If you want to find out what liberal scholars and conservative pundits share in common, then James Crossley's Jesus in an Age of Terror might be up your alley. The book launches a two-pronged attack, against the demonization of the Middle-East in the media -- generally since the early/mid-70s, but especially since Bush's war on terror -- and also against a similar "demonization" in the field of Biblical scholarship. Scholars, claims Crossley, even the most liberal and secular ones, have in various degrees, and sometimes unwittingly, aligned themselves with Anglo-American imperialism by using stereotypes and broad generalizations of Arab cultures.

Crossley's chief targets are members of the The Context Group, a group of liberal academics who have since the '80s been using social sciences to help understand the people of the Bible. In the words of a spokesman for this group, Bruce Malina:

"The awareness of multiculturalism would require us to be sensitive to differences among cultures... If we wish to understand the persons of the ancient Mediterranean world, persons from the world of Jesus and the apostle Paul, we should be prepared to learn entirely new ways of perceiving so as to assess those persons on their own terms. Otherwise, we will be perpetuating the long-standing problem of being 'Ugly Americans', a phrase coined to describe the utter failure of U.S. personnel at the beginning of the Vietcong insurgency to understand the ways of that mysterious culture." (Portraits of Paul, pp 2,4)

So in efforts to be sensitive to the Middle-Eastern world (out of which come the Biblical heroes), the Context Group has explained reasons for certain behavior patterns which tend to puzzle or disturb us. Thus we learn that the people of the Bible were defined by the groups to which they belonged and were motivated by group norms more than individual needs. Our western emphasis on personal choices and personal rights was foreign to such cultures then as now. As a result, says Malina:

"Because one is to focus entirely on the needs of others, one begins to neglect one's own needs, and thus stifles normal individual psychological development... But persons have feelings, especially of hurt, and they are quick to learn to repress and deny those feelings. Mediterraneans learn to lose the ability to sympathize with the pain of others and are quite willing to abuse others physically, emotionally and spiritually. They abuse those in their group 'for their own good', for example, their children, spouses, and elderly relatives." (The Social World of Jesus and the Gospels, p 114)

Despite the noble intentions that drive scholars like Malina, however, Crossley thinks the above generalizations are crass, "covering vast and cultural areas, and which smack of old-fashioned imperialistic anthropology" (Jesus in an Age of Terror, p 112). They need "not only some serious evidence, but serious widespread evidence to back them up" (p 198). And not only are these academics misguided, thinks Crossley, they unwittingly play into the hands of conservative pundits who use similar stereotypes not out of empathy, but to show how superior western people are by contrast.

For instance, Crossley critiques Loren Rosson (the author of this blogpost, and former student of one of the Context Group members) for feeding post-9/11 perceptions of Arab cultures. "Rosson can talk in spectacularly general terms of [honor-shame cultures] where 'insults are fine and frequent arts, belligerence a commendable show of machismo, public degradation a staple of life, two-faced attacks (and backhanded compliments) prestigious displays of wit, and treating others as if they are invisible a proper way of snubbing inferiors and equals'." These are remarkably "huge generalizations about the Arab world", according to Crossley (p 106), and he says further that

"Issues of honor and shame have been used by some of the aggressive neo-conservative right in the U.S. to describe the issues at the heart of the war on terror and answer why 'they' hate 'us'. Such views effectively ignore, or do not discuss in any detail, the serious impact of U.S. foreign policy, such as the propping up of Saddam, the bombing of Iraq, the destructive sanctions against Iraq, the unflinching support for Israel over against the Palestinians... Rosson's view also ignores the role of urbanization and slum-dwelling in Islamic countries, mixed in with the stark economic shifts brought about in oil economies." (Jesus in an Age of Terror, p 109)

Crossley's concern for other factors besides the cultural is appreciated (and I would never downplay those), but with regards to the "outrageous stereotyping" he continually complains about throughout the book, Context Group members (and I) would respond along the lines of that being precisely the point: stereotyping is not only possible but institutionalized in honor-shame cultures. (It was, for instance, in my host country when I served in the Peace Corps.) Certain behavior patterns, moreover, are regularly predictable -- though not inevitable, of course -- and to deny the reality of such behavior patterns can be dangerously irresponsible. For example, a foreigner who compliments a Turkish village couple on how beautiful their baby is will (likely) receive a hostile response, since the compliment would (likely) be interpreted as an envious one. Or in other areas a woman who runs off with a younger man unapproved by her family will shame the family to the extent that either her father or a brother will (likely) try to kill her. Acknowledging such realities -- or reporting them, or describing them -- doesn't necessarily involve a moral judgment.

We can come to similar conclusions for different reasons, and I'm not sure that showcasing "parallels" between conservatives and liberals ultimately means much, though it's admittedly interesting. I think one of the worst traps we can fall into is to mask truth out of fear that it will sound politically offensive. On the other hand, Crossley's demand for more evidence demonstrating honor-shame behavior patterns is certainly fair. Scholarship should always be based on as much evidence as possible, lest ideology take over.

Whatever you make of it in the end, Crossley's book is provocative. If you're intrigued by the way a liberal academy can intersect with conservative politics -- who would have thought? -- then you should enjoy reading it. It's currently on order for the library and may be requested here. In the meantime, you may want to check out any of the following books by Context Group members who are critiqued by Crossley.

The Cultural Dictionary of the Bible, by John Pilch.
Ancient Israel: The Old Testament in its Social Context, by Philip Esler (editor).
Social Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels, by Bruce Malina and Richard Rohrbaugh.
Portraits of Paul: An Archaeology of Ancient Personality, by Bruce Malina and Jerome Neyrey.