NT Blog

The sixth and final intalment of the Scholarly Smackdown on beliefnet between Elaine Pagels and Ben Witherington III, "Did Paul Distort Christianity", has now been published:

Scholarly Smackdown Round 3: Elaine Pagels

Pagels's post is (at the very least) a useful summary of her thinking on The Gospel of Thomas, on which she clearly thinks that Ben Witherington III's thinking is out of date since she refers repeatedly and disparagingly to what they learned in graduate school, e.g. here:

A further indication that Thomas is not "Gnostic," by your own definition, is that it does use the Old Testament in a very positive way—just as the Gospel of John does. Both frame their views of the gospel with midrashic interpretations of Genesis 1. Recognizing this has led scholars far beyond what you learned as a graduate student from Bruce Metzger, and what I learned in graduate school. That's why those of us working in this field—including Birger Pearson—have come to recognize these texts not as "Gnostic"—whatever that fuzzy term meant—but as early Christian, and immersed, like all the early Christian sources we know, in the Hebrew Bible.

Final reflection on the two Beliefnet Scholarly Smackdowns: so far they are a useful but flawed experiment. What they have been good at has been giving the reader a flavour of each of the author's views. They are useful mini-articles. What they have been less good at has been the (unfortunately titled) "smackdown" of the title, which I am told is a wrestling analogy. There is precious little wrestling here! Because the scholars concerned (Crossan, Pagels and Witherington) have been encouraged to write relatively lengthy, self-contained emails, the actual critical engagement has been too limited. There has been too much talking past one another. If you want a good quality of interaction, I still think you have to go a long way to beat Xtalk at its best. It's not always at its best, of course, but when it is it's the most stimulating around.

Labels: Elaine Pagels, Gospel of Thomas

---

Christianity Today have today published a review of The Gospel of John by Ben Witherington III:

The Gospel, Literally
A Break-through film makes the Word visible.
Reviewed by Ben Witherington III

I think Witherington gets this about right, especially over Cusick's performance:

There is a warmth and passion to Cusick's portrayal that is winsome and captures your attention, drawing you in. When he tells his first followers, "Come and see," immediately you want to do so.

Witherington is clearly a bigger fan of Jesus of Nazareth than I am, though, and he compares elements of that film favourably with The Gospel of John. Like Adele Reinhartz [para. 6], Witherington comments on the film's inclusion of Mary Magdalene among the group following Jesus. Like me, he also draws attention to the fact that the film does not identify the woman taken adultery with Mary Magdalene, though I'm not sure that that identification is so much a "mistake" as an inevitable, if regrettable, piece of typical Jesus film harmonizing.

Minor comments: I'm pretty sure Zeffirelli is spelt with two "f"s and not one.

---

Latest reviews published on the SBL Review of Biblical Literature include:

Barrett, C. K.
On Paul: Essays on His Life, Work and Influence in the Early Church
Reviewed by Ian Scott

Bevere, Allen R.
Sharing in the Inheritance: Identity and the Moral Life in Colossians
Reviewed by Outi Leppa

Carson, D. A.
New Testament Commentary Survey, Fifth Edition
Reviewed by James P. Sweeney

Davis, Basil S.
Christ as Devotio: The Argument of Galatians 3:1-14
Reviewed by Ian Scott

Pao, David W.
Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus
Reviewed by Scott Spencer

---

The first concordance of the Bible I bought, while still at school, was by Cruden. I was told the legend: he was a madman who channelled his madness into the production of the first ever concordance of the Bible. It turns out that the truth is even more interesting. A new book by Julia Keay looks at Alexander the Corrector and it has an enthusiastic review in The Independent:

Alexander the Corrector, by Julia Keay
Trials and triumph of a pedant in Bedlam
By Jonathan Sale

In this excellent biography, Julia Keay tells the extraordinary story of the Scottish scholar who, on the point of being ordained, was incarcerated on grounds of insanity. Cruden's reputation for madness survives in, for example, his entry in my copy of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. However, Keay presents evidence that he was not mad, but put away by a powerful Aberdeen family to silence him. He had discovered that a girl whom he was unsuccessfully courting was pregnant by her own brother. Later, the incestuous lady set herself up as the "wife" of another brother.

---

Also in this week's Church Times:

K. A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003)
Review by John Barton

He is, in general, sceptical of all readings of the Bible based on an analysis of its literary character, seeing it instead as a huge repository of facts. I am sure he is right to think that the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of historical scepticism. But the solution cannot be to go back before critical intelligence was applied to scripture.

---

There's a lively review in the most recent Church Times of the following:

Fred Lapham, An Introduction to the New Testament Apocrypha (London & New York: T & T Clark, 2003)
Review by Leslie Houlden

But in one case the editor’s campaign has already had a resounding victory, in every school and church in the land. Sydney Carter’s hymn “The Lord of the Dance” had its origin in the Acts of John, from the mid-second century, where Jesus is depicted, just before his Passion, standing in the midst of his disciples and bidding them join hands and dance with him.

Now, none of the canonical writers thought of that, did they; and is it not wonderful?

Yes; and I didn't know that.

---

Lorin Cranford has the following useful resource:

Bibliography on Gospel Synopses and Harmonies

---

I recently asked about the whereabouts of the Acts-L older materials. Thanks to Mike Parsons for following this up. They are now located here:

Acts-L WWW Page

I've made the updates on my E-Lists and related pages.

---

I've often talked here about the role played by historical consultants in films and documentaries (and I have written a little about my limited experience of the latter). In RogueClassicism David Meadows draws attention to the following delightful piece in today's Times:

Into battle with Alexander
Oliver Stone is turning the deeds of Alexander the Great into a sword and sandals epic. Historian Robin Lane Fox agreed to advise on period detail — just as long as he could lead the cavalry

Big movies are notorious for trampling on history; I have just given the year’s biggest movie the chance of trampling on a historian. In November, Oliver Stone’s film about Alexander the Great will burst on the world. I have been the film’s historical adviser and in September last year I galloped on my stallion across the Moroccan desert at the head of Oliver’s cavalry charge. We were filming the battle of Gaugamela, Alexander’s greatest victory over the Persians . . . . .

. . . . . My colleagues told me that for historians, Stone was supposed to be like Satan, perhaps because they had seen his film of Nixon and I had not. Like the poet John Milton, I have to say I quickly became very fond of Satan. Anyway, the claim that Stone has no historical sense is completely untrue.

I was stretched, as he was, by constant consultations which were concerned to do as much justice as possible to the little evidence which we have . . . .

The full story is apparently to be told in a documentary this week:

Charging for Alexander
BBC Four, Tuesday, 8.30pm.

Historian Robin Lane Fox is one of the world's leading experts on Alexander the Great. His advice has been sought by some of Hollywood's biggest filmmakers as they've looked to bring the life of history's greatest military commander to the big screen.

Now Oliver Stone has succeeded where other directors have failed, with his film Alexander, set to reach cinemas later this year with Colin Farrell in the title role. Naturally, Stone turned to Lane Fox to help him get the film's historical details right, and Lane Fox agreed, on one condition. He wanted Stone to help him fulfil a lifetime ambition: to ride with the Macedonian cavalry.

Charging for Alexander follows the eccentric don from his Oxford home to the film's Moroccan desert set, where he dresses in period armour and encounters a sceptical crew, a foul-mouthed leading man, and a director who insists on making up historically inaccurate names for his soldiers. The experience marks a bizarre change from Lane Fox's usual life as a teacher, but will he make the final cut?

Definitely on the one to watch list.

---

Following on from my previous blog entry, the IMDb entry for Kenneth Colley, who plays Jesus in the opening (post-credit) sequence in Life of Brian, lists him as an actor in another New Testament related film after Life of Brian, the TVM Peter and Paul. I can recall seeing this on television over twenty years ago and particularly remember Anthony Hopkins's Paul shouting at Peter at the Antioch incident, "You are like a reed!" I have wanted to get hold of a copy of this for some time, and it seems that it is now available on video, in the USA at least, so that's a must. While looking at the IMDb on Peter and Paul, I noticed that it features José Ferrer (1909-92) as Gamaliel. He played an excellent Herod Antipas in The Greatest Story Ever Told. In fact, the cast of Peter and Paul looks remarkable -- Raymond Burr as Herod Agrippa, Herbert Lom as Barnabas. I am looking forward to seeing it again.

---

Good to see reference to the twenty-fifth anniversary release of Life of Brian on Paleojudaica; this is from the Houston Chronicle

'Passion' gives 'Life of Brian' something to celebrate
By ROGER MOORE
The Orlando Sentinel

Pythoner Eric Idle suggested Jesus Christ, Lust for Glory, playing off the British title of Patton: Lust For Glory, Jones recalls.

"The more we worked on it, the more interesting and outrageous it became. We reread the Gospels, changed the story to Brian, a contemporary of Jesus. We realized, very quickly, that the real humor lay not in what Christ said, but in the fact that 2,000 years after Christ, you've got everybody still killing each other because we can't get together on how we should worship and accept his message of peace and love."

In other words, people were misunderstanding the message of Jesus, right from the start. "Blessed are the cheesemakers," one character thinks he hears Jesus say off in the distance during the Sermon on the Mount.

Python and future Brazil director Terry Gilliam did the exceptional biblical production design, "but we lucked out in shooting in Monastir, Tunisia, the same place Franco Zeffirelli made Jesus of Nazareth," Jones says. "A lot of the same sets were still there. Just had to dress them up a bit.

"Of course, it also meant that you could be shooting your version of the Sermon on the Mount, and some elderly Tunisian extra would say, 'Well, that's not the way Zeffirelli did it.'"

I've heard this before, but I love that story. One thing I like to point out when showing students the Sermon on the Mount scene from Life fo Brian is that the Pythons also clearly chose an actor who looked like Robert Powell's Jesus to play Jesus in that opening scene, the only time Jesus appears in the film. The actor is a certain Kenneth Colley, about whom IMDb gives us this trivia, "The only actor to play an Imperial officer in more than one Star Wars film (not including extras)."

---

An article on Christian History and Biography discusses "divine purpose" in current popular culture:

The Lord of the Rings, The Passion of the Christ, and the Highway of Holiness
Has God been "re-routing" us through popular movies, books, and cultural events?
By Chris Armstrong

One recent cultural event has come not so much as a push, but as a dynamite blast, helping to clear from the highway's on-ramps a huge, craggy stone of falsehood. This "blast" is Mel Gibson's portrayal of the Passion of Jesus. Not without flaw, this movie nonetheless serves the church in the best possible way: it reminds us that the common portrayal of Jesus as a Nice Man with a moralistic message is a hollow fiction. The Nice-Man Jesus crumbles before the truth of who he actually was and what he did for us. Gibson has dealt a strong blow to the complacency of quasi-Christian moralism, clearing the way to the atonement Christ provided through his sacrifice.

---

I have added the following new entry to the NTGateway Scholars: H page:

Harry A. Hahne

Hahne is at Golden Gate Seminary in the USA. It's a homepage with lots of information including full-text articles on Biblical Studies and Computer-Assisted Bible Research.

---

One of the new essays on May's SBL Forum is:

Cheryl A. Kirk-Duggan, "A Brewing Thought, a Spot of Tea: Scholarly Writing as Adventure"

This essay considers some of my rubrics of writing in general, and writing a thesis/dissertation in particular, as a creative, fulfilling adventure.

It's a lively and enjoyable piece and ideal for you if you are struggling with writing a dissertation at the moment. The author explains her metaphorical strategy for avoiding writer's block and for enjoying the creative experience of writing. I have one query about the beginning point of the essay, though:

Writing tends to be the bane of existence for many teachers and students in higher education. Put simply, writing is often a necessary, but neither a sufficient nor a satisfying burden.

Is this so? I must admit that writing is pretty much my favourite part of the job; I just wish I could find more time to do it -- that's where my burden lies and I guess that that's the same for many colleagues. Would that we had the more time to indulge in the adventure that Kirk-Duggan describes!

---

I commented yesterday on Zeba Crook's homepage. I would now like to draw attention to this element on his homepage:

An English Reader's Synopsis

This is an introduction to a project on which Crook has been working for some years. There are several examples in the PDF file to which the above page links. Crook is attempting a major English language Synopsis in which the use of a "source language translation" (i.e. literal, non-idiomatic) will help the reader to see as many of the actual agreements in the Greek as possible, agreements that are sometimes obscured in "target language translation" Synopses like Throckmorton's Gospel Parallels. Stephen Carlson makes some useful comments on this in Hypotyposeis and asks about the target audience for the proposal. I would say that there is a potential market at least among the growing number of undergraduate Theology students in the UK who do not do Greek. Greek went optional on the Theology BA Honours in 1995 here in Birmingham and most, if not all, other British Universities are the same. When I was in Oxford, Greek was still compulsory for Single Honours Theology BA students but I understand that this is the case no longer. But the students without Greek still want to do courses on Jesus and the Gospels and it will be useful to be able to push them towards a resource like the one proposed by Crook. When I am teaching New Testament courses to our undergraduates, I make use of my own simple English language Synopses, some of which I have made available on-line (I have a lot more, so perhaps I ought to think about making those more broadly available too). We have now moved Greek Synopsis work into the Level 2-3 Greek New Testament courses.

There may be sufficient interest for an English language Synopsis like the one Crook is proposing for a more general audience, but I don't know.

Some further comments on the proposal:

(1) Its essential ethos is right. I recall E. P. Sanders complaining that the Funk Synopsis matches up parallels in the RSV that are not actually present in the Greek. I have not checked up the Funk Synopsis to see if that is right or not. See Robert Walter Funk, New Gospel Parallels: Volume One, The Synoptic Gospels (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985). Even that is not true, the comment points up the potential danger with using "target language translation".

(2) Crook explains that "Each gospel is presented in its own order, indicated when the gospel name and passages appear in bold lettering". This sounds like a good idea for combatting the big problem over how to order a Synopsis. For English-only readers, one should probably be especially conscious of the difficulties they might have in finding parallels and anything that facilitates their easy handling of them should be encouraged. If I understand Crook's proposal correctly, pericopae will be repeated in that particular Gospel's relevant order where that Gospels is out of sync with one or both of the others.

(3) I am fully behind the importance of teaching textual criticism to users of the Synopsis. I wonder, though, if the textual apparatus provided is a bit too detailed for an English language only reader. I am not sure if the target audience is conceptualised clearly here. The list of witnesses in the selected cases where textual apparatus is provided is too terse and focussed for non-Greek readers. I would have thought that something that explains the most important variations is required or the student will ignore it.

(4) My major qualm about the proposal is the use of the reconstructed text of Q in the Synopsis. On one level, this is a useful and interesting way of showing students where the IQP's Reconstructed Q comes from, i.e. from Synoptic comparison between Matthew and Luke. But my concern is that the use of Q limits the usefulness of the Synopsis in a fundamental way by foreclosing one of the key issues in Synoptic Problem research, which is the very reason for looking at a Synopsis. Instead of acting as a tool for students to investigate and test the Q hypothesis, the actual printing of the reconstructed text of Q inevitably gives Q a tangibility, a concrete presence, that makes it harder to encourage students to test the hypothesis. In my experience of teaching the Synoptic Problem, many students have difficulty grasping the Q hypothesis -- it takes a lot of patient explanation -- and they are quickly put off if they hear about its chapter and verse numbers, its reconstructed text and so on. In fact I tend to avoid talking about the properties of reconstructed Q in introductory lectures because it unduly biases the students against the Q hypothesis. I want them to understand the hypothesis and to judge it as fairly as possible and not to be biased against it by leaping ahead too quickly to reconstructed Q. This may just be my experience; it may just be Birmingham students! But I know that I would find it tough to introduce a Gospel Synopsis to undergraduate students that features the text of Q, with verse numbers and the like. I am afraid that many of them would simply refuse to take it seriously, for all my attempts to defend it.

(5) There is a related practical issue. The introduction of Q turns the three-column Synopsis into a four column Synopsis (and more when Thomas and John come in too). I think this is potentially problematic on two fronts. First, it reduces the simplicity of the presentation, thinning out the columns and crowding the page. This is a shame in a Synopsis that is designed to appeal to undergraduate students. Second, it radically alters the opportunity to colour the Synopsis. In my own view, it is greatly fortuitous that there are three Synoptic Gospels and three primary colours and that the combinations between them make colouring both intuitive and fun (see previous blog entry and discussion in my The Synoptic Problem). I'm not sure how one would encourage students to colour a four-column Synopsis. Would one leave Q white? Would one colour in-line with the colouring of Matthew and Luke so that one could see how the wording of Q had been reconstructed? Either way, it seems to me that the problem is that one weakens the gift we have been given of three Synoptic Gospels.

(6) A related problem is that I would find it less straightforward to use a Synopsis like this in teaching the Synoptic Problem. Pure triple tradition is still in three columns, so one has the link there between triple and three columns. But the pure double tradition is in three columns, Matthew, Q and Luke, and so it's less straightforward to explain these "triple" and "double" tradition terms. This might sound like an overly simple point but I reckon that it is a very useful way to begin the discussion of the Synoptic Problem and to go from triple tradition and double tradition to possible explanations of these.

My critical comments should not detract from the fact that, to repeat, I think this a very interesting proposal with some real merit.

Update (3 December 2004): Zeba Crook has uploaded a new version of the proposal here:

English Reader's Synopsis

---

In Bible Software Review Weblog, Rubén Gómez draws attention to the following online Festschrift, quite an unusual phenomenon:

"What Does the Text Actually Say?"
A Festschrift in Honour of Dr Richard K. Moore
with articles by Evelyn Ashley, Michael Bullard, Marc Chan, Tim Finney and Alan Gordon and notes of appreciation from Barbara Aland, Ann Harding, David Neville, Ken Panten, Michael Welte and Geoff Westlake.
Published at http://purl.org/RelTech/books/RKM/, 2002.

Given my interest in the Synoptic Problem, I was drawn in particular to the following article:

Marc Chan Chim Yuk, "Jesus' Sayings in the Triple Tradition of the Synoptic Gospels"

Essentially, what the author does is to look into the actual degree of verbatim agreement between the Synoptics in triple tradition material, showing that the average is about 26.4%, a figure lower than the 50% figure mentioned by Sanders and Davies in Studying the Synoptic Gospels (see article for reference). But the study also concludes that:

It has revealed quite positively the fact that the correlation of Jesus' sayings in the Triple Tradition of the Synoptic Gospels is twice as high as the correlation for the surrounding narratives.

And it sees this as evidence that:

This indicates that the words of Jesus were treated with very high respect and thus transmitted and reproduced with care.

The last sentence rather took my breath away since it seems to go far further than the evidence allows:

There are still problems that have not been solved but the overall trend in this article points towards the fact that indeed the sayings of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels do represent what Jesus actually spoke during his ministry on earth.

It's a shame that a generally useful essay overreaches itself in the end, not least in that the topic it begins with is the avoidance of claims that are not supported by appropriate evidence. One or two other comments on the essay:

(1) It's a shame that the essay perpetuates the lore that there are essentially two alternative solutions to the Synoptic Problem, the Two-Source Theory and Griesbach, with no mention of Farrer (Marcan Priority without Q). This is particularly disappointing in an essay that begins and ends with E. P. Sanders and Margaret Davies's Studying the Synoptic Gospels which not only discusses the Farrer theory at length but also comes down broadly in support of it (see some quotations from it).

(2) The author recommends a colour coding scheme apparently devised by a certain Karawara Gospels Project. The article explains that this system was designed by Richard Moore, in whose honour this Festschrift was produced, in 1987-8. David Neville, author of two books on the Synoptic Problem, mentions this same project in his Thanks to Richard Moore, in the same volume. I am happy to see that the scheme is effectively identical to the one I came up with and recommended in my The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze! It takes advantage of the fact that there are three Synoptics and three primary colours, and works with that. This has always seemed so intuitive to me that I am surprised that more have not tried the same thing, so I am reassured to find someone independently coming to the same conclusion. However, when it comes to computerizing the scheme, they adjust Luke's yellow to grey "since yellow is barely visible when printed", and they make similar adjustments in the various combinations. I understand the problem here because when I went from the manual colouring of my Synopsis to trying to represent it on-line, the first problem was indeed the faintness of the yellow. But the solution I have used in my on-line synopsis examples has been to avoid the problem by simply providing a grey background rather than a white one. Then the yellow shows up better than anything.

Unfortunately, there are no examples of the colouring provided in the article, no doubt because it was originally projected as a print volume (see note 4) rather than an on-line one.

---

I have moved my colleague Professor David Parker's homepage to our main Theology web site in Birmingham because its old server had become defunct. I've made the adjustment also on the NT Gateway's Scholars: O, P, Q and at the same time have serviced the other links on that page.

Update (21.40): Thanks to Markus Öhler for a speedy reply to an email I sent earlier. He informs me that his old and extensive homepage has been taken down ("Sie war veraltet und stilistisch auch untragbar") but he has a new, shorter page: Markus Öhler. The pages for AG-ASS are still available.

---

The SBL Forum now has its latest content for May uploaded:

SBL Forum: May

From the practices of ancient scribes to the ordeals of the dissertation and latest book, biblical scholars are passionate about writing. This month SBL Forum features articles about writing in the past and in the future, plus insight for students writing dissertations, teachers in community colleges, and selected poems.

On Philo of Alexandria blog, Torrey Seland draws attention to one of the new articles, Ronald Hock, Writing in the Greco-Roman World.

In previous months, the beginning of the month sees the major content getting uploaded and then selected articles will be added as time goes on. I'll keep an eye on it for additional updates and, of course, post here.

---

Today's Guardian Online has a nice little feature that attempts to put Google to the test:

On your marks, get set, search ...
Google, the world's most popular internet search engine, is about to offer shares to the public. It has built its reputation on being the fastest and most accurate way to find information. But is the internet really the quickest way to access facts - and get them right? We put Google to the test against more old-fashioned methods.
Ros Taylor, Oliver Burkeman and Stephen Moss

On the whole, Google does pretty well but doesn't always beat the telephone and the library. The article shows that you need both ingenuity and experience to get the best out of Google. And, of course, it does not add on the time for travelling to the library or the cost of making phone-calls. Here I am sitting at my PC and Google is so handy. But here's my concern: we are already getting to the stage where some students think that if Google can't find it, it doesn't exist. This perception might well intensify as the internet gets more comprehensive and as Google continues to find ways to pinpoint its searches. In the main I celebrate the fact that so much information is so straightforwardly accessible, but is it going to lead to more frustration in the future when people then fail to find what they need on the net?

---

Back in December on Hypotyposeis, Stephen Carlson mentioned Zeba Crook's English Reader's Synopsis. I have now added Zeba Crook's homepage to my Scholars: C page:

Zeba A. Crook Homepage

As you will know if you peruse Scholars' Homepages, they vary enormously, from just a page with a paragraph or two prepared by support staff, to entire web sites with variety of useful resources. This is a good one, with CV, list of publications, course materials, some links and an introduction to the project mentioned above, on which more anon.

---

Following on from my previous blog entry, a quick look around that Spirit of Things web site shows up some other interesting things too. You can read presenter Rachel Kohn's essay Who is a Fundamentalist? And why does it Matter?, which features some critical comments on The Passion of the Christ, and there is the entire transcript, again, for this episode of the programme:

The Suppressed Christian Tradition

In the late 1970s Elaine Pagels published The Gnostic Gospels, putting into the public domain a suppressed Christian tradition, which the church regarded as 'heretical'. They were the Gospels of Mary, Philip and Thomas, found at Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1945. Now a world-famous scholar, Pagels argues against the term "Gnostic," which was a term of reproach, and reflects on the gospels' similarities to Kabbalistic and Buddhist thought.

Like the Lüdemann programme, it is very interesting reading. Just one excerpt touching on her recent work on the Gospel of Thomas and its relationship to John:

what I realised as I was reading the Gospel of Thomas, is that there is teaching there, that is shared with the author of the Gospel of John. Other scholars have pointed out the strong similarities between John and Thomas. They’re both written for someone who already knows the basic story, they’re both written as supplemental and advanced teaching, they’re both written speaking about the Kingdom of God not as something coming at the end of time, but as the present spiritual reality, and they both have what you might call mystical elements to them.

But as I read that, and looked at the work of those scholars who’ve observed the enormous similarities between the two, I came to the conclusion, and to me it was a surprise, and it was unwelcome and it seemed very strange, but I realised that the only way one can make sense of the relationship between these Gospels is to see that whoever wrote the Gospel of John knows the kind of teaching you find in Thomas, and thinks that it’s been taken there in the wrong direction.

Labels: Elaine Pagels, Gospel of Thomas

---

Thanks to Gerd Lüdemann for sending over this link. It is an Australian radio programme called The Spirit of Things and this episode from 4 April 2004 is an interview with Gerd Lüdemann:

A Letter to Jesus

Gerd Ludemann is a world-renowned New Testament scholar at the University of Gottingen in Germany. After publishing 'A Letter to Jesus' declaring his loss of faith, the University of Gottingen, removed his courses from the theological faculty. A cause celebre among biblical scholars, Ludemann's predicament raises issues about the relationship between scholarship and personal faith. In this special interview Ludemann bares his soul and his thoughts about who Jesus really was.

There is a full programme transcript available from the link above -- would that more radio programmes would provide this! This excerpt shows Lüdemann summarising his journey away from Jesus:

First I examined the Resurrection of Jesus, because I was told by my church, and by the confession of the church, that the risen Lord is the Lord of the universe, and I wrote a book about the Resurrection, had to conclude that Jesus didn’t rise, that his body rotted away and that Resurrection meant the vision of the risen one, that is a vision, a dream. And nobody will trust his or her dream, so I had to abandon that approach of theology to trust in the risen one, and I turned to Jesus, and thought, Well, if he didn’t rise, there’s a possibility that the authority of Jesus’ words and deeds might be the basis of future faith.

So I was looking for a new way of believing or remaining a believer. And I had to conclude that roughly 85% of the words of Jesus actually go back to the community that made these words up and don’t go back to Jesus, which created another crisis. I had to ask Who was Jesus? Why should Jesus be the basis for my own religion? Because historical investigation showed that Jesus was a Jew and did not go to the Gentiles. So basically I had to decide either to follow Jesus and become a Jew or to respect Jesus as a Jew of his days and abandon Christianity, or at least traditional Christianity, and that’s what I did.

---

I'm still here. I've just hit one of those periods where work is so ovewhelming that I've not had time to blog. Where I did manage to get some time at the weekend, you may have noticed that I added some more reflections on The Passion of the Christ. This is not because I had nothing else to blog about or nothing else to say but because I have been working on an article on this with a tight deadline, now past. Now that I'm all Passion-ed out, what next? One thing to look forward to is the Visual Bible International's Gospel of Mark film. I have mentioned this before (Three Other Jesus films), but here is a little more news from a Globe and Mail article by James Adams called The Gospel's second coming:

In the meantime, Drabinsky is continuing with plans to start shooting The Gospel of Mark in late August or early September, using Toronto and Spain as locations. Jeff Sackman said he's "open to the idea of Mark in theatres for 2005," but "it will depend on what transpires in the market between now and then. I assume there are dozens of Christian-themed movies in various stages of production and there could be a glut." At the same time, "I think this experience proved there is a theatrical market" for high-calibre Christian fare.

No more news yet on Regardt van den Bergh's The Lamb.

Labels: Gospel of Mark film, Visual Bible

---

Jack Kilmon on Xtalk mentions the sad news of the death of Hyam Maccoby. This obituary is from The Independent:

Professor Hyam Maccoby
Stormy petrel of biblical scholarship and author of books on Jesus, St Paul and Judas Iscariot
Albert H. Friedlander

Labels: obituaries

---

In comments on my post about the harmonizing tradition in the Jesus films, Bill points out that the reaction people are making to The Passion of the Christ relates to the explicit claim that this film was historically accurate. I think that this is a useful corrective to my post. I would add a couple of points by way of response, however. First, I've seen a toning down of the claims about historical accuracy in this film as time has gone on. Have a look at the official Passion of the Christ web site, for example. There are no claims here, in the film's official publicity, of historical accuracy. Indeed in "Background Information", it writes under "Sources" that:

It was adapted from a composite account of The Passion assembled from the four Biblical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. (My emphasis)

This actually comes pretty close to describing the work of harmonizing. Gibson himself writes, in the "Foreword" to The Passion (Tyndale House, 2004):

There is a classical Greek word which best defines what "truth" guided my work, and that of everyone else involved in the project: aletheia. It simply means "unforgetting" . . . . It has unfortunately become part of the ritual of our modern secular existence to forget. The film, in this sense, is not meant as a historical documentary nor does it claim to have assembled all the facts. But it does enumerate those described in relevant Holy Scripture. It is not merely representative or merely expressive. I think of it as contemplative in the sense that one is compelled to remember (unforget) in a spiritual way which cannot be articulated, only experienced.

And from the Diane Sawyer interview on February 17:

Asked whether he considers his film the definitive depiction of the passion, Gibson said: "This is my version of what happened, according to the gospels and what I wanted to show — the aspects of it I wanted to show."

And from the Christianity Today interview with Gibson:

Struck: How did you find the balance between staying true to the Scripture and your creative interpretation?

Wow, the Scriptures are the Scriptures—I mean they're unchangeable, although many people try to change them. And I think that my first duty is to be as faithful as possible in telling the story so that it doesn't contradict the Scriptures.

Now, so long as it didn't do that, I felt that I had a pretty wide berth for artistic interpretation, and to fill in some of the spaces with logic, with imagination, with various other readings. ('Dude, That Was Graphic')

But second, the claim about historical accuracy is one that has a familiar ring to it when it comes to Jesus films. Consider, for example, the Jesus film:

The attention to biblical accuracy catapults you back into the life and time of Jesus Christ. You walk the same historical streets, you experience the same wonderful miracles, and you are touched by the power of God as you relive the most important events in the history of mankind.

Or consider the publicity for Jesus of Nazareth:

This epic production is acclaimed for its thorough Biblical and historical accuracy, with six hours of superb acting, beautiful music, and outstanding cinematography. (DVD publicity, e.g. here)

Or consider most recently The Miracle Maker:

Extensive historical and geographical research and the advice of leading biblical experts have ensured the greatest accuracy. (Official website)

I am not trying to claim that Icon Productions have not made inflated claims for their own film, but my point is that the claims of historical accuracy are pretty common in the publicity for Jesus films.

---

I am intrigued by the portrayal of Antipas in The Passion of the Christ. What are the sources for this portrayal? Several have suggested that it is in large part derived from Jesus Christ Superstar. A review on Net Monster's Movie Reviews, for example, comments

So Gibson's portrayal of Herod as an overweight buffoon appears to be less based upon historical evidence than a direct crib from Jesus Christ Superstar. Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice should sue.

Or see this review on Cool Stuff. That one scene is the source for the other is possible. Have a look at Antipas in another recent Jesus film, The Miracle Maker, in which the opening line of Herod's greeting has almost the same intonation as Herod's greeting in Superstar, "I've been waiting to see you . . . ." The depiction of Herod in that one song in Jesus Christ Superstar is so memorable that it cries out for imitation. But I can't think of any other elements in The Passion of the Christ that appear to be derived from Jesus Christ Superstar. The best analysis I have read of the scene is in Robert Gundry's The Burden of the Passion (see also previous comments):

The treatment of Herod Antipas, to whom Pilate sent Jesus and who sent Jesus back to Pilate, exhibits Gibson's artistry-and homework as well-at its most subtle and thorough. The drunken feast that Jesus' entry interrupts recalls the drunken feast at which the severed head of Jesus' forerunner, John the Baptist, was served to Herod on a platter. Herod's wife Herodias is present here as she was present there. But Herod wears a woman's wig and mascara. Why this womanish portrayal of him despite his heterosexual marriage? Well, it was Herodias who manipulated Herod against his will to have John the Baptist beheaded. To represent her dominance over Herod, Gibson makes him effeminate. There is more. On his way to Jerusalem some Pharisees had said to Jesus, "Get away from here, for Herod wants to kill you." But Jesus answered, "Go tell that fox for me, Listen, I am casting out demons and performing cures today and tomorrow, and on the third day I finish my work. . . . It is impossible for a prophet to be killed outside of Jerusalem" (Luke 13:31-33). The Greek word behind "fox" is feminine, so that Jesus is calling Herod a vixen, a female fox-not an animal to be afraid of or to run away from. Gibson matches Herod to Jesus' slur.

An excellent analysis. I would add something I've just spotted from Emmerich's Dolorous Passion

He was seated on a pile of cushions, heaped together so as to form a species of throne, in a spacious hall, and surrounded by courtiers and warriors . . . .

. . . . . They all began at once to vociferate their accusations, to which Herod hardly listened, being intent solely on gratifying his curiosity by a close examination of Jesus, whom he had so often wished to see. But when he beheld him stripped of all clothing save the remnant of a mantle, scarcely able to stand, and his countenance totally disfigured from the blows he had received, and from the mud and missiles which the rabble had flung at his head, the luxurious and effeminate prince turned away in disgust . . . . (Emphasis added).

I am less inclined now to think that Superstar is the source for this depiction of Herod -- Emmerich alongside the Gospels, given Gundry's insights, are the more likely sources.

---

In Hypotyposeis, Stephen Carlson comments on the recent Crossan story about The Passion of the Christ in which there seems to be some criticism of the act of harmonizing the Gospel accounts for the film. Stephen writes (excerpted):

I certainly agree that having four gospels instead of one harmonized text has proven to be much richer theologically and historiographically, but I'm taken aback at the apparent per se objection to any harmonization of the gospels. Unless one is to film a single gospel straight through, which is not common, film treatments of Jesus are going to use a blended combination of the gospels. Does this mean that the genre of the Jesus film is fundamentally illegitimate? I just don't get it.

I share this surprise at the strong reaction amongst some scholars to the harmonizing in The Passion of the Christ, not least because this is an age-old tradition in the Jesus films and The Passion of the Christ is far from unique in this regard.

There are essentially four important exceptions to the general rule about the Jesus films harmonizing the four Gospels to produce their narratives, The Gospel According to St Matthew, Jesus (based on Luke), Matthew and The Gospel of John. Otherwise, the Jesus films have narratives in which characters, scenes, motifs and more are drawn together from all four Gospels and none of them. One could give many, many examples but one that I have drawn attention to in the past is Mary Magdalene in the number "Everything's Alright" in Jesus Christ Superstar:

The various stories of the anointing of Jesus (Matt. 26.6-13, Mark 14.3-9, Luke 7.36-50, John 12.1-8) are rolled into one in the number 'Everything's Alright', and unlike any of the Gospels, the one who anoints Jesus is Mary Magdalene (cf. Luke 8.2). And shortly before this, Jesus' reply to Judas' criticism of Mary ('Strange Thing Mystifying') utilizes another story still, the Woman Taken in Adultery (John 8.1-11):

'If your slate is clean, then you can throw stones
If your slate is not, then leave her alone.' (Do You Think You're What They Say You Are?)

I think it's important to understand not only the principle of harmonizing in Jesus films, but also the elements that are repeatedly found appealing by the different film-makers. Certain motifs from the Gospels repeatedly prove popular to the film-maker and can be seen again in The Passion of the Christ. The trial before Herod (unique to Luke, see 23.6-12); Pilate's hand-washing (unique to Matthew, 27.24) and "we have no king but Caesar" (unique to John, 19.15) are all very common in film depictions of the Passion, and not surprisingly crop up again in The Passion of the Christ.

But the issue of harmonizing is clearly one that strikes a real chord with many scholars viewing this film and it does make me wonder whether it is a result of their general lack of familiarity with the Jesus film tradition. Consider, for example, Emily Cheney in Gibson's Gory Story on the SBL Forum. She notes that "It is primarily Mel Gibson's Passion Play, not an accurate portrayal of Jesus' death and the events leading up to his death because we have four versions in the New Testament, not one" and adds:

He harmonizes the four gospels, not respecting how each gospel is emphasizing different aspects and is written for different audiences, at different times, in different places.

Or consider Ched Myers, Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ,” Anti-Semitism and the Gospel: Mark’s Trial Narrative as Political Parody, who remarks:

One of the many problems with Gibson’s film is that it weaves in strands from all four of our gospel versions (not to mention his own gratuitous additions). Attempts to “harmonize” what are four very different versions of the Jesus story have long been discredited because they give the editor such wide license to pick and choose. This effectively creates a “fifth” gospel—or in Gibson’s case, anti-gospel. The only way to unravel Gibson’s fabric is to examine each gospel separately, in order to see their different emphases and purposes.

I am intrigued by the comment here that harmonies have "long been discredited". Of course it is the case that we academic types love to pour over the Synopsis, but we are not marking an undergraduate essay on the Historical Jesus when we are looking at The Passion of the Christ but at a film that is part of a tradition of Christian story-telling. Or from an article interviewing Francis Moloney, Moloney: 'Scene After Scene is Just Wrong' in Passion Film, we read:

Moloney argued against the way in which Gibson selected different verses from different gospels. "Each passion story has its own point to make," he said, adding that if the film puts a selection of all of them together, what you get is a "juxtaposition of material that doesn't belong together." A classic example he mentioned was that the last words of Jesus in the gospels of Matthew and Mark, "My God my God, why have you forsaken me?" are "words of despair." The two writers "really wanted to show that Jesus really died an agonizing death, and that the answer of God to this death is the Resurrection in the very next chapter."

As with the other Jesus films, the cry from the cross "My God, my God . . ." is effectively recontextualized by the harmonizing, drawing in a selection of -- and sometimes all of -- the words from the cross. I quite agree that the harmonizing of the words on the cross does not allow us to understand the way in which Mark's narrative works, but then the film is not attempting to give us an exposition of Mark's Gospel.

---

Martin Webber emails to point out that the old Acts-L homepage at Baylor University, along with the archive of older materials, has now disappeared. I've adjusted the link on my E-Lists and Luke-Acts pages so that they have only the Yahoo!Groups link. If anyone happens to know of the whereabouts of anything else for the list, I'd be happy to hear about it.

---

I commented yesterday on Bible Studies - Русские страницы and drew attention to some concerns about articles of mine that have been reproduced there without permission. I wrote to the author of the site to express my concern and he emails me in response with an explanation. He says that he did ask for permission to reproduce many of the articles on the site but he could not always find the relevant email addresses and some people did not reply. Others, he says, may have just slipped through the net. So I had a look in my own correspondence and see that I did in fact write to the author of the site in response to an email he sent me on 27 November 2001. (I write well over 5,000 emails a year so it is not surprising that I forget some). My email of 27 November 2001 says that I am happy to encourage links to any of my articles but that I am not happy to grant permission to reproduce any of them. I might add that in some cases (e.g. Fatigue in the Synoptics) I do not own the copyright anyway and so cannot grant others permission to reproduce them. So I have asked the author to take my articles down.

The site in question has lots more articles and as far as I can see there are no statements about copyright or permission being granted. It is possible that there are others whose articles have been reproduced without permission; I have written to the author of the site to encourage him to add statements concerning permission where he has it, not least because I can imagine that others might be less gracious than I when their material has been reproduced without permission. I should add here that I think that what the author of the site is doing, bringing Biblical Studies to Russia, where books and journals are often scarce, is most valuable. For that reason it is all the more important to make sure that everything available on the site is there legitimately.

---

There have been comments here and elsewhere on the AAR decision to hold stand-alone meetings. The AAR web site have now made available the text of the response from the AAR board on this issue in relation to the petition organised by Karen King and Elaine Pagels:

A Message from the AAR Board

Labels: Elaine Pagels

---

I have commented previously on Robert Gundry's short article on The Passion of the Christ in the SBL Forum's Letters to the Editor. They have now re-ordered this page and sensibly given Gundry's article (as well as the other longer ones) a page of its own:

The Burden of the Passion
Robert H. Gundry

---

It is good to see the SBL Forum continuing to publish Letters to the Editor -- this brings alive the SBL pages as indeed a kind of "forum" for debate and discussion, adding a degree of diversity and interaction for the first time. The latest to be added is this interesting contribution:

The Question, Not the Answer, Is the Problem
Stuart S. Miller

The tendency to regard the defining moment in Jewish-Christian relations as the rejection by the "Jews" (as if the original followers of Jesus weren't Jews!) of Jesus at Golgotha rather than the rejection by Christians, subsequent to the crucifixion, of the halakhah, only serves to further deflect attention from Christianity's roots in Judaism. All the attention given to answering the question, "Who killed Jesus?" further misleads the adherents of both Christianity and Judaism from the truth. Christians continue to skirt the implications of their Jewish heritage for their faith and their relationship with the Jews. Jews, by responding defensively, only legitimize the falsifying of history that has allowed Christians for so long to regard them as the "Other." . . . .

. . . . New Passion plays, such as Mel Gibson's movie, only further mask the historical truth and do nothing positive for relations between Christians and Jews. The Church and Christian leaders need to set their own history and relationship with the Jews straight, not by readdressing, or compelling Jews to readdress, "Who killed Jesus?" but by finally teaching their adherents the undeniable truth about Christian origins. Empathy for the suffering of Jesus the Jew might then be transformed into a truly meaningful lesson.

Stuart S. Miller is Associate Professor of Hebrew, History, and Judaic Studies at the University of Connecticut at Storrs.

Update (7 January 2006): thanks to Stuart Miller for notifying me of the revised URLs for the above: access "article" and letter (PDF).

---

Greg Bloomquist emails me to point out that the late Tony Fisher's Greek New Testament pages have encountered a problem -- one always gets an "Error! Database is busy . . ." message. I have written to a contact in the York University computing department in the hope that this can be fixed. It may be that in the long term we should approach York with a view to taking over the site so that it can be maintained on a more day-to-day basis. I will post any updates here. In the mean time, the Online Greek Bible provides a similar service if one is doing a simple search. That site is superior in one way -- it provides varieties of fonts for display, including unicode, but it is not able to tackle the more complex searches that Tony Fisher's site can. Also, I am not keen on the anonymity of the site -- I prefer web authors to be upfront about who they are.

Labels: Unicode

---

This new book has been announced from SCM Press:

Paula Gooder and Peter Kevern,
Exploring New Testament Greek: A Way In

This practical textbook for undergraduate students and serving ministers is specifically designed to teach the reader about New Testament Greek, and to enrich the readers understanding of Scripture. Features a regularly updated companion website with exercises and revision notes.

0334029422 £10.99 OUT MAY 2004

The site features an endorsement from me, indeed the only endorsement currently given there:

"· '… clearly fills a gap in the market.' Mark Goodacre, University of Birmingham"

I should therefore point out that I have not seen this book. I was asked to look at a book proposal in January 2003, and I have looked out my report and see that what I wrote was "This book proposal is a very interesting one, and it would clearly fill a gap in the market." I reported favourably on the book proposal, but listed several potential concerns too. I'll ask SCM if I can now have a look at the book.

---

On Hypotyposeis, Stephen Carlson draws attention to:

Armin Daniel Baum

He is at the Freie Theologische Akademie, Germany and this page features a CV and list of publications. I have added it to the Scholars: B page and have at the same time updated the links to several of the other pages there. (It still amazes me to see how few university sites bother to set up forwards from older pages. It is something I am always nagging about here, often to no avail. At least we have a set of good forwards set up from older pages in the Dept of Theology, but that's because I look after them).

Stephen also refers to one of Baum's articles available for download:

Die Diskussion der Authentizität von Herrenworten in altkirchlicher Zeit [PDF]

Note too several other articles of interest on the Freie Theologische Akademie site:

Artikel zum Download

---

We had a fascinating seminar yesterday in the Graduate Institute for Theology and Religion here in Birmingham. Andy Pryke, from the School of Computer Science gave a paper called:

"Who wrote Paul? Can text analysis based on data compression techniques
(like "winzip") add to our knowledge?"

I will present some preliminary research which applies techniques from computer science and genetic analysis to the text of the letters attributed to Paul. The presentation will show visual representations of the relationships between these documents, and no background in computing is required. Feedback is welcome, particularly on (i) the utility of the method and (ii) the relationship of these results to those of traditional scholarship.

The talk was concise, clearly presented, patiently explaining the computing side of things so that we could all understand, and wanted to enlist the help of those present on the Biblical scholarship side of things.

As I understood it, Andy had applied compression techniques to all the letters in the New Testament in order to ascertain how similar each text was to each text, so that one could see -- for example -- how similar 1 Corinthians is each other letter in the New Testament, then how similar Romans is to each other letter in the New Testament and so on. The use of compression technology like Winzip is useful in this context because it compresses texts by looking for repeated patterns, allowing one to express the compressed text as a number, e.g. "The cat sat on the mat" could be represented as "Θ c@ s@ on Θ m@", thereby reducing the number of necessary symbols from 17 to 10, 0.59. One can then make a direct comparison with another text using the same code, Θ = the, @ = at, and see how similar the chosen text is. "Born of the flesh" could be represented as "Born of Θ flesh" using the same code, reducing the number of necessary symbols from 14 to 12, 0.88, so (obviously) quite different from "the cat sat on the mat". Likewise in the New Testament letters, each text was tested for its relationship to each other text and the degrees of similarity ascertained. The results of the 400+ different relationships can be plotted visually so that one could see where the clustering of similar texts occurred.

The results were interesting. The seven undisputed Paulines appeared to cluster together as very similar texts, but 2 Thessalonians was right there in the mix with them. Ephesians and Colossians were both a bit further away, though similar to each other, and Colossians more similar to the undisputed Paulines than was Ephesians. The Pastorals were way off -- more similar to non-Pauline texts like Hebrews, 1 and 2 Peter than to the undisputed Paulines. And the Pastorals clustered together as similar to each other. The one real anomaly in the results was provided by 1 and 2 John, both of which came out as similar to the undisputed Paulines and less like the other letters in the NT.

---

Thanks to Holger Szesnat for this one. I'm afraid my Russian is non-existent so I have no idea whether this will be a useful site to readers or not:

Bible Studies - Русские страницы

The site has some English content too, including this essay;

Rick Strelan, "Who Was Bar Jesus (Acts 13,6-12)?"

Update (01:28): having looked around the site a bit more now, it seems clear that one of the things it does is to reproduce articles from around the internet. However, there do not appear to be any statements (in English at least) about whether or not permission has been sought. The site includes at least two articles of mine that are reproduced without permission and without any acknowledgement of their original location and this kind of thing is, of course, unacceptable.

---

I took part last night in a Panel Discussion of The Passion of the Christ at the Light-House in Wolverhampton. It was an interesting experience. To be honest, I felt a little over-prepared. The other panelists had seen the film once each and were less familiar with the background than I. My natural enthusiasm, not only for the film but also for the opportunity to engage critically about it, meant that I had to be careful not to talk too much, a tough challenge.

Dr Deirdre Burke from the University of Wolverhampton spoke first. Her view was that the film was deeply disturbing and that there was anti-Semitism here of the kind that was likely to lead to people vandalising synagogues. The Rt. Rev’d Michael Bourke, Anglican Bishop of Wolverhampton, was more positive about the film and said that he had preached on it over the Easter period, but that he was a little concerned about the violence in the film -- graphic depictions of violence in the cinema could lead people to become desensitized to violence in the real world. Dr George Chryssides, also of the University of Wolverhampton, was pretty negative about the film. He felt that it did not stand up well as a piece of history and was misleading on several fronts. I tended to make the kind of points I've made here and in my article. I had just watched the film again and explained that because it engaged me strongly on an emotional and spiritual level, it was harder for me to exercise the kind of critical detachment that I would normally aim for in this kind of context.

Deirdre Burke expressed her concerns about the film in the context of talking about holocaust survivors, so I did point out that Maia Morgenstern, the actress who plays Mary the mother of Jesus, was the daughter of a holocaust survivor and the grandaughter of someone who died at Auschwitz. I still feel that this cannot be lightly brushed aside.

George Chryssides commented that the film was not recognisably set in Jerusalem -- he felt that it looked nothing like it and did nothing to evoke a Jerusalem setting in the viewer's mind. I found this interesting and it did make me realise that there are no long shots of the temple, for example, little that will make the viewer think of the Temple and its architecture.

The audience had widely varying views and seemed pretty representative of the reaction in the general public. Some love it, some hate it. One member of the audience introduced himself as a media studies lecturer and said that he thought the film awful and completely cliché ridden, slow motion, use of flashback etc. Predictably, perhaps, I tried to point out the differences between this film and other Jesus films, and specifically focused on the fascinating phenomenon of seeing events through Jesus' eyes, including seeing the view of the stone rolling back from inside the tomb. In fact I noticed this all the more in the viewing of the film beforehand -- there are many scenes on the road to Calvary where one is clearly seeing events as Jesus himself sees them, shaky camera and all. And during the scourging, it is Jesus who sees the devil and the demonic baby.

---

As regular readers will know, I have commented here several times on the way that the character of Simon of Cyrene, played by Jarreth Merz, is depicted in The Passion of the Christ. To take an excerpt from my recent article, The Passion, Pornography and Polemic, for example, I commented:

At this point, when the viewer is strongly identifying with him, Simon is directly castigated by one of the Roman guards as “Jew!” This is the only character (other than Jesus who is called “King of the Jews”) in the entire film who is specifically characterised as a Jew. The point is important, not least given the fact that some critics of The Passion of the Christ have imported terminology into the film that is not found there. The film does not once, for example, castigate those in opposition to Jesus as “the Jews”, in spite of repeated assertions to the contrary. Moreover, the positive depiction of Simon of Cyrene as a Jew is clearly not accidental. This scene in The Passion of the Christ is largely dependent on Catherine Emmerich’s Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, especially Simon’s exhortations to the soldiers to stop. But where she makes Simon a pagan, Gibson insists that his heroic figure was a Jew.

Evy Nelson now emails me with a less positive take on the depiction of Simon:

Yes, Simon of Cyrene is called "Yehuda," but so is someone else, done so, by my reading, in contradistinction. One personifies as a type the Jew who fails to go the distance w/Jesus and therefore ends in despair and destruction. As I witnessed Simon's character development, I sensed that he represents the Jew who begins to understand who Jesus is and embraces that revelation, whereupon he casts aside his Jewish observance.

Stick w/me on this one. When Simon is first impressed, he is wearing a skull cap not unlike modern-day kippot (whether men did or did not wear such in 30 CE is, as I see it, a moot point; what matters in Gibson's Passion envisioning is how this item of clothing as symbol is realized) and at least one of his outer garments is striped in such a way that many Jews watching the film have identified it as a tallit, an item that we all recognize as a primary sign of Jewish belief and observance. These items he continues to wear as he, forcedly, assists Jesus in carrying the cross. When Jesus falls and is yet again brutalized by the Roman guard, Simon, right before he defiantly defends Jesus, casts off his outer garments, tallit presumably included. The camera clearly shows the clothing lying ignobly in the dust . . . .

. . . . . Is Gibson trying to communicate a subtext regarding Judaism here? Well, if you see the film again, notice that as Simon launches into his castigation, we are suddenly presented w/finely dressed men w/ostentatious tallit in the background of the scene. However, if Gibson is not consciously trying to communicate a subtext of antagonism or offense, then the nature of the scene is one that, nonethelss, can leave a Jew feeling uneasy. It is for reasons like this that Gibson should have, in my opinion, enlisted Jewish insight.

As for the skull cap, that too is lost at the point Simon completes his task on Calvary. If you watch the film again, notice how head coverings on men figure in the presentation of characters. Contrast, for example, the disciples at the Last Supper--nary a head covering--w/the multitude demanding Jesus' crucifixion. Even Sanhedrin member Joseph of Arimathea is without head covering when he attends in the lowering of Jesus' body from the cross.

I am grateful for this alternative, interesting take on the film. And let me reiterate that I do have some concerns with the film's perspective on and depiction of elements in the Passion narrative, concerns that may well have been less if Gibson had indeed, as Evy suggests, "enlisted Jewish insight". I hold to the view I have often expressed that Gibson was mistaken in not enlisting the help of an advisory committee of scholars from different backgrounds of the kind that The Gospel of John so wisely used. Having said that, I am not convinced that Simon's loss of his clothing is significant. It seems unlikely to me that it is intended to communicate any significant subtext regarding Judaism except in our initial viewing of Simon, it serves to affirm all the more strongly his Jewish identity. I have had a chance to think carefully about this and happily, Evy's email arrived yesterday, not long before I went to see the film for the third time, so I had a chance to watch the scene carefully. I must admit that I had not noticed the features Evy refers to before. My reasons for not finding the loss of clothing significant are twofold. First, it seems to me that it is simply that Simon is struggling with the cross, the violence and everything else. His loss first of some clothing and subsequently his hat / skull cap is a bit of realism -- he's been struggling with this heavy cross and with the trauma of the trudge to Calvary and it would be unrealistic to expect all his clothing to remain in tact. It seems reasonable to me to assume that his loss of his outer garments is not religiously significant. It is about verisimilitude. Second, the all important charge of "Judaeus!" (Jew!) comes after the loss of his outer garment. The film-makers have located the line that specifically encourages the viewer to think about Simon's Jewish identity after the point at which he loses some of his clothing. If there is any intention to convey a subtle anti-Jewish message here, then I think the film fails and works against itself. Where I think the issue of the clothing is interesting, and I am grateful to Evy because I had not thought about this before, is that it encourages the viewer to think all the more strongly about Simon's Jewish identity. And this is striking in the light of the fact that the source material, Catherine Emmerich's Dolorous Passion, Chapter 33, uses the clothing to signify to the reader that Simon was not Jewish:

At this moment Simon of Cyrene, a pagan, happened to pass by . . . . The soldiers perceiving by his dress that he was a pagan" (emphasis added).

I am grateful for the opportunity to have thought some more about this scene. I should also point out that Evy Nelson has an article on Christianity Today called The Latest Temptation of Christians.

---

The Ecole Biblique web site announces the sad news that Marie-Émile Boismard died on 23 April:

Fr. Marie-Émile Boismard, o. p. (1916-2004): Notice Nécrologique

This full obituary is written by Jerome Murphy O'Connor and reports on Boismard's life and research. There is a bibliography at the end.

Update (30 April): URL has now changed to:

Fr. Marie-Émile Boismard, o. p. (1916-2004): Notice Nécrologique

Labels: obituaries

---

On a recent blog entry on Hypotyposeis, Stephen Carlson makes some interesting comments on Alan Garrow's forthcoming book, The Gospel of Matthew's Dependence on the Didache, and adds, "the $120 retail price from T&T Clark in that series may mean waiting until the SBL Annual Meeting". I am sure that it is worth mentioning that T and T Clark International are continuing with Sheffield Academic Press's tradition of providing half-price on hardback books in the JSNTS that are not otherwise available in paperback. This is an excerpt from a recent letter sent out with the recent T and T Clark International catalogue in March (page numbers refer to the current catalogue):

Our scholar’s discount scheme enables you to buy titles published in the following leading research series at half the normal retail price:

• Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplements (see pages 4-10)
• Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements (see pages 13-17)
• Library of Second Temple Studies (formally Journal for the Study of Pseudepigrapha Supplements) (see pages 22-23)

Now collectively known as the T&T Clark Library of Biblical Scholarship, these series offer the very latest research in all aspects of Biblical Studies, including innovative work from historical perspectives, studies using social-scientific and literary theory, and developing theological, cultural and contextual approaches.

Signing up for scholar’s discount is easy. Either e-mail us your details at newbooks@continuumbooks.com or visit our new website www.tandtclark.com and register on-line.

By registering for scholar’s discount you are entitled to 50% off all hardback volumes in The T&T Clark Library of Biblical Scholarship AND you qualify for special offers on countless new and backlist titles.

As far as I can see one can not yet register on-line, so it looks like the best route is the email one. But I have written to T & T Clark International to enquire further about the possibility of their adding a registering service for this discount on their new site and I will report on any update here. I should perhaps add in this context that I have recently accepted an invitation to become editor of the Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement series and will report further on this in due course.

---

The latest email from Ben Witherington III has been added to beliefnet's Scholarly Smackdown on Jesus and Paul conducted between Elaine Pagels and Ben Witherington III. This time the order is reversed and Ben Witherington contributes first:

Scholarly Smackdown Round 3: Ben Witherington III

His topic is Gnosticism and the canon. Was there any fully-fledged Gnosticism in the first century? Witherington says no. There's one useful bit of bibliography, something I had missed: Craig Evans, "Thomas, Gospel of" in R. P. Martin and P. H. Davids (eds.), Dictionary of the Later New Testament and its Development (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 1997): 1176.

I'm still not sure if this format is conducive to really decent critical engagement. The problem I mentioned before is exacerbated by reversing the order of engagement in this round so that here Witherington if effectively starting afresh. There's not enough actual conversation here.

Labels: Elaine Pagels

---

Thanks to Arne Halbakken for this link from WorldNetDaily

Jewish activists: Apologize to Mel
Posted: April 24, 2004
By Rabbi Daniel Lapin

Even the most hostile critic must concede that just as depraved films stimulate degenerate imitation, so do uplifting films stimulate noble behavior. That is certainly what has been happening with "The Passion." Wouldn't it be uplifting and even noble were the Jewish groups who earlier had insulted "The Passion," its maker, the Gospels that inspired it and indeed all Christians, now to issue an apology?

Wouldn't it be refreshing if those who earlier warned of anti-Jewish violence because "Gibson is spouting classic anti-Semitism" would now say contritely, "We were just plain wrong"? How about a "We're sorry" from those who threatened, "Mel Gibson's mouth has turned into a lethal weapon." Instead, what they are now saying is, "Just wait till those Muslims see 'The Passion.'"

One of the things that concerns me about the piece is the implication that it was only "Jewish groups" who were concerned about The Passion of the Christ. Many of the film's most vociferous critics have not been Jewish; and the famous "ad hoc committee", as Paula Fredriksen has tried to make clear, had as many Catholics on it as Jews. Still, Lapin appears to be right that the "dire warnings" turn out not to have been justified.

---

Some new additions (and one update) to the Gospel of John Books and Articles page. These are all Word documents and are from Jeffrey Staley's homepage. Thanks to John Urquhart for alerting me to the new URL for the second of these items:

Jeffrey L. Staley, Reading with a Passion: Rhetoric, Autobiography, and the American West in the Gospel of John (New York: Continuum, 1995), full text of the pre-publication chapters.

Jeffrey L. Staley, “What Can a Postmodern Approach to the Fourth Gospel Add to Contemporary Debates About its Historical Situation?” in Robert Fortna and Thomas Thatcher (eds.), Jesus in the Johannine Tradition: New Directions (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001)

Jeffrey L. Staley, “Liar Liar and ‘This Woman’ in John 7:1-8:59: From Rhetorical Analysis to Intertextual Rereading” in Amy M. Donaldson and Timothy B. Sailors (eds.), New Testament Greek and Exegesis: Festschrift in Honor of Gerald F. Hawthorne (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003)

---

Another addition to the Historical Jesus: Books and Articles page:

Scot McKnight, “Jesus and the Twelve”, IBR Studies (no date), Institute for Biblical Research web site

---

I am going to make up for being late on this last week by noting the latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature as soon as it's out. These are just the titles directly related to the NT:

The United Bible Society's New Testament Handbook Series
Reviewed by Susan Lochrie Graham

Bøe, Sverre
Gog and Magog: Ezekiel 38-39 as Pre-Text for Revelation 19, 17-21 and 20, 7-10
Reviewed by Michael Barram

Davis, Stephan K.
The Antithesis of the Ages: Paul's Reconfiguration of Torah
Reviewed by Gary D. Salyer

Gathercole, Simon J.
Where Is Boasting?: Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in Romans 1-5 Reviewed by H. H. Drake Williams III

Koester, Craig R.
Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community
Reviewed by Steven A. Hunt

Patte, Daniel and Eugene TeSelle, eds.
Engaging Augustine on Romans: Self, Context, and Theology in Interpretation
Reviewed by Martin Ramey

Theissen, Gerd and Dagmar Winter
Translated by M. Eugene Boring
The Quest for the Plausible Jesus: The Question of Criteria
Reviewed by John Byron

Witherington, Ben III and Laura M. Ice
The Shadow of the Almighty: Father, Son, and Spirit in Biblical Perspective
Reviewed by Seung-Ai Yang

Labels: Simon Gathercole

---

A forthcoming book of interest in the JSNTS series:

Alan Garrow, The Gospel of Matthew's Dependence of Didache (London and New York: T & T Clark International, 2004).

Abstract:

This book maps the relationship between Matthew's Gospel
and the Didache.

While scholars agree that some form of relationship between these two texts must exist, no consensus regarding the precise nature of this relationship has yet been agreed. At the same time, serious consideration has never been given to the possibility that Matthew's Gospel was written with direct knowledge of a text substantially similiar to the single extant manuscript of the Didache.

If it may be shown that Matthew had direct knowledge of the Didache, then a number of significant implications follow, for example: new evidence is brought to bear on the Synoptic Problem; insight is gained into the pattern of first century Christian liturgical practice and belief; and a detail is uncovered in the story of Gentile incorporation into the Jewish form of the Jesus movement.

The book has an excellent accompanying web site:

Didache Garrow

It is run by the author, Alan Garrow and designed around the principle of a cube, with the main cube leading off to several different cubes. It takes a little while to get used to navigating your way around this web site, and you might find yourself making several false moves, but it's a fun idea and I'm all in favour of nice new ideas like this. The site includes details about the book, the author, background information, sample chapters, coloured texts and so on. A great example to others on the innovative use of the web to act as a companion to a monograph.

---

Andrew Gregerman emails with the note that in my Featured Links: July 2001 I had a bunch of references to the FindArticles.com reproductions of Harvard Theological Review. I have been gradually stripping these away from the site, but had missed this page. I've now added a note there.

---

Don't forget to look at the latest Explorator from David Meadows:

Explorator 6.52

One paragraph from New York Times linked there caught my interest:

Arts Briefing
By Lawrence Van Gelder

It includes some comments on the American newspaper coverage of The Passion of the Christ:

According to the initial findings of a study by the College of Communications at Marquette University, a Jesuit institution, most articles that it categorized as straight news reports were either neutral or positive. Reaction to the film, about the last hours of Jesus, became more negative in editorials, reviews, critiques and feature articles. The preliminary report, part of a larger study of newspaper coverage in all 50 states, said that besides addressing general religious themes, the press tended to focus on anti-Semitism, violence and historical accuracy.

Yes, I would say that that was my impression too -- those were the three areas around which the comments have coalesced.

[And thanks too to David Meadows for a link to my article on The Passion]

---

I am so used to linking to and commenting on others' reviews and articles about The Passion of the Christ that it feels odd to point to something I've written myself. I hope that readers will not think me self-indulgent to do so. The latest article to be added to the Essays from Bible and Interpretation on The Passion is the following (with American spelling):

The Passion, Pornography and Polemic:
In Defense of The Passion of the Christ
By Mark Goodacre
April 2004

If you recognise sections of it, it will be because parts are adapted from blog entries here. But the majority of the article, about three-quarters of its 4,500 words, is new.

---

Geza Vermes's article from The Guardian on The Passion of the Christ (see blog entry on) has now been reproduced on the Bible and Interpretation web site as part of their section Essays from Bible and Interpretation on The Passion:

Celluloid Brutality
Mel Gibson's film about Christ is horribly gory, historically wrong - and it will inspire judeophobia
By Geza Vermes
Friday February 27, 2004
The Guardian

---

On Paleojudaica, Jim Davila has some interesting and insightful comments on The Passion of the Christ:

REVIEW of Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ

Jim comments that "Speaking of Greek, it's strange that the sign on the cross only had the Latin inscription and one in Aramaic", which contrasts with John 19.20 which mentions Greek too. Jim suspects "some pre-Vatican II, pro-Latin Mass agenda here". This is an interesting point -- the lack of Greek in the film as a whole is sharply focused in this context where John 19.20 is clearly the source. It has me wondering how other Jesus films deal with the titulus. One of the difficulties it presents is that it can make the titutuls pretty big. Jesus of Nazareth (dir. Franco Zeffirelli, 1977) certainly has the full Johannine titulus with Greek, Latin and Hebrew but I am struggling to think of any other Jesus films that do. Here is a link to a picture of the cross with the full titulus from Jesus of Nazareth:

Jesus of Nazareth: cross with titulus

I would imagine that the recent Gospel of John (dir. Philip Saville, 2003) must have it, but I don't specifically remembering noticing it. I'll check.

Jim also comments:

I don't believe that anyone could take that amount of flogging and then get up again and walk for any distance, let alone do so carrying a heavy cross. Jesus would have gone into shock during or just after the flogging and would not have been of much use after that. Given the level of sanitation, nutrition, and medical care at the time, he probably would have died from the flogging alone.

The one thing I wonder here is over Josephus' description of Jesus ben Ananias in War 6.5.11, someone who was whipped under the Roman procurator Albinus until his bones were laid bare and yet who still, apparently, survives this appalling torture. Of course Josephus' description might well be exaggerated, but I do not think it implausible that the scourging of Jesus could have contributed to his relatively quick death on the cross (cf. also Jim's comment to this effect). The evangelists do not agree on whether it was three hours or six, but either way this is relatively speedy by the standards of ancient crucifixions, and apparently quicker than the death of the two robbers or brigands whose legs had to be broken according to John.

I agree with Jim about the level of realism and share the feeling over the comparison with, say, the second season of 24 (which was, nevertheless, great television). The comment that "At least The Passion didn't involve that kind of cartoon violence" contrasts a bit with Paul Flesher's "Mel's Jesus: A 'Real Man' or Just a Toon?".

Jim's remarks that "The crucifixion scene in the movie is physically impossible" seem pretty well founded and are worth reading; I had not thought about the pull of the hands on the nails and the looseness of the tieing, which I had not noticed. On the latter, compare the picture of the crucifixion in Jesus of Nazareth above, also pretty loose tieing of the ropes along with crucifixion through the palms.

I thought Jim's comments on the alleged anti-Semitism fairly balanced; I have written on this in a little more detail now in an article on Bible and Interpretation. As I also comment there, I could not agree more with Jim's "wish [that] he had worked with an advisory team of specialists". And finally, I think Jim's suggestion that the Satan in the film resembled the grim reaper in Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey makes more sense than Bruce Chilton's absurd suggestion of Dr Evil and mini-me from Austin Powers (see blog entry on).

---

A new addition to the Historical Jesus: Books and Articles page:

Robert L. Webb, “Jesus' Baptism: Its Historicity and Implications”, IBR Studies (no date), Institute for Biblical Research web site.

---

David Instone-Brewer has uploaded to the web the latest of his Tyndale Tech newsletters (with thanks to Jim Davila on Paleojudaica for the alert). The topic is unicode, and especially unicode for Hebrew. As ever, it is full of useful bits and bobs:

Greek and Hebrew Fonts: Unicode and Older

I think my own experience of working with unicode is more positive than David's and for two reasons, first that I work with Greek a lot but Hebrew only a little and second that I work with PCs and not Macs. There are a few things I would add from my own experience and which may prove helpful to others:

(1) Palatino Linotype: if you are running Windows 2000 or XP you arleady have a unicode font installed called Palatino Linotype. This includes a Greek character set (not all unicode fonts do) and it looks excellent on both screen and paper. The reason that this is worth mentioning is that if you are running Windows 2000 or XP and require a really good Greek font, then you don't have to do anything.

(2) Inputting the text. This is the big issue. I have been using this excellent facility for some time now:

Unicode Classical Greek Inputter

This is designed by James Naughton and provides a very straightforward facility for you to type in unicode and then to copy and paste into your document. You can choose your preferred font (Arial Unicode MS, Cardo, Gentium, Palatino Linotype etc.). If you prefer mouse-clicking to typing, you can do that too. An additional advantage of this web page is that you can save it onto your hard drive and access it whenever or wherever you want, without being connected to the internet. So it's worth saving now while one has the chance -- it might not be there in a year's time!

(3) Quotations from the Greek New Testament: If in a given document you are simply writing out quotations from the Greek New Testament, there is no need to type this afresh. Here there are several options:

(a) Search or browse on The Unbound Bible, choosing "NA26, Accents (Unicode)" and copy and paste the results into your document.

(b) Do the same at the Online Greek Bible, choosing either "Athena" or "Palatino Linotype".

(c) Go to James Naughton's Unicode Classical Greek page and download the complete text of the Greek New Testament in an HTML help file or PDF. The advantage of this is that you can store it locally and use off-line.

Update (19.23): Paul Nikkel comments in Deinde on the Tyndale Tech email and the comments in Paleojudaica. He comments that "Actually the current Mac OS has Unicode support and as far as I know has had it since OS 8.5 or so. Also, contrary to the Tyndale article OpenType fonts are supported on the Mac OS X as far as I know, Mac Developers Article." Read more . . . . .

Update (Saturday, 22.24): Rubén Gómez comments in Biblical Software Review Weblog.

Update (Saturday, 22.32): Jim Davila comments in Paleojudaica. Minor note: Jim comments on Deinde, "If there's a way to link to individual posts on his site, I couldn't find it". You click on the "View comments" link and that gives you an URL for that post plus any subsequent comments on it.

Labels: Tyndale Tech, Unicode

---

The latest addition to the Historical Jesus: Books and Articles page is this article from my former teacher John Ashton of the University of Oxford, with thanks to David Mackinder for alerting me to this:

John Ashton, “The Religious Experience of Jesus”, 2002-03 James Lecture, Harvard Divinity School, in Harvard Divinity Bulletin 32/1 (Fall/Winter 2003): 17-20. [View whole issue in PDF]

---

The media can't get enough of John Dominic Crossan at the moment. This one, alerted in Bible and Interpretation, is from the Daily News:

Crossan examination: Jesus scholar looks at 'Passion' and politics of Christ
By Alexander Stevens / CNC Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004

"I've written about 20 books and I've gone on book tours, but I don't think I've ever had this kind of media attention," he says, on the phone from his home in Florida. "It's all because of this movie." . . . . .

. . . . . "I think he gored-up the movie," says Crossan. "No scholar has any evidence that the soldiers that scourged Jesus were sadistic brutes who thoroughly enjoyed their work, as opposed to soldiers just doing their job, and wanting to get it over and have a beer." . . . .

. . . . . . "By simply taking the last 12 hours of Jesus' life, he's made it seem as if the entire crowd of Jerusalem is against Jesus," says Crossan. "So here's what you've got (in the movie): You've got non-Christian Jews, and they're all bad, and you've got Christian Jews (such as Mary Magdelene and the Virgin Mary), and they're all good.

"Everywhere else I look, Jews are bad," he adds. "They're jeering Jesus all the way to the crucifixion. I don't see why Jews who, even if they dislike Jesus, would like what the Romans are doing to him.

I think that the problem with this is that it is inaccurate -- it does not accurately describe the way that the film depicts the journey to the cross. On the comment that "No scholar has any evidence that the soldiers that scourged Jesus were sadistic brutes", I would want to point out the evidence from Josephus, War 5.11 which suggests just this, that soldiers could be brutal and sadistic ("wrath and hatred . . . . by way of jest") in the act of crucifixion. It is not a far cry from that to imagining they could be the same way in scourging a victim.

---

The Light House in Wolverhampton (U.K.) has an event on next Tuesday following one of its screenings of The Passion of the Christ and I'll be taking part along with several others:

PANEL DISCUSSION: THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (18)
Tues 27 April, 6.45pm
Mel Gibson’s film has caused a great deal of interest, from Christians and from people of other faiths and none. There have been comments about the role of cinema in evangelism, the search for authenticity by the use of Latin and Aramaic and accusations of anti-Semitism. An opportunity to hear a variety of views about the film and to express your own opinions. The panel will include: The Rt. Rev’d Michael Bourke Anglican Bishop of Wolverhampton, Dr George Chryssides and Dr Deirdre Burke Religious Studies Lecturers at the University of Wolverhampton, Len Brandes former President of the Jewish Congregation in Wolverhampton and Dr Mark Goodacre from the Graduate Institute for Theology & Religion at Birmingham University.
Cost: free. All welcome.

Further details available here.

---

Both Rubén Gómez on Bible Software Review Weblog and Jim West on Biblical Theology refer to this list:

Top Ten Bible News sites

It's located on Theology.me.uk, a site devoted to Theology discussion and resources. It's a useful site, currently anonymous, though I do happen to know the person who runs it. It is nice to see this blog in the list above, but there are noticeable absentees, most particularly Paleojudaica, which was the inspiration for me to get going in the first place and is without doubt one of the top biblioblogs. Although the list is at the moment effectively limited to blogs, I'd also want to reference at the top Bible and Interpretation. Although new on the scene, Deinde certainly looks like it is going to be a very useful resource too.

---

Bible and Interpretation link to a short but interesting article on John Dominic Crossan in Wisconsin's Capital Times:

Author stresses 4 different Gospels
By Phil Haslanger
April 20, 2004

There are one or two great lines, including ""I would define a fundamentalist as one who doesn't like the way that God organized the Gospels". He also claims that "It's the multiplicity of the Gospel that crowns my work".

---

Robert Gundry has a very interesting letter in the current SBL Forum:

Letters to the Editor

The letter (more of a short article) is headed The Burden of the Passion and you will need to scroll down a little to read it. Although it is not mentioned by name, he is responding directly to Paula Fredriksen's article in the previous month's SBL Forum entitled History, Hollywood, and the Bible: Some Thoughts on Gibson's Passion. This much is clear from his reference to "scholars [who] accuse Gibson of reading the Gospels through the contra Iudaeos tradition". It is all worth reading, but a couple of excerpts anyway. On Pilate:

. . . . we also know from outside the New Testament that he yielded to Jewish pressure on at least one occasion earlier than Jesus' trial (Josephus, Antiquities 18.55-59; War 2.169-74). Pilate's position was precarious . . . . and Pilate himself had complaints lodged against him (Philo, Embassy 299-305; Josephus, Antiquities 18.85-89), the latter of which led to his own deposition. So he had reason to get the jitters and cave in. And since he did cave in despite his belief in Jesus' innocence . . . . he himself does not look innocent in the least.

On the violence:

In this light, the nearly interminable beating of Jesus does not have the look of gratuitous violence in the sadomasochistic mode. Not at all! Its very length and brutality are designed to test the ability of Jesus to carry "the whole burden of sin" and prove Satan wrong. Unbelievers may not like this theology. It may disgust them. But believers or not, reviewers only expose their theological insensitivity to call the violence inflicted on Jesus "gratuitous."

On Satan:

Satan has a comeuppance too. When Jesus dies having successfully borne the weight of the whole world's sin, Satan collapses on the site of Jesus' death-and shrieks. Why? Because that is what demons do when exorcised, when cast out. Shortly before his passion Jesus said, "Now is the prince of this world cast out." Exorcistic language if there ever was such! Satan has had his/her day; but thanks to Jesus' burden-bearing, that day is over.

I didn't think it was "the site of Jesus' death"; but I will have another look when I see it again next week. Also interesting is Gundry's interpretation of the portrayal of the effeminate Herod Antipas. Someone should encourage Gundry to write a full article developing some of his fascinating insights on the film, if they have not already done so.

Incidentally, on reading Fredriksen's article again, it looks like it was written before she saw the film. She refers explicitly only to material she viewed in the earlier version of the script that was read by the "ad hoc committee" and (twice) to the film's trailer. There is nothing in this article that would require knowledge of the film itself.

---

Also on Deinde, news of a response to the AAR Joint Meetings Petition headed by Karen King and Elaine Pagels. It seems that the petition has been unsuccessful. Deinde references Ryan's Lair for a copy of the announcement, which has it under the heading Excellent news from the AAR. The gist of it is that there is no change about the fundamental decision to discontinue joint meetings with the Society of Biblical Literature from 2008, but that a "task force" will be set up to look at the "implementation" of the decision. Additionally, "the Board instructed the executive director to begin exploring the possibility of holding periodic concurrent meetings with other relevant associations" including the SBL.

There is no report from this meeting yet on the AAR Web Site, though I was interested to read the AAR's FAQ about the decision, including answers to the questions "What was the AAR Board's process for making this decision, and why didn't you seek the opinions of members?" and "Is it accurate that the AAR did not consult with the SBL before making this decision?". Both of these FAQs date back to last July. Effectively their answer to the second question is "No".

Update: Jim Davila comments in Paleojudaica and concludes that "The response of the Board of Directors is not satisfactory. With respect, this is not over yet." It certainly seems extraordinary to me that the membership of AAR were not consulted about this major decision.

Labels: Elaine Pagels

---

On Deinde "Tsar" makes some useful comments on Harold Scanlin's The Myth of the Paperless Church: Codex, Cognition and Christianity (mentioned here yesterday):

The Myth of Paper

I agree with the characterisation of the article:

While the majority of his article considers the codex and its effect on canon, he starts off by writing about the myth of the paperless office, which comes from the identically titled book by Sellen and Harper. Unfortunately, although he starts with this paragraph and names his article in line with it he doesn't dwell on this issue as it is relevant now.

Yes. Although the article is interesting, the title leads one to expect something slightly different. Scanlin begins by talking about paper's affordances as a reason for the unlikelihood that it will decline in importance. Tsar comments:

It is true that the electronic medium we have today is a poor substitute for the affordances of paper, but to be fair it is only recently that the affordances of this media have started to be realized. The trend since the 70's has been to recreate the properties of paper in an electronic format. Recently though the trend has shifted to understanding and applying the advantages of the electronic medium, such as XML format documents, wikis, dynamically generated pages among others. The important point here is that the strengths of electronic medium are not in the end user/content interaction but in the creation and transmission of the texts, precisely the areas that are of interest to Scanlin in his article but which he leaves unexplored.

One comment on the format of Deinde: it is a great deal easier to read on its blog-style main page than it is on its forum-style subpages. I wonder if all of the forum-style material could also be brought in to the main page with a permalink? Also, my own preference is to know who is writing what. The comments are intelligent and it would be nice to know who "Tsar" is.

---

Part 2 of Stephen Carlson's reflections on The Passion of the Christ is now available on Hypotyposeis. The topic is the question of the film's historical inaccuracies:

My Thoughts on The Passion of the Christ (2 of 3)

---

This notice is posted on behalf of Dapo Asaju. Please correspond with him at the address below.

17th Annual Conference of Nabis
--------------------------------------------------------------------
THEME: DECOLONIZING BIBLICAL STUDIES IN AFRICA
Place- Lagos State University, Ojoo, Lagos State, Nigeria.
Date- July 6-9th 2004

Full details available at:
http://www.nabis.8m.com

This is for the Nigerian Association for Biblical Studies. Dr Asaju is
hosting the conference in his University and enquiries, correspondences,
topics of proposed papers etc should be sent to

Dr. Dapo Asaju
Department of Religions,
Lagos State University, Nigeria
dapoasaju@yahoo.co.uk

I have also added a link to the Nigerian Association for Biblical Studies on the Societies page of the NT Gateway.

---

Thanks to Gail Dawson for the link to this article from The Tower Online, the newsletter for the Catholic University of America (free registration required):

Moloney: 'Scene After Scene is Just Wrong' in Passion Film
Portrayal of Jews is 'So Massively Negative,' Says TRS Dean
By Ryan Schanberger
Published: Friday, March 26, 2004

The themes of the critique will be familiar to most by now, the depiction of Pontius Pilate, the harmonizing of the Gospels, Jesus' carrying the whole cross while the thieves carry the crossbeams and so on:

I didn't like it as a movie," he said, criticizing the violence that "goes on, and on, and on." According to Moloney, the film lacked "narrative tension," and seemed the same all the way through. "In fact, I nearly fell asleep during the way of the cross."

"It's just historically wrong -- it's not what actually happened," Moloney said . . .

There are also some comments from an event at the Catholic University of America featuring Timothy Friedrichsen, William Loewe, William Dinges and Rabbi Jack Moline.

---

I have had a look around and have found a web page for Paul Flesher (see Flesher lecture on The Passion of the Christ):

Introducing Paul Flesher

A couple of the links are dead; for one the correct link can be found here: Wyoming Web Lectures on Religion. This is a project to provide full on-line lectures in real-media from key figures like Jacob Neusner and Rosemary Radford Ruether. This is a great idea and has obviously inspired the provision of Flesher's lecture on The Passion of the Christ.

Thanks to those who have informed me that standing to lecture is the norm among able-bodied Americans. Note that his web page provides a picture of Flesher standing to teach too.

---

On Scholars: M I have added a link to the following:

Troy W. Martin
St Xavier University, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.

The page includes a full list of publications.

One of Troy Martin's articles is available on-line in BSW's electronic version of Filología Neotestamentaria:

Troy W. Martin, "The ambiguities of a 'baffling expression'" (Gal 4:12), Filología Neotestamentaria 12 (1999): 123-138

---

On Paleojudaica Jim Davila draws attention to The Journal of Religion and Society 6 (2004), a special edition on The Passion of the Christ. It may be worth adding that the same material also features in the Journal of Religion and Film 8 Special Issue no. 1 (February 2004). The Journal of Religion and Society version has the advantage of some PDF versions of the articles. The Journal of Religion and Film version has added five articles reproduced from the SBL Forum for March, by Nicola Denzey, Paula Fredriksen, John Dart, Frances Flannery-Dailey and Paul Flesher and Robert Torry. Unfortunately, there are a couple of articles from that edition of the SBL Forum not there reproduced, those by Gregory Allen Robbins and W. Barnes Tatum. Having said that, the useful thing about the addition of the SBL articles is that it provides some material written after the film has been viewed. The disappointing thing with the material from the Creighton symposium is that it is all from before the film has been viewed by any of the contributors. Perhaps they will have a follow-up featuring responses to the film?

---

When commenting on Waco earlier today, I noticed that James Tabor has flagged up a new entry on his Jewish Roman World of Jesus:

Personal Reflections on My Viewing of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ"
James Tabor

One or two comments, though these will be familiar already to regular readers of this blog:

Jesus carried this unbelievably huge full cross, just like in all the traditional paintings, and at times that part of the film bordered on the ridiculous. This portrait, however appealing to tradition, is unsupported in either the Gospels (Greek word stauros means stake) or what we know of Roman history. It is worth noting that the two “thieves,’ crucified with Jesus, as this film portrayed things, had only to carry the “cross beam” to which the arms would be tied or nailed, not the entire cross. This would be in keeping with Roman practice, so why have Jesus bend and break for nearly 30 minutes of the film, carrying a “cross” that surely would have weighed over 100 lbs. Here, as in other places, presumably Gibson read his English Bible where the term “cross” is used, and guided by Sister Emmerich’s visions and Church tradition, decided that this was the way things were.

The source for Jesus carrying the whole cross rather than the cross beam is the report in the Synoptics that Simon of Cyrene helped with carrying Jesus' cross, something that has informed the traditional Christian depiction.

Tabor also writes, with reference to the article by Joe Zias:

Gibson also had Jesus’ nailed to the cross in the hands and feet, rather than through the wrists and the heel bones, as we know was actually the case.

But do we "know" this? The Zias article suggests that this particular victim's arms were tied -- he was not nailed through the wrists or hands. And we do not know, of course, how typical this one victim was. Josephus' evidence in War 5.11 is that victims were crucified in a variety of poses. In fact that passage is interesting also for another element in The Passion of the Christ:

So the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest, when their multitude was so great, that room was wanting for the crosses, and crosses wanting for the bodies. [Courtesy of James Tabor, Josephus' References to Crucifixion]

I am interested here in that phrase "by way of jest", something that shows that the horrifying depiction of Roman soldiers deriving pleasure from torturing Jesus may not be far off the mark. It is a truly chilling thought.

Tabor also comments on the fact that it would normally take days for the victims to die and that crucifying victims involved making sure that the death was prolonged and agonising. But there is one thing here that is interesting in Jesus' case -- that the Gospels record that Jesus' death was relatively quick (six hours in the Synoptics and three in John). In John, the two other men needed to have their legs broken to bring about a speedier death.

Tabor also comments that "Not a single Jew is presented with any kind of character development". I think that this is incorrect, as regular readers will know. Simon of Cyrene, the only character whose Jewish identity is explicitly commented upon in the film, shows real character development, from reluctance to get involved with a random criminal to exhorting the soldiers to stop the violence.

---

A new addition on the SBL Forum and continuing its digital technologies theme:

The Myth of the Paperless Church: Codex, Cognition, and Christianity
Harold P. Scanlin

---

Bible and Interpretation point to this article in the Texas Catholic Newspaper:

'The Passion of the Christ'
WAS IT AS IT WAS?
Biblical scholars discern fact from artistic license
By BILL HOWARD

The article features the views of Carolyn Osiek (Texas Christian University’s Brite Divinity School); Brian Schmisek (Director of the University of Dallas’ Institute for Religious and Pastoral Studies in Irving); and Dr. Mark A. Chancey (Southern Methodist University). Chancey's views can be read in full in his Bible and Interpretation article An Unacknowledged Passion. In this newspaper review there are some enjoyable comments, especially Osiek's summary:

“Artistically, it gets an ‘A,’ historically a ‘B+’ and theologically a ‘C.’ I recommend it, as long as one keeps a balanced theological mind. If one has never taken seriously the brutality of a Roman crucifixion, this is a good learning experience. . . . If the film will help us understand Jesus’ great act of love and his solidarity with the victims of torture, it is well worthwhile.”

Given many scholars' overreactions to the film, this article overall is quite refreshing, especially the acknowledgement of the artistic value of the film:

“If you want to portray it in cinema, there’s a lot that you want to fill in,” Schmisek said. “I’m not watching the movie thinking that’s the way it really happened. This was an artistic portrayal of (Gibson’s) interpretation. I would think most people know that it’s not a literal portrayal.”

There is also the frequently mentioned criticism about Jesus carrying his own cross:

Osiek and Chancey had difficulty with the carrying of the cross and crucifixion scenes. One of the inconsistencies, according to Osiek, was Jesus carrying the entire cross, whereas the two prisoners carried just the crossbeam. Jesus would likely have carried the crossbeam, she said.

But, as I have pointed out here before, the source for Jesus carrying the entire cross is the role played by Simon of Cyrene who can then carry the cross for Jesus. That is why in the Gospel of John film, with no Simon, one can have Jesus too carrying the crossbeam only.

---

I am a bit late on the latest from the Review of Biblical Literature. Some New Testament reviews:

Gathercole, Simon J.
Where Is Boasting?: Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in Romans 1-5
Reviewed by James P. Sweeney

Lapham, F.
Peter: The Myth, the Man, and the Writings
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas

Lüdemann, Gerd
Paul: The Founder of Christianity
Reviewed by Michael Kaler

Reinhartz, Adele
Befriending the Beloved Disciple: A Jewish Reading of the Gospel of John
Reviewed by Jeffrey S. Siker

Witherington, Ben III, and Laura M. Ice
The Shadow of the Almighty: Father, Son, and Spirit in Biblical Perspective
Reviewed by Ronald R. Clark

Labels: Simon Gathercole

---

This new web site is available:

Deinde: Discussion and Resources for Biblical Scholars

It is run by Paul Nikkel (graduate student at the University of Sheffield), Rafael Rodriguez (graduate student at University of Sheffield) and Danny Zacharias (graduate student at Acadia University under Craig Evans). Paul Nikkel describes it in this way: "The purpose of the site is to provide news and commentary relevant to biblical scholars as well as resources and a place for discussion." Its main layout is in blog style so it would be useful to have an RSS feed. Looks like it could be a valuable web site.

---

Bible and Interpretation's Essays From Bible and Interpretation on the Passion adds a link to a video presentation by Paul Flesher:

“The Passion” as an Icon
By Paul Flesher, Video Presentation, Real Player plug-in
(University of Wyoming: April 2004)

It's a 45 minute lecture. It is an accessible piece; it does not assume any major knowledge of the Bible, and takes one steadily through one Biblical scholar's reflections on the film. At about 20 minutes in he discusses some of the images that come from other Jesus films, citing Jesus Christ Superstar (for Herod Antipas), Last Temptation of Christ and Jesus of Montreal (for the cross falling on Jesus). As far as one can tell it is a recording of some kind of public lecture, with Flesher sitting down to address his audience. (Is this usual among American lecturers?) At about 27 minutes in the lecture finishes and there are some quite interesting questions.

Update (20 April): there is a web page linking to this talk here:

The Passion of the Christ discussion

---

On Hypotyposeis Stephen Carlson has published the first part of his thoughts on The Passion of the Christ:

My thoughts on The Passion of the Christ (1 of 3)

This entry is not showing up in my bloglines subscription, perhaps because it is before Stephen changed the feed, so you may need to go to the link above if you have not already read it. Stephen writes, ""Passion" is not an intellectual understanding but a powerful emotional feeling, and Gibson deftly exploits the medium of film to evoke just such a response in his audience" and he speculates that "It is probably the intensity of viewer's unavoidable emotional reaction that is responsible for stridency of some of the reviews to the film", something I have often wondered myself. He explores the inappropriate use of the term "pornography" in reviews of the film and compares the violence here with the violence in Pulp Fiction and Fargo. I am looking forward very much to Parts 2 and 3.

---

It is good to see Stephen Carlson's Hypotyposeis blog back with a vengeance. If, like me, you read all your blogs via Bloglines, you might have missed several entries. You will need to adjust the feed for Hypotyposeis -- unsubscribe from the old feed and then enter http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/hypotyposeis/atomfeed.xml.

---

Also well worth mentioning is James Tabor and Eugene Gallagher, Why Waco?
Cults and the Battle for Religious Freedom in America (California: University of California Press, 1995). Chapter 1 is available on-line:

What might have been

. . . . A person familiar with the biblical texts could have perceived the situation in wholly different terms from the government's "hostage rescue." For the Branch Davidians, no one was a hostage. The only "rescue" they needed was from the government itself. In their view, the federal agents represented an evil government system, referred to in the book of Revelation as "Babylon." The idea of "surrendering to proper authority," as the government demanded throughout the next seven weeks, was absolutely out of the question for these believers unless or until they became convinced it was what God willed. As they saw it, their group had been wantonly attacked and slaughtered by government agents whom they understood to be in opposition to both God and his anointed prophet David Koresh. Their fate was now in God's hands.

The Waco situation could have been handled differently and possibly resolved peacefully. This is not unfounded speculation or wishful thinking. It is the considered opinion of the lawyers who spent the most time with the Davidians during the siege and of various scholars of religion who understand biblical apocalyptic belief systems such as that of the Branch Davidians. There was a way to communicate with these biblically oriented people, but it had nothing to do with hostage rescue or counterterrorist tactics. Indeed, such a strategy was being pursued, with FBI cooperation, by Phillip Arnold of the Reunion Institute in Houston and James Tabor of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, one of the authors of this book. Arnold and Tabor worked in concert with the lawyers Dick DeGuerin and Jack Zimmerman, who spent a total of twenty hours inside the Mount Carmel center between March 29 and April 4, communicating directly with Koresh and his main spokesperson, Steve Schneider. Unfortunately, these attempts came too late. By the time they began to bear positive results, decisions had already been made in Washington to convince Attorney General Janet Reno to end the siege by force . . . .

Update: See comments from Jim Davila in Paleojudaica.

---

On this day when in 1993 77 cult members died in a fire at their compound in Waco. This morning's Guardian publishes an article from its archive, Funeral pyre at Waco : Two Britons among cult's survivors. Not long ago, Kenneth Newport published a fine book called Apocalypse and Millennium : Studies in Biblical Eisegesis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), Chapter 9 of which is "Waco apocalypse: the Book of Revelation in the Branch Davidian tradition".

More on Waco later.

---

The NTGateway blog is taking a break over the weekend but will be back on Monday. If you are waiting for an email from me at the moment, let me apologise. At the moment correspondence is coming in far, far more quickly than I am able to answer it. I do get to pretty much all correspondence eventually.

---

Bible and Interpretation continues its series of essays on The Passion of the Christ with this one focusing not on the film itself (he has not seen it) but on the related question of Inter Jewish conflict in the Gospels as a way of reacting to the charges concerning anti-Semitism:

Inter-Jewish Conflict and the Passion of Jesus
To argue that the Evangelists all conspired to re-write history, condemning the Jews and exonerating the Romans, seems a little far-fetched
Anthony J. Tomasino

---

This notice posted on behalf of Prof. Philip Esler:

------------------------------
The St Andrews Conference on Old Testament Interpretation and the Social Sciences
Wed 30 June to Sun 4 July 2004

In 1994 St Andrews hosted a conference entitled 'Context and Kerygma: The St Andrews Conference on New Testament Interpretation and the Social Sciences'. Many of the papers presented were subsequently published in Modelling Early Christianity: Social-Scientific Studies of the New Testament in Its Context, edited by Philip F. Esler (London and New York: Routledge, 1995).

Now, a decade later, we are holding a similar conference in St Andrews. It will run from the evening of Wednesday 30th June 2004 to mid morning on Sunday 4th July 2004 and will be entitled 'The St Andrews Conference on Old Testament Interpretation and the Social Sciences.'

Participants will be accommodated in the delightful environment of St Salvator's College (as in 1994) and most papers will be given in or around St Mary's College.

The speaking slots for the conference are now essentially complete (see list of agreed speakers and topics below) and we believe that they will provide a rich exposure to the conference theme, especially for staff and postgraduates interested in social-scientific exegesis. The papers cover many general topics and also studies of particular texts.

The full cost of the conference including accommodation, food (including the Conference dinner) and diversions will be £285. But for those who do not wish to go on outings or attend the final dinner, or are willing to share a room, a cheaper rate (something close to £200) is available for the conference.

Please email Philip F. Esler (pfe@st-andrews.ac.uk) to express interest or for further information.

List of Confirmed Speakers

Mario Aguilar, University of St Andrews, 'Symbolic Wars, Age-Sets and the Anthropology of War in 1 Maccabees'

Marvin Chaney, San Francisco Theological Seminary, San Francisco, USA, 'The Political Economies of Eighth-Century Israel and Judah' (provisional title)

Robert Coote, San Francisco Theological Seminary, San Francisco, USA, 'Tribalism in Ancient Palestine and the Hebrew Bible'

Zeba Crook, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, 'Modelling Exchange in the Biblical Era'

Richard DeMaris and Carolyn Leeb, University of Valparaiso, Indiana, USA, 'Can a Filicide Be a Worthy Judge? Honor, Vow, and Ritual in the Jephthah Story Cycle (Judges 10:6-12:7)'

Adriana Destro and Mauro Pesce, University of Bologna, Italy, 'Levitical Sacrifice in Anthropological Perspective'

John H. Elliott, University of San Francisco, USA, 'Euphemism and Dysphemism in the Biblical Communities and Their Cultural Roots: A Social-Scientific Study of Deut 25:11-12'

Philip F. Esler, University of St Andrews, 'What Solomon's Father Did in the Ammonite War: A Social-Scientific Study of 2 Samuel 10-12'.

Lester Grabbe, University of Hull, 'Prophets Ancient and Modern: Anthropological Insights on Israelite Prophecy'

Anselm Hagedorn, Humboldt-Universität, Berlin, 'Ethnicity and Stereotypes in the Book of Nahum. Social-Scientific Insights into the Literary History of a Prophetic Book'

Jutta Jokiranta, University of Helsinki, 'The Prototypical Teacher in the Qumran Pesharim'

Carolyn Leeb, University of Valparaiso, Indiana, USA, 'Polygyny in the Biblical World: Insights from Haiti'

Bruce J. Malina, 'Identity Theory, Politics and the Pontifical Biblical Commission's The Jewish People and Its Scriptures in the Christian Bible '

Andrew Mayes, Trinity College Dublin, 'Freud, Moses and Monotheism'

Dietmar Neufeld, University of British Columbia, Canada, 'Body, Ritual and States of Ecstasy in the Old Testament'

Douglas E. Oakman, Pacific Lutheran University, Tacoma, WA, USA 'Hermeneutics in Context: Biblical Interpretation in Dialogue With the Social Sciences'

John Pilch, Georgetown University, Washington, USA, 'Altered States of Consciousness and Visions in Ezekiel'

Richard Rohrbaugh, Lewis and Clark College, Portland, Or USA, 'Purity and Assimilation in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs'.

Gary Stansell, St Olaf College, Northfield, Minnesota, USA, 'Wealth in Ancient Israel: or, How Abraham Became Rich'

---

Thanks to Helen-Ann Hartley, Wilkinson Junior Research Fellow and Assistant Dean,
Worcester College, Oxford, for sending over her thoughts on The Passion of the Christ:

-----------------------
These thoughts are offered in response to a review in the Oxford Diocesan newspaper The Door (April 2004). The reviewer states that in his opinion, the film ‘can draw believers more deeply into the heart of their faith. And as an evangelistic tool for non-believers that will hopefully intrigue them and cause them to ask questions and further explore particularly the life of Christ under-emphasised here, I think it will do far more good than harm’. I disagree. The film is a deeply flawed account of the last twelve hours of the life of Jesus based upon a synthesis of the gospel accounts with material from extra-canonical sources, heavily influenced by the Stations of the Cross. As such it provides no narrative context for the truly harrowing scenes of torture and crucifixion other than the theme of substitutionary atonement. (Incidently, a quick study of the credits reveals the special effects people have worked on some major Hollywood horror films).

We have no real inkling of the activities surrounding the Passover, other than the full moon and Mary’s quotation of the first question from the Haggadah. The use of flashbacks provides minimal, contrived links with the life of Christ and we are told nothing of his programme of teaching and healing. Jesus as the pre-emptor of Western dining culture, producing a table as though it came straight out of IKEA? I don’t think so. Pilate is portrayed as a dithering and reflective character (presumably picking up on the Gospel references to him ‘wondering greatly’ – Mk. 15:5 for example) whereas in reality he was a brutal individual who would have had no hesitation in condemning yet another Jew to death; Herod is a camp buffoon direct from a production of ‘Jesus Christ Superstar’; the chief priests and elders are a brooding lot who stay in their full regalia throughout, presumably because we are meant to see them as the real villains, they even accompany Jesus up to Golgotha. Jesus’s words ‘Father forgive them, they know not what they do’ are aimed at the chief priest and not, as in the Gospels, at the Roman soldiers casting lots. The Romans themselves are a mad bunch, almost animal-like in their relentless abuse of Jesus. Satan moves about the Jewish crowds and demonic children hound Judas to his death. The sense of total opposition between Jesus and the Jewish crowds (with a few exceptions) is pressed home. Gibson leaves in the line: ‘His blood be on us and our children’ (not subtitled) and in this perhaps the greatest distortion lies.

Aside from the debate over the supposed anti-semitism (or indeed whether it is even appropriate to use this term), it is not hard to see why many Jews have expressed great concern over the film. The film provides Christians with the opportunity to reflect on the suffering of Jesus but also more importantly, the chance to reflect on how the narratives of Jesus’ death have played a role in Jewish-Christian relations. The story of Jesus is surely about his life, death and resurrection and seeking to represent Jesus by showing us the last few hours of his life distorts the message. I wouldn’t see the film – read the book instead!
---------------------

---

Bible and Interpretation post a notice of this article in the Globe and Mail from last Saturday:

Jesus the social reformer? It makes nice fiction
By DOUG SAUNDERS

But they are also objectionable, not just to conservative believers, but also to a number of secular liberal scholars. The charge against Mr. Crossan is led by E. P. Sanders of Duke University in North Carolina, who is widely regarded as the world's most authoritative expert on first-century Jewish culture and history. Mr. Sanders describes himself as a "secularized Protestant" who was raised in the social-gospel tradition. He, too, would like to see a Jesus who fits into that tradition. As a sober historian, though, he realizes that there is no such thing.

"One may sympathize with the effort to find support for economic reform in the ministry of Jesus. It is frustrating to see inequality and injustice in the world today and not to be able to call on Jesus to support the many changes that are so badly needed," he wrote in the New York Review of Books. "The basic problem for such a thesis is that evidence is lacking." . . . .

As far as I can tell, all the quotations are taken from the New York Review of Books exchange between Crossan and Reed on the one hand and Sanders on the other. I have commented on this previously. Unfortunately, it seems that now none of that exchange is available for free.

---

Thanks to Melisso Quero from the BBC for this notice. The final two episodes in the Bible Mysteries series will be broadcast on the following dates (here with blurb and, for Revelation, a link to its web page):

Revelation: The End of the World
Sunday 25 April on BBC Two, 12:00-12:50

Many believe the terrifying visions of Armageddon, the Beast and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse hold the key to the end of the world. This programme investigates new evidence revealing that the Book was written as a warning against the worship of Rome's most powerful Emperors and that the infamous number of the beast was not 666, but 616 - secret code for the Emperor Caligula.

Peter the Rock
Sunday 25 April on BBC Two, 12:50-13:40

He was the cowardly disciple who denied knowing Jesus, yet found the strength to establish the church and the courage to die for it. The evidence shows that in fact St Peter was the John Major of his time. His bland, middle of the road management style was precisely what was needed to unite a divided movement under threat.

In the Revelation episode, look out for my colleage Professor David Parker, who will be explaining about the number 616.

---

BBC Scotland broadcast a 55 minute special on Jesus films and their music on Easter Monday. There are lots of clips, and some interesting interviews with key people involved including Tim Rice (Jesus Christ Superstar), Geoffrey Burgon (Life of Brian) and a co-producer involved in the music of Last Temptation of Christ (will check the name). There is also quite a lot of me in it. You can listen on-line here:

Silverscreen Superstar

In this Easter special, musician Davey Scott goes behind the screen for the untold stories about the music in the classic 'Jesus films'. Jesus Christ Superstar, Godspell, The Last Temptation of Christ and The Life of Brian all come under the spotlight.

Or you can go to this page and scroll down and click:

Radio Scotland Features

---

I have just come across an interesting passage about the relationship between the character Q in Star Trek: The Next Generation and the postulate Q in the Synoptic Problem in a book by Michael Barrett and Duncan Barrett called Star Trek: The Human Frontier (London and New York: Routledge, 2000):

The name may have various sources; an obvious one is 'question' or 'query'. Another possibility is the gadget expert in James Bond films. It has one relevant history in Christian theology, where the so-called 'synoptic problem' of the authorship of the gospels is held by some to involve a 'hypothetical entity' responsible for the creation of parts of these texts not otherwise explicable. 'To postulate Q is to postulate the unevidenced and the unique.' Q is here a sort of residual category, invoked when need arose and now, it seems, the subject of much controversy. (82-83)

It's particularly gratifying to me to see Austin Farrer's "On Dispensing With Q" getting quoted in this context, and to see Q described as "the subject of much controversy"!

---

I was happy to receive in today's post from T and T Clark International the reissue of my second book, The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze. It has a great new cover with an illustration of "Saint Matthew the Evangelist, from 12th Century Byzantine evangelistary". I'm afraid I can't point to a nice picture of it on the T & T Clark Web Site because there's not one there yet. It is part of a new series called Understanding the Bible and Its World and there are details of the series available here:

Understanding the Bible and Its World

This new series is designed with the needs of introductory level students in mind. It will also appeal to general readers who want to be better informed about the latest advances in our understanding of the Bible and of the intellectual, political and religious world in which it was formed. The authors in this series bring to bear the methods and insights of a whole range of disciplines—including archaeology, history, literary criticism and religious studies—while also introducing fresh insights and approaches arising from their own research.

And should you wish to buy a copy (I know, this is all appalling self-promotion, but no one else is going to do it for me) then here is the link:

The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze

The book has an accompanying web site still available (but with the old pic.) here:

The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze Web Site

---

On Paleojudaica, Jim Davila points out this article on Discovery News with an extraordinary title:

Turin Shroud Back Side Shows Face
By Rossella Lorenzi

Now the scientific article on which that news piece is based has been published, with thanks to David Mackinder for the link:

The double superficiality of the frontal image of the Turin Shroud
Giulio Fanti and Roberto Maggiolo
Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics 6 (June 2004): 491-503

That link will take you to an abstract of the article:

Photographs of the back surface of the Turin Shroud were analysed to verify the existence of a double body image of a man. The body image is very faint and the background not uniform; i.e., the signal-to-noise ratio is lower than one. Therefore, image processing, developed ad hoc, was necessary to highlight body features. This was based on convolution with Gaussian filters, summation of images, and filtering in spatial frequency by direct and inverse bidimensional Fourier transformations. Body features were identified by template matching. The face and probably also the hands are visible on the back of the Turin Shroud, but not features related to the dorsal image.

From that page you can navigate your way to the full text of the article after having signed in or created an account. It is available free for thirty days (from today) only. The article itself is tough for non-experts like me to fathom, but there are lots of nice pictures and there is material that one can follow [TS=Turin Shroud]:

Therefore it has been ascertained that an image exists on the back of the TS. It certainly corresponds to the face and probably also to the hands, where the luminance levels are higher. In other words, there is an image on the bs corresponding with the one on the fs, which, at least as regards the face, corresponds to it in form, size, and position.

The face image is therefore doubly superficial. This means that, if a cross-section of the fabric is made, one extremely superficial image appears above and one below, but there is nothing in the middle (figure 17). (501)

---

Beliefnet have published Round 2 of the new Scholarly Smackdown on Jesus and Paul between Elaine Pagels and Ben Witherington III. Remember to read it while you can -- the last one (Crossan and Witherington) went premium after it was finished:

Scholarly Smackdown: Did Paul Distort Christianity?
Round 2

Since you and I have some substantive disagreements on what Paul said, it’s important for those participating in this conversation who are not scholars to know that this discussion is not just a matter of “liberal” vs. “conservative,”-much less “he said, she said”-- but that serious scholars, the great majority of them Christians, like you and me, can honestly interpret these letters differently. Those who want to read more about the various viewpoints will find here suggestions of a few places to start, so that they may come to their own decisions.

There's lots of material of interest, though I can't help thinking -- as with the Crossan / Witherington exchange -- that there is much too much talking past each other. There is not enough of the kind of really stimulating direct exchange of views that one might have expected. One of them will ask a question and the other will not answer it or will answer it only indirectly. I wonder if they would benefit from some of the everyday cut-and-thrust of the academic e-lists which can often hold one to account in a pretty direct way. If you don't answer a question, someone will ask it to you again; if your answer skates around the issue, someone will point this out. One of the things I like about the e-lists is the (intelligent) use of the in-line comment -- quoting your dialogue partner's views and engaging with them. I am enjoying these new "Scholarly Smackdowns" (though I still hate the title); I hope beliefnet do more of these in the future; and I think that they are more than just a series of mini-articles from contrasting perspectives; but I would like to see the participants engaging with each other a little more directly than they sometimes do at present.

Labels: Elaine Pagels

---

Bible and Interpretation list this article from the Toronto Star (TheStar.com):

Christian scholar questions Gibson's depiction of Jesus
Theology taken from nun's meditations
Passion is dangerous, sadistic, expert says
RON CSILLAG

"This is the most savage movie I have ever seen. I've never seen anything like it. It is two hours of unrelenting brutality." . . . .

. . . . "I have said that if this is the way God is, this punishing God who takes it out on Jesus instead of us, then we should not worship that God. We're dealing with a savage God and we are in really serious trouble if that's what God is like."

Crossan isn't done with his question: "Is your God a punishing God who demands punishment for sin but, who instead of taking it out on us, takes it out on his own beloved son?

"I'm waiting for some strong evangelical with a conscience to say, `Wait a minute. This is not our Jesus. This is not our God.'" . . . .

. . . . . But Crossan is aware of the movie's intent. He knows Gibson's title says it all.

"He said he's not interested in (Jesus') ministry and resurrection, but his sacrifice. But (Gibson) has gone from sacrifice to suffering, and from suffering to sadism. What he's decided to do, and what every passion play does, is to take the four Gospels and reduce them to one. Then you take what each of them does and reduce that to (Jesus') death.

"Then you reduce death to passion, which means to suffer. He shows the last hours (in Jesus' life) as suffering, and I think at that point, it becomes sadism because all that shows you is people thoroughly enjoying beating Jesus to a bloody pulp.

"I'm sure the Crucifixion was horrible," Crossan goes on. "I'm sure the scourging was horrible. I think rape is also horrible but I don't think we should dramatize it or show it in detail. It would be pornography." . . . . .

. . . . . The movie is 5 per cent from the Gospels, 80 per cent from Anne Catherine Emmerich and the rest from Gibson. If she was copyrighted, he'd be sued, or she would get a major screenwriting credit," Crossan says with a chuckle.

But he becomes very earnest when he says he finds it a "huge irony that all these conservative Christians are awestruck over a movie that is based on an extremely conservative Roman Catholic nun's meditations," and not on the very scriptures they hold as inerrant . . . .

. . . . . Ultimately, what the film will convey to foreign markets is that "there are Jews who are bad and there are ex-Jews, called Christians, who are good."

Several of the items here have appeared in other comments made by Crossan on the film. But some comments on specific elements raised here. First, hyperbole. Perhaps this is the most savage film that Crossan has seen, but its violence is nothing like as strong as it is sometimes claimed to be. It is certainly not one of the most violent films made. Nor is it "two hours of unrelenting brutality"; there is a lot of relenting, whether in terms of the camera's gaze, the witnesses' reactions or the flashbacks. Second, harmonizing. I don't know that one can criticize the filmmakers for harmonizing the four Gospels (to "reduce them to one"). Of course we'd like them to do the work that we love doing with the Synopsis, but this is not realistic when one is looking at Christian storytelling. Third, more hyperbole. The film is indeed more dependent on Emmerich's visions than many realise. I was quite struck myself by how many details came from the Dolorous Passion when I began to read it. But 5 per cent Gospels and 80 per cent Emmerich is seriously overstating it.

---

On his monthly blog the Dartboard, John Dart mentions the following:

AAR Joint Meetings Petition

The content is that "We the undersigned members of the American Academy of Religion petition the Board of Directors of the AAR to rescind its action taken in April and July 2003 to discontinue concurrent annual meetings with the Society of Biblical Literature." This comes with authority -- it was created by Elaine Pagels and Karen King. But as Dart points out they need to strip out some of these names before submission, and especially Red Butt Monkey, Mel Gibson School of Theology.

Labels: Elaine Pagels

---

On Paleojudaica Jim Davila kindly mentions my piece on The Pleasures and Perils of Talking to the Media. I don't think I have ever read it myself (since submitting it, that is!) and have just done so. I see a split infinitive in this line: "Their working assumption is that you are likely to get treated badly and to either have your views ignored, misunderstood, or distorted." I was surprised because I feel like I am always correcting split infinitives in students' work. This looked shoddy on my part. But I looked at my own version and it is not there. What I wrote was ". . . and to have your views either ignored, misunderstood or distorted". There's another problem with that -- some would say that you should not have the structure "either . . . . , . . . . or . . . . " -- but I am relieved to see that I do not inadvertently do something I am always moaning to others about! Note to self: remember to read material you submit to web sites when it appears. Suggestion to SBL Forum: allow an author to read a "proof".

Update (17.12): SBL have already made the change. Thanks; very speedy work!

---

Thanks to David Mackinder for the link to this article from today's (now for me yesterday's) New York Times:

Holy Week Pilgrims Flock to 'Passion'
By ANNE THOMPSON

Attendance grew steadily through the week and reached its highest on Good Friday, the commemoration of the Crucifixion, said Bob Berney, the president of the movie's distributor, Newmarket Films.

"Every night since Palm Sunday the numbers have gone up," he said on Friday. "It's a very rare movie that returns to No. 1 in its seventh week."

"The Passion" earned an estimated $17 million on 3,240 screens, Mr. Berney said, up 61 percent from the previous weekend. Since opening it has grossed $354.8 million in the United States, Mr. Berney said, making it the eighth-highest-grossing film of all time . . . . .

. . . . . "It was a campaign-style marketing plan," Mr. Berney said. "Bush conservatives were the target audience, but it spread beyond that."

When Jeffrey Katzenberg of DreamWorks released "The Prince of Egypt" in 1998, he took a different approach. He spent four years building support among Jews and Christians alike for that animated family film about Moses, which earned $101 million. "Mel embraced controversy," Mr. Katzenberg said. "I avoided it and built consensus." . . . . .

---

On Paleojudaica and Biblical Software Review Weblog there are notices of new content on the SBL Forum. There are three articles in the Features section, no doubt with more to come:

How I Met the Computer, and How it Changed my Life
by Robert A. Kraft

Technology and the Transmission of the Biblical Text
by James R. Adair

Transferring Biblical Narrative to Graphic Novel
by David G. Burke and Lydia Lebrón-Rivera

Incidentally, it is good to see that SBL Forum are using permanent URLs, i.e. any individual articles one links to from previous issues of the Forum have remained constant. But I wonder whether an indexing of previous articles would also be useful. At present you can search the archives but I think a browsing facility would also be useful. I would also be interested to see this "Forum" opening up another forum for SBL members to discuss the articles posted. I will write with these suggestions while they are fresh on my mind.

---

This is from the Religion Press Release Service (and talk about trying to milk the publicity from The Da Vinci Code!):

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE GOSPELS OF MARY - MARVIN MEYER, THE FOREMOST SCHOLAR OF THE GNOSTIC GOSPELS, TRANSLATES AND INTRODUCES THE GNOSTIC AND NEW TESTAMENT TEXTS THAT REVEAL THE STORY AND IMPORTANCE OF MARY MAGDALENE.

Contact: Laina Adler (415) 477-4409
laina.adler@harpercollins.com

Almost a year after the original publication of The Da Vinci Code comes THE
GOSPELS OF MARY, the ultimate resource for those who have deciphered the code but now seek the texts and truth behind it. Written and translated by Gnostic text expert Marvin Meyer, THE GOSPELS OF MARY is the most accessible text available to help interested readers parse fact from fiction and come to their own conclusions on all matters relating to the life of Mary Magdalene.

Marvin Meyer is your resource for a "Where Are We Now" retrospective story on the impact of The Da Vinci Code. Due to this influential book, for nearly a year Mary and her place within the circle of Jesus' disciples has been a topic of fervent interest and discussion.

"...[Mary's] story is captivating because it encapsulates major unresolved issues facing Christianity -- the role of women in the church, the place of human sexuality, and the yearning for the feminine aspect of the Divine." [Christian Science Monitor | Nov.14]

THE GOSPELS OF MARY is relevant right now.

--Dan Brown's novel, The Da Vinci Code, uses the Gospel of Mary as a major plot device.

--"Sales of The Da Vinci Code continue to top 100,000 copies a week, according to Nielsen BookScan." [Publishers Weekly | Feb. 9]

--With regards to sales of The Da Vinci Code and related books, Margaret
Maupin, senior buyer at the Tattered Cover in Denver, CO stated, "Bookbuyers are interested in the mysteries, but they don't necessarily want another novel -- they want the truth..." [Publishers Weekly | Feb. 9]

--Elaine Pagels' recent book Beyond Belief relies heavily on Meyer's translation of The Gospel of Thomas, and has renewed interest in the "secret gospels" or "Gnostic Gospels."

Please contact Laina Adler at (415) 477-4409 if you'd like more information on THE GOSPELS OF MARY, a copy of the book, or if you'd like to interview author Marvin Meyer.

MORE ABOUT THE BOOK ----THE GOSPELS OF MARY
"Of all the disciples of Jesus, none seems to have been as independent, strong, and close to Jesus as Mary Magdalene." -- from the Introduction

THE GOSPELS OF MARY: The Secret Tradition of Mary Magdalene, Companion of Jesus, by Marvin Meyer, is the first collection of the earliest texts, including the Gnostic Gospel of Mary and other texts -- both inside and outside the New Testament -- that describe the life of Mary Magdalene.

Marvin Meyer is the foremost expert on the Nag Hammadi texts and the texts about Jesus outside the New Testament. As he states in the Introduction, these texts unveil the importance of Mary Magdalene as Jesus' beloved disciple and an apostle and evangelist, a figure whose importance for Christianity is only now emerging from the shadows of history. Included are selections from the New Testament Gospels, extracanonical literature, and Gnostic sources, as well as the Gospel of Mary (the Gospel of Mary Magdalene).

Marvin Meyer has translated the major Gnostic texts that place Mary Magdalene at Jesus' right hand and give her high place among his followers. The Mary texts are complemented by an essay from Esther de Boer, a widely respected biblical scholar and expert on Mary Magdalene and the Gospel of Mary.

Cumulatively, these texts reveal a vibrant oral tradition in which Mary Magdalene is not only a follower of Jesus but also his companion and closest disciple.

# # #

MARVIN MEYER is the foremost expert on the Nag Hammadi texts and the texts about Jesus outside the New Testament. His books and articles have been translated into Spanish, Portuguese, French, and Japanese, and the Gospel of Thomas, of which his is the standard edition, has been listed as one of the 100 best spiritual books of the 20th century. He is Griset Professor of Bible and Christian Studies and co-chair of the Department of Religious Studies, and director of the Albert Schweitzer Institute, at Chapman University, Orange, California.

ESTHER A. DE BOER is the author of Mary Magdalene: Beyond the Myth and The Gospel of Mary: Beyond a Gnostic and a Biblical Mary Magdalene.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
THE GOSPELS OF MARY: The Secret Tradition of Mary Magdalene, the Companion
of Jesus
by Marvin Meyer
HarperSanFrancisco; A Division of HarperCollins Publishers
May 2004 | On-sale April 6, 2004 | $17.95 | 128 Pages | ISBN: 006065581X
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Labels: Elaine Pagels

---

Also on Textweek, Jenee Woodard points to this article on Sojourners:

Bloody Purim & the Bloody Passion
by Rabbi Arthur Waskow

The part that catches my attention is the misrepresentation again of The Passion of the Christ:

For centuries - and now again, in the wake of the film The Passion of the Christ and its pointing at "the Jews" as killers of the Christ - Jews have insisted that Christians look also inward for the impulse toward that killing . . . .

As often, this gives the impression that the film speaks of "the Jews", in inverted commas, as a body hostile to Jesus and who killed Jesus. The film does not speak in this way. There are two people in the film whose Jewish identity is particularly stressed, Jesus and Simon of Cyrene. The term "the Jews" only appears in the expression "king of the Jews". As I have mentioned before, there is no chance of a sensible discussion about the very important issues that surround this film if elements that are not present are imported into it.

---

The NT Gateway's move to a fresh server seems to have done it a lot of good -- it now seems to be faster and more efficient. Meanwhile it seems that the University of Birmingham sites are struggling -- my homepage has been down for days as has the Department of Theology of which it is a part. No doubt these sites will clunk back into action once people at the university return to work tomorrow, but perhaps I will need to think seriously about moving my homepage too to NTGateway.com.

---

Over on Textweek Jenee Woodard notes this new article on Tikkun:

Why did they kill Jesus?
Ched Myers | 04.07.2004

For some reason the text in the article above has got a bit garbled -- letters missing and the like. But you can read a cleaner version on Ched Myers's own site here, though the choice of font colour and background on this one requires a bit more re-think:

Mel Gibson’s “Passion of the Christ,” Anti-Semitism and the Gospel: Mark’s Trial Narrative as Political Parody

Like most other Biblical scholars and theologians, he hated it. Given that my own reaction is rather different from what has become the standard one among academics, I was interested in one element in his article, which confirmed to me something I have suspected about the academic reaction:

One of the many problems with Gibson’s film is that it weaves in strands from all four of our gospel versions (not to mention his own gratuitous additions). Attempts to “harmonize” what are four very different versions of the Jesus story have long been discredited because they give the editor such wide license to pick and choose. This effectively creates a “fifth” gospel—or in Gibson’s case, anti-gospel. The only way to unravel Gibson’s fabric is to examine each gospel separately, in order to see their different emphases and purposes.

If one of the bases for criticizing this film is that it harmonizes the Gospels, then the problem is not with this film but with all the Jesus films with the exception of Jesus (1979), The Gospel According to St Matthew, Matthew and The Gospel of John. Has the harmonizing of the Gospels "long been discredited"? Of course this is the case if one is doing serious historical critical scholarship on the Gospels, but it is not the case when it comes to producing dramatic reworkings of the Jesus story.

When one is looking at The Passion of the Christ it is important to analyze it as film and not as documentary. One of the questions that has been in my mind from the beginning of the controversy is how this film compares to others in the genre. One of the things that has been lacking in much of the critical reaction to the film has been any comparison between The Passion of the Christ and other Jesus films. What is it that is so peculiarly bad about this film as compared with, say, Jesus Christ Superstar or The Miracle Maker? For a properly critical case against this film to be sustained, one requires more sensitivity to the tradition from which it comes.

---

On RogueClassicism, David Meadows reports on his viewing of The Passion of the Christ -- some comments on his view of the Latin.

---

If you are in the UK, don't forget Resurrection on Channel 4 tonight at 6.25 pm:

Resurrection
Was Jesus resurrected or is it all a fanciful story at odds with the modern world? Tom Wright, the Bishop of Durham, sets out to prove the historical truth of the resurrection on a journey that takes him to the places where the real Jesus lived and died.

---