Abstract:
A serious objection against Christian faith is that the Bible is not trustworthy because the history it relates does not correspond to the facts of history. In theology this problem is "solved" by some biblical scholars by an acceptance of the research methods that are used for all literature alike while others accept the historical critique by understanding the biblical history as a faithful but a-historical revelation. Fundamentalists reject the historical-critical objections and stress the inerrancy of Scripture. In this contribution these three "answers" are rejected: biblical studies shall take the (real) facts serious indeed (pace inerrancy), nor jump into an a-historical revelatory history next to historical criticism (pace strong Barthian views in the "Amsterdam School"), but neither read religious scriptures all in the same way "as all literature" - but apply academic methods as is appropriate for the Hebrew and Greek Bible.
