Biblical Scholarship & Shifting Beliefs

An Interview with C.J. Cornthwaite

For a while, I have been following the work of Dr Chris Cornthwaite, a scholar whose YouTube channel explores topics in biblical studies. I was fascinated by Chris's work not only because his videos are deeply informative and accessible – you should check them out! – but also because Chris speaks candidly about his journey with faith and scholarship.

I am often asked about my relationship to Christianity – a topic I haven’t explored in detail on the blog. And while Chris would no doubt express himself differently to me, I think his story is one to which many scholars and students of the Bible, including myself, will relate. It was therefore a great privilege to interview Chris, and ask about him a bit more his scholarship, shifting beliefs and plans for his brand new Substack.

JN: Chris, it’s really wonderful to get a chance to sit down with you. As a background to your scholarship, what was the focus of your PhD research?

Diasporas! It’s a loaded word. I worked on Philo and 4 Maccabees for my Master’s degree, and ended up writing a lot about what people do in “diaspora.” Decisions they make to fit in. Reworking their tradition to make sense in a new place. And how their practice evolves.

Of course, when we talk about Christianity we’re usually talking about how it spread in the Jewish diaspora.

I remember thinking, Why don’t we talk about other “diasporas” in antiquity? How did religion spread through THOSE?

So I started researching it. Along the way, I realized that Acts’ description of Christianity spreading through synagogues might be fiction. Or, at the very least, idealized. The “diaspora” model might be a literary invention.

But it seems pretty clear that Jewish communities around the Mediterranean had at least something to do with the spread of Christianity.

During my thesis, I researched how a Syrian goddess moved through those communities, how the Phoenician Baal-Poseidon moved through those, and how a Thracian goddess named Bendis was brought into Athens.

I started working outside the academy and never formally published it. But the thesis itself is available online here. (Note, if I were writing it today, I’d do some things differently! Such is life.)

JN: How did you become interested in a historical approach to the biblical texts, and what does it mean for you to study Christianity through a historical lens?

I sort of fell into it backwards. I was a staunch evangelical, a pastor, and confident that I just “followed the Bible” in everything. I wanted to be ordained, and reluctantly attended the only seminary in my town: an Anglican one.

I was pretty sure those heretic Anglicans had never read the Bible (at least not seriously like I had). And sure enough, from day one, I realized that almost nothing they did was biblical as far as I was concerned.

All those “smells and bells” (“Hell’s bells” as I called them!).

But as I learned, I realized that a lot of what I thought was “biblical” wasn’t at all. It was a shock to the system! And a bit like picking a scab, I couldn’t stop. I just had to know more about the Bible. Its problems. Its history. And its oddities.

By the time I’d finished my MDiv, I knew the Bible wasn’t inerrant. But to my surprise, it was more fascinating than ever. I just want to know where it all came from!

The biggest change comes down to one word. Honesty.

So often, we come to the text needing something from it. Affirmation that the way we believe is right. Reassurance that our faith is completely logical–that we can prove it like a math equation (1 Jesus + 12 Apostles + 500 Witnesses = Certainty).

But the text often resists us.

This goes for skeptics too. I meet people on the other side who are just as convinced that they understand what happened: ‘Contradictions with the texts prove the Gospel writers were lying,’ ‘Jesus was invented by the Flavians,’ or ‘Paul stole Christianity.’

The text resists these too. It’s complex and wonderful. And just when you think you’ve understood it, you’ll find something new. I suppose that’s what scripture should be!

JN: On YouTube, you often share your journey of deconstruction, and rebut common misconceptions that you had as an evangelical Christian. What do you think are some of the more common misconceptions believers have about the gospels, in particular?

I think, again, it often comes down to what we need from these texts. As modern Christians, too often we want the Gospels to validate our presuppositions. We want them to be like court reporting, “eyewitness” testimonies. We often want to use them as proof.

But they don’t work this way.

We don’t perfectly understand the origins of the Gospels. However, they certainly aren’t what I always thought as an evangelical – the equivalent of 4 witnesses each standing on a corner and reporting a car accident.

Stories passed through hands. Changed languages along the way. And almost certainly evolved in the telling.

The Gospels are ancient biographies (I know that’s your specialty, John). Ancient biographies may contain history, but they also love a good embellishment.

• They borrow from Imperial imagery (the emperor is the Son of god first!).

• They seem to have periods of being edited and rewritten (evidenced already from the fact that Matthew and Luke copied Mark –and probably other sources).

• They may borrow stories from the Old Testament or the mythology of the surrounding cultures to fill out the narrative.

• They were not the only Gospels in circulation, nor do we have any way of ascertaining whether they were the most “historically accurate.” (Although there are some pretty wacky alternatives!)

• And—what moderns seem most annoyed by—they contain contradictions that are impossible to reconcile without some mental gymnastics.

They are not obviously the gospel truth.

Yet they are incredible books. Rich repositories of history. Central to the faith of Christians through millennia. And in many senses, I love the Gospels now more than I ever did. In all their complexity and messiness. Despite the fact they raise more questions than answers.

JN: What do you see as the relationship between critical historical study and faith? Can the two co-exist, or are they naturally in tension with one another?

When I was accepted to seminary, a mentor who I respected sat me down. “You just can’t go,” he warned me. “It will destroy you. If you want to learn Greek and Hebrew, take some courses. Maybe go to a Bible college. But don’t go to an Anglican seminary.”

At the time, I shrugged and figured he was wrong. And–I’m stubborn–I decided I’d prove him wrong by going to seminary and being a witness to all the heretic Anglicans.

Turns out, that mentor was right. But he was also wrong.

Seminary shook my faith. It broke me even. But I don’t regret that it happened.

My faith is different now, but I think I like it better. I’m so thankful I’m not the earnest, cocky kid I was when that mentor had the hard talk with me.

I used to tell people, “Give me any argument against Christianity. I’ll prove you wrong!”

God, I was an ass.

But I was doing what I was taught – performing what I thought was real Christianity. I modelled what was shown to me.

For most of us, faith is passed on by others. Most of us don’t have Bible scholars or theologians as parents or faith mentors. We have imperfect people, doing their best with the faith as they understand it.

For some, realizing that the simple faith of their parents or mentors was – to put it bluntly – wrong at points, means that it was all a waste of time. It can even feel like a betrayal.

And of course, the faith I received came with a side of toxic masculinity, purity culture, and rapture paranoia. Lots of us are in therapy for the damage a faith caused us – especially as kids.

There comes a time when we realize that what we were given isn’t just the faith, but the faith as our teachers and mentors understood it.

We unpack these things as we grow. Some people want nothing to do with Christianity. Understandable, really. But some of us still feel the pull to something about it. We struggle through and re-learn how to connect to the faith in new ways that feel authentic.

I’m also thankful that I deconstructed in seminary. I was reading some of the world’s best theologians and Bible scholars. I could say a lot of nasty things about Christians. But I couldn’t say that they weren’t interested in wrestling with their own tradition.

Christians have actually been really good at wrestling with their traditions.

And a lot of those people have been theologians and Bible scholars. Not attacking the faith from outside (as a lot of people seem to think). But exploring it from within. Re-working it.

There are – of course – secular Bible scholars. And there’s a sense that we all need to act as secular, despite our personal beliefs. This is how scholarship works.

But many Bible scholars are within the tradition, trying to wrestle with it.

Unfortunately, Bible scholarship has often been treated as a threat to the people in the pews. I think this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It becomes a threat, because people aren’t exposed to it. And when they are exposed to the discipline that threatens simple, shallow faith, they can self-destruct. Therefore it’s a threat.

I’m not saying it’s easy. It’s not.

But done well, Bible scholarship can expand our faith. Historically, being a follower of Jesus has meant a lot of different things. And that’s what’s always at the heart of critical study. What did the earliest followers of Jesus think? How did they create their movement? How did they exist in the world?

The answers to these questions might hurt. They might unsettle and confuse childlike faith.

But childlike faith is often worth losing. And hopefully, it’s replaced by something better!

JN: As you popularise scholarship, are there any trends and currents you see in gospel scholarship which you are excited to discuss and see develop?

CC: It’s changed so much, even since I started my PhD in 2013. I don’t remember people talking about Marcionite priority back then (a few were). This work is cracking the synoptic problem open again and presenting new possibilities.

One of the projects I worked on during my PhD, on Graeco-Roman associations, is raising so many interesting questions about the structure of early Christ groups. This work is only just beginning. It hasn’t been popularized much, but I think it has the potential to be groundbreaking. When we see the roots of Christian practice and language in the evidence from surrounding immigrant groups and trade guilds, it changes EVERYTHING! For example, Paul is using legal contract language in Philippians! Who knew!

People are talking about another quest for the historical Jesus. We’ll see where that goes.

Really, everywhere I turn there are interesting questions being asked. Biblical scholarship is an old discipline, and every time I dig into the work of great scholars of old, I discover new stuff. And at the same time, a lot of work in the Gospels shows paradigms we’ve been operating under that need to be broken down. When we do this, it cracks questions open once more.

Bottom line, when you’re a nerd like me (and you, I think, John), the questions are never-ending. And just when you think they’ve all been solved, a new discovery or perspective throws everything back into a new light.

JN: I was really excited to see that you have now joined substack. What sorts of ‘content’ should your subscribers expect to find as you grow on this platform?

I expect to do lots of reflections and storytelling. I love doing this. There was a time in my life when I gave sermons (it hasn’t happened in years). So I’ve framed my Substack as “Post-Christian sermons from an agnostic preacher.” I hope to talk about the Bible a lot, but use it for reflection. I do more of the critical study in my YouTube videos.

Thanks so much for giving me the opportunity to do this! It’s been a lot of fun!

JN: Thank you for giving us so much to chew on, Chris. It has been a real privilege to hear more about your journey – I’m excited for what lies ahead on your substack!

---

If you enjoyed this interview and would like to find out more about Chris’ work, you can find his YouTube channel here and his brand new Substack here.

A reminder that Chris’ PhD thesis on ancient diasporas is available online.