From the open Facebook group Journal of Evangelical Speculative Theology in response to Roger Olson’s An Example of Unwarranted Theological Speculation: Divine Timelessness:
We, the moderators of JEST (Journal of Evangelical Speculative Theology) offer this letter of protest to Dr. Roger E. Olsen who offended our highly esteemed guild by claiming that Divine Timelessness amounts to UNWARRANTED speculation:
Dear Dr. Olsen, We affirm with you that Divine Timelessness is a speculative topic, and that of the highest degree. We here at JEST, however, take serious umbrage–at least as seriously as we are capable—at your claim that this glimmering jewel of theological speculation is “unwarranted.”
In short, sir, theological speculation is what we do, and we do it with unfettered enthusiasm. It is clear to us that your particular academic credentials do not qualify you to determine what speculation IS or IS NOT “unwarranted.” We do not find your dismissive remarks regarding our dubiously accredited guild to be lacking in disturbance and insensitivity.
We here at JEST encourage speculation as often as is warranted by the nature of the topic itself. The only instance that speculation could possibly be rightfully considered “unwarranted” would be in the absence of a dearth of biblical, textual, or other scholarly support. That is to say, scholarly evidence is the only thing that can “unwarrant” speculation. We advise that the topic be removed from the realm of actual scholarship and placed squarely in our field of speculation, where it rightfully belongs.
Dubiously submitted with all due speculation,
So actually they are saying: “As long as you can’t disprove the speculation of Divine Timelessness, which we affirm is just our speculation, you do not have the right to scholarly question it and we do not give Bible verses. The fact that our ‘Evangelical Magisterium’ has said so should be enough so retain your views.”
You should look up JEST in the English dictionary.
Yeah, isn’t that hilarious? :’D