Picking up from yesterday, here's a little more from John Goldingay:
"The admission that one is using historical-critical methods with a 'bias' may seem scandalous, but it is becoming clear that historical-critical history always functions ideologically in the nature of the concerns and presuppositions that determine what counts as history [see Brueggemann, Abiding Astonishment 37-46]. Since historical critical-exegesis is the ruling method in professional biblical study, one purpose of its exercise is now to legitimate the members of the scholary guild in their position of power [Fussel, 'Materialist Readings of the Bible,' 15]."
Models for Interpretation of Scripture, 44.
On another front...to those from last night's Bible study, here are the links to the two articles I mentioned:
Crispin Fletcher-Louis, "Jesus and the High Priest."
Craig Evans', "Assessing Progress in the Third Quest of the Historical Jesus," Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 4 (2006): 35-54.