N.T. Wrong has given an interview after ceasing the publication of his great, irreverent blog. I particularly like this part:
It goes without saying that I continue to see a valid distinction between ‘use’ and ‘interpretation’ (and I like Umberto Eco’s theoretical approach here), and I place scholars whom I encounter somewhere along the continuum between them. Frustratingly, in reading the publications of biblical studies, there are too many of these scholars far closer to the ‘use’ end of the continuum, so much so that it is just annoying to have to continually second guess whether a particular biblical scholar is interested in discovering what is true or only has an interest in defending what is already believed to be true. The state of biblical commentaries — a ‘primary secondary’ source for biblical studies — is a simply appalling example of this.
I talked about this problem in the diss repeatedly. I didn’t use the word ‘annoying’, of course; I think it was ‘frustrating’. Speaking of words, I’m also glad to see that we don’t share hobbies.