SBL Forum: generalist or specialist?

A recent article by Michael Bird and Craig Keener in the SBL Forum is garnering lots of positive attention in the blog world. Bird and Keener, both accomplished scholars, are making the case for generalists who range widely in the field. Generalists, they say, (1) are necessary for translating scholarship to popular audiences, (2) tend to promote interdisciplinary research, (3) help us overcome disciplinary myopia, (4) make for better classroom teachers, and (5) tend to be the scholars who most influence the field in the long run.

(I note that all their examples of great and influential scholars are European or European American men.)

Obviously, I'm a generalist. I'm the only NT professor in a theological seminary, so I have to be informed about the entire canon. I need to stay in healthy conversation with my colleagues, especially in Hebrew Bible, theology, and history -- not to mention with the ongoing life of religious communities. My research tends to come out in essays and in books like Sinners, which is clearly the work of a generalist. I agree with all the points Bird and Keener offer.

However, there's a part of me that greatly admires the specialists. They dig deeply into specific fields of inquiry, demonstrate patience and discipline, and drive the field forward. They're the only people who keep up with the whole range of literature in a specific subfield. My personality isn't well suited to specialist work, and my employment context isn't either, but we shouldn't downplay the value and quality of that calling.