to mere mythology.

This hermeneutical inconsistency is indicative of a deeper problem within Christianity: the reliance on faith over reason. Faith, by its very nature, rejects the need for evidence or logical coherence. It allows believers to accept contradictory interpretations without demanding a rigorous standard of truth. This is why the interpretation of the wise men’s gifts can vary so widely—because in the end, what matters in Christianity is not the consistency of interpretation, but the willingness to believe, regardless of the contradictions.

The piecemeal nature of Christian hermeneutics reveals a desire to avoid the full implications of applying any one interpretative method consistently. Christians want to lock into a hermeneutic that confirms their beliefs without having to confront the doctrinal consequences of that method when applied across the board. This results in a theology that is conveniently flexible, bending to fit the needs of the moment rather than adhering to any rigorous standard of truth.

In conclusion, the interpretation of the gifts of the wise men serves as a microcosm of the broader issue in Christian hermeneutics: a lack of consistent, rigorous standards. Christianity’s reliance on faith over reason allows for a flexible, yet fundamentally incoherent, approach to scripture. Without a commitment to intellectual rigor, Christian theology remains mired in muddy hermeneutics—a patchwork of interpretations that ultimately undermine the credibility of the faith.

---

We invite you to join the conversation! Feel free to share your thoughts, critiques, and further questions in the comments section below. Let’s engage in a robust discussion on this critical topic.