What type of NT Scholar Are You? (updated again)

Sean Winter on Sean the Baptist asks "What type of NT scholar are you?", following on from a Michael Bird post Specialist or Generalist on Euangelion. Michael has a great "recipe for being a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none NT generalist", including the following tip:

If you can’t actually attend conferences at least read the seminar paper topics for various conferences like SBL, ETS, SNTS etc. Ask authors to email you their paper if you are interested in their seminar paper and you can’t attend.

I think that's a good suggestion, and I'd add: don't just go to papers in the narrow area of your own research -- try to take an interest in as many as possible. Always attend plenary sessions where possible. A related but key point I'd also add would be perhaps too obvious for mentioning, but still vital:

7. Talk to people: at the conferences take an interest in other people's research, and when they are working in an area you are not familiar with, ask them what one ought to be reading in that area. What are that person's pick of the last few years' books? What are the interesting ideas that deserve attention? Who are the "ones to watch" in that area?

Sean the Baptist goes on to quote a fascinating characterisation of the different kinds of scholar, from an assessment by John Knox of John A. T. Robinson:

"To be sure, there are many scholars so gifted and accomplished as not to be typical in either sense ... But for the larger number of us I believe one may say that the worker in New Testament studies will belong to one type or the other - to the more knowledgeable or the more imaginative. And I would maintain that the door to being a true, and even a distinguished, scholar is as widely open to the second type as to the first"

John Knox, "J. A. T. Robinson and the Meaning of New Testament Scholarship", Theology 92 (1989), 251-267 (here p.256)

It's a fabulous quotation, and I love the idea of being "as widely open to the second type as the first" -- what a great way of making sure that one avoids the pitfalls of both. I'd say that to answer Sean's basic question towards the beginning of our careers, as most of us bibliobloggers are, is a difficult one. We become associated with a particular narrow area because we have so far only published, on the whole, in the one narrow area, and that might make us appear to be specialists. Perhaps those who now appear "specialist" will in due course become "generalists". It's difficult to say. So I suppose it is something that one will be able to pronounce on more confidently when looking back at one's career rather than looking forward at it.

Here's a way of nuancing the question. What type of NT scholar do you most admire? I must admit to a fondness for what I would call "ideas" people, i.e. "the more imaginative" in Knox's characterisation. Fundamentally, my favourite scholars are those who have the ability to think exciting new thoughts, to rework existing questions in interesting new directions. I am thinking in particular of scholars like Michael Goulder (I know, surprise, surprise) who might be criticized on various fronts, but who will never be criticized for being dull. He always makes me think about existing questions in new ways. Whose books or articles would you always leap on?

The more I think about this one, though, I think the characterisation really is too simplistic to be useful. We can all think of work-a-day scholars whose special ability is to keep on top of a range of material, both primary and secondary, but the best scholars are those who combine imagination and insight with knowledge and wisdom. The greatest of all living NT scholars in my book typifies this combination, E. P. Sanders. He radically rethinks consensus positions, lucidly explicating his own views, at which he has arrived on the basis of extensive but careful reading of the primary materials.

Update (Sunday, 21.18): Michael Pahl comments on The Stuff of Earth. I agree -- "New Testament studies could use a little more romance"! I remember getting some funny looks from students once when I said that I was a romantic and rather liked some of the romance in Jeremias's parable scholarship, in spite of the fact that I agreed with very little of it.

Michael hits an important note here, the question of the extent to which your teaching load makes you a generalists, something Sean the Baptist had also mentioned before. I think that this is where many of us are -- our research requires us to specialize while our teaching requires us to generalize. It's a healthy mix and one that ultimately works for good. The broad range of our teaching often makes us think relevant and interesting thoughts that impact on the precise and more specialized area of our research. The key is that we turn those teaching necessities into long term research opportunities, so that we don't get stuck in a rut, always researching the same old area.

Update (Sunday 21.26): for Danny Zacharias on Deinde, this is a "blogger-cooler" discussion. I like the term, and the comments. (Yes, "water-cooler" discussions is a term used in the UK too).

Does your wife read your blog?

(Or your husband, spouse, partner, best friend).

On the Novum Testamentum blog, Brandon Wason mentions that his wife Wendy never reads his blog. It effectively draws attention to one of the strange dynamics of the blogging phenomenon, especially with professional blogs. Here I am in Birmingham reading blogs like Brandon's without having met him, while his nearest and dearest don't take a look at it. They are rather like the diary room in Big Brother, experienced by a big audience outside the circle of your immediate friends and family with whom you spend more of your time.

Another thought: when you know the blogger personally, it sometimes changes your perception of his/her blog. You hear some comments slightly differently.

Update (21.11): Jim West asks if my wife Viola reads my blog; the answer is no, I don't think she's ever looked at it. She has quite enough to put up with me yacking on about whatever I'm yacking on about at the time.

Now I must get back to some serious blogging. Is summer also "silly season" for the bloggers?

SCM-Canterbury Press Sale

SCM-Canterbury Press have a summer sale on at:

SCM-Canterbury Press: Summer Sale

There are only a few NT titles, but you may find something of interest (and the sale includes a couple of my late grandfather's books, Norman W. Goodacre).

Date of P52

On Xtalk today Ken Olson draws attention to an interesting article in Harvard Theological Review by Brent Nongbri of Yale University:

Brent Nongbri, "The Use and Abuse of P⁵²: Papyrological Pitfalls in the Dating of the Fourth Gospel," HTR 98.1 (2005): 23-48

Ken quotes Nongbri's conclusion:

What emerges from this survey is nothing surprising to papyrologists: paleography is not the most effective method for dating texts, particularly those written in a literary hand. Roberts himself noted this point in his edition of P⁵². The real problem is the way scholars of the New Testament have used and abused papyrological evidence. I have not radically revised Roberts's work. I have not provided any third-century documentary papyri that are absolute "dead ringers" for the handwriting of P⁵², and even had I done so, that would not force us to date P⁵² at some exact point in the third century. Paleographic evidence does not work that way. What I have done is to show that any serious consideration of the window of possible dates for P⁵² must include dates in the later second and early third centuries. Thus, P⁵² cannot be used as evidence to silence other debates about the existence (or non-existence) of the Gospel of John in the first half of the second century. Only a papyrus containing an explicit date or one found in a clear archaeological stratigraphic context could do the work scholars want P⁵² to do. As it stands now, the papyrological evidence should take a second place to other forms of evidence in addressing debates about the dating of the Fourth Gospel.

It looks like an important article -- it's a staple of introductory courses on the New Testament that P⁵² provides us with a nice fix-able date in the very early second century that acts as an anchor for a lot of other datings. It looks like people will need to revise those sorts of over-simplistic appeal to over precise attempts to date this fragment.

Update (Thursday, 14.28): Sean the Baptist comments.

Update (Sunday, 1.04): Stephen Carlson has some useful comments on Hypotyposeis.

Mark Chancey, Myth of a Gentile Galilee

I mentioned yesterday that I'd blog on the above book because it's got some real on-line presence. First, it's worth looking at the related article on Bible and Interpretation from 2003:

The Myth of a Gentile Galilee
The available evidence suggests that Galilee in the time of Jesus was a mostly Jewish region
By Mark A. Chancey

Second, Cambridge University Press have a major web page on the book, with sample chapter and full text view feature on ebrary. And like many CUP publications, the full text is available also on Google Print.

More Open Source Reflections

My post last Friday headed Sansblogue on Open Source Online Biblical Studies generated bags of comments, and the discussion has continued on Sansblogue (and a previous post on Sansblogue). AKMA continues to comment in his blog, and there are several useful posts by Peter Kirby in Christian Origins (specifically Open Source Biblical Studies, Open Access Translation).

There's one thing I'd like to come back to. I am not trying to put a dampener on things when I talk about the current situation, noticing the extent to which major advances have been made by both salaried professionals and gifted amateurs (for want of better terms). On the contrary, I think it's important that we recognise that all the major advances that have been made in our area in terms of on-line provision of quality educational materials has been done within the model of dynamic evolution driven by the enthusiasts.

AKMA writes:

If a professional association really wants its members to gain mindshare, to raise the level of public discourse over the topics it addresses, that organization ought to commission educational materials from its leading exponents and distribute them online — for a tiny proportion of what mainstream-media campaigns cost.

Yes, that won’t reach every audience segment, and perhaps it won’t reach certain audiences at all (though I’m inclined to suspect that a vigorous online sphere of attention would at least stand to generate side-channel interest and awareness). Some professional association ought to give it a try, someday. (I would single out the Society of Biblical Literature and Catholic Biblical Association, but these have no PR budget at all, to the best of my knowledge. Still wouldn’t cost them much to do a world of good.)

A suggestion: why not share this proposal with SBL? Indeed, a more specific proposal: why not write a short article on it for the SBL Forum and see what interest it generates? Perhaps the forum can itself carry the proposal forward in the future? But I'd come back here again to one of my basic points, that we may end up still talking about what the SBL calls "volunteer" efforts. I don't know whether the top post-holders in the SBL earn anything for their services, but it is clear to me that the vast majority of those who contribute to the SBL by running seminars, sitting on boards and so on, are volunteers -- they see it as a part of their professional duty and joy. So even on the assumption that we can move forward with involvement from the professional societies, we may need to recognise that the one thing that they are not going to be able to provide is extensive funding.

Also in discussion with AKMA, this time from comments here:

Mark, I am encouraged to hear that you feel enough freedom and institutional support to suppose that we can make great headway without the addition of funded leaves, stipends, or equipment; not everyone has the same experience. (Will Brum be searching for someone to fill your position?) I don’t expect unanimity on this topic, but the responses I’ve encountered over the years suggest that the theological academy will prefer to lag than to leap. I’d be tickled to be proved wrong, though.

AKMA's comments in some ways make my point. Perhaps Birmingham is more generous than are other institutions, but I don't think so: we get one term's sabbatical in every ten, and that sabbatical ("funded leave") I would always use in part to work on on-line resources. I say "in part" because there is a bunch of other stuff I'd use it for too, and writing would admittedly be a higher priority. Likewise on "stipends, or equipment" -- this is what I mean by our institutions providing support by employing us and giving us a salary and a computer. Things are far from rosey in UK academia -- I have bought my own home desktop and my own laptop out of my own funds, for example -- but I think it's worth recognizing it is the job, the institutional support that enables one to do a lot of what one does.

Having said that, I'd like to draw attention to Peter Gainford's comments:

For the record, I'm inclined to think that whatever the nature of the project(s) will be, funding will be an absolute necessity. Now, mostly that's for pragmatic reasons. But I'm also thinking primarily of the need for academics, in particular, to be able to demonstrate their research output: I have a sneaking suspicion that something like the British RAE, or New Zealand PBRF, is simply never going to acknowledge any non-print work as valid research unless it's part of a project that's legitimated by some funding body or other.

I would guess that that is right, at least as far as the RAE (=Research Assessment Exercise) is concerned. If any readers have experience on the RAE panels, I'd be interested to hear if that is not the case. For myself, I have never submitted an electronic item to the RAE, in spite of the fact that I have put far more hours into developing electronic resources than I have writing books and articles that I have submitted. I remember a colleague once asking me why I devoted so much time to developing electronic resources when it was clear that they would not be recognized by the RAE. I don't recall how I answered, but what I would say now is that academics should not live by the RAE alone and that there is a great deal more to working in a university than trying to satisfy the RAE panel, important though that may be. Moreover we need to be wary of playing into an either / or here. What can be exciting about providing on-line resources is that they can work together with one's research in such a way that they help to generate, overlap and interact with print publications.

Update (23.21): On Sansblogue Tim Bulkeley has further useful reflections, focusing especially on the importance of collaboration. I'm all in favour of collaboration! It makes me less nervous than the talk about funding does, talk that in my experience tends to lead down cul-de-sacs, talk that more often than not leads to frustration and can be best avoided.

Expository Times, September

No sooner had I received the August Expository Times alert earlier today than the September one arrives. Below are articles with an NT theme. As usual there are also bags of book reviews. Links below take you to abstracts; full text available for subscribers and institutional subscriptions:

Expository Times
1 September 2005; Vol. 116, No. 12

The Damned Rich (Mark 10:17-31)
James G. Crossley
The Expository Times 2005; 116 397-401

Familiar Friend or Alien Stranger? On Translating the Bible
David G. Horrell
The Expository Times 2005; 116 402-408

Book of the Month: Insights into Ephesian Christianity
Paul Foster
The Expository Times 2005; 116 412-414

Review of Bibical Literature latest

Latest from the SBL's Review of Biblical Literature under the NT heading:

Bovon, François
L'évangile selon saint Luc 15,1 - 19,27
Reviewed by Thomas Kraus

Horton, Charles, ed.
The Earliest Gospels: The Origins and Transmission of the Earliest Christian Gospels. The Contribution of the Chester Beatty Gospel Codex P45
Reviewed by Sylvie Raquel

Scholtissek, Klaus
In ihm sein und bleiben: Die Sprache der Immanenz in den Johanneischen Schriften
Reviewed by Michael Labahn

Shiner, Whitney
Proclaiming the Gospel: First-Century Performance of Mark
Reviewed by Gregg Morrison

Calvert-Koyzis, Nancy
Paul, Monotheism and the People of God: The Significance of Abraham Traditions for Early Judaism and Christianity
Reviewed by Mark Nanos

Evans, Craig A., ed.
Of Scribes and Sages: Volume 1: Early Jewish Interpretation and Transmission of Scripture
Reviewed by Corrado Martone

Mark Chancey on the Bible in American Public Schools

This falls a little outside the usual area of coverage on the NT Gateway blog since it's connected with a controversy over American public schools, but Prof. Mark Chancey of Southern Methodist University [Mark: you need a homepage] has asked me to draw readers' attention to his report on a curriculum that is gaining widespread usage in American public schools. Mark has a letter on this in The Bible and Interpretation this week, and Jim Davila comments in Paleojudaica. Here is the website for all the relevant information:

Texas Freedom Network: The Bible and Public Schools

Mark comments that he is particularly looking for support from academics, and hopes that my commenting on this here will make more aware of this. I note that already there are some big names on the Academic Endorsements page. I have not signed it myself because I am not an American citizen, but I have read it with great interest and some concern as a Biblical scholar who is also a Dad with children shortly to enter into the American public school system. I have spent some time reading Mark's report, which is available in full on the website above:

The Bible and Public Schools: Report on the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (PDF)
A Report by Mark Chancey for the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund

It makes for some fascinating reading. On the whole it simply documents the difficulties with the report, commenting on why given elements are problematic. I suppose the thing that most struck me was the sheer extent of the apparent plagiarism in this document and, what's more, plagiarism of on-line articles of pretty dubious worth. Mark footnotes extensively, something the curriculum itself apparently does not do. It's not just that errors abound but that it includes things like urban legends about NASA.

It's good to see Biblical scholars getting involved and making intelligent, careful, reasoned responses to important public issues like this. Incidentally, if you haven't seen it yet, Mark Chancey's The Myth of a Gentile Galilee, which is based on his Duke University PhD, is essential reading; in fact, I may make a separate blog entry in a little on what is available on-line in relation to this book.

Peter Jennings

Michael Homan comments on the death of Peter Jennings. Not being an American (yet?!), I only tend to come across the names of the big journalists when they are connected in some way with Jesus films or documentaries. There was a big ABC Special on Jesus and Paul a while ago, with a strong website. See also Darrell Bock's review, Darrell Bock's interview, Charlotte Allen's review and Wilken's review.

Back in 2000 there was also a Peter Jennings ABC special focused just on Jesus and it used to have its own website -- it was a Featured Link in July 2000. But it looks like that Search for Jesus website has gone now, assimilated into Jesus and Paul.

Expository Times, August

Jim West has mentioned the latest edition of Expository Times on Biblical Theology. Here is the link to the journal and articles that will be of particular interest to NT folk. It's subscription or institutional subscription only on the full text:

The Expository Times
1 August 2005; Vol. 116, No. 11

Sinlessness and Uncertainty in Jesus
Graham Neville
The Expository Times 2005; 116 361-365

The Canonical Approach and the Idea of 'Scripture'
John C. Poirier
The Expository Times 2005;116 366-370

Book of the Month: Bridging the Gap between New Testament and Textual Criticism: The Legacy of T. C. Skeat
Michael J. Kruger
The Expository Times 2005; 116 374-376

There is a whole bunch of book reviews too, which you can access by going to the link at the top of this entry.

JSNT latest

The latest Journal for the Study of the New Testament is now available:

Journal for the Study of the New Testament,
1 September 2005; Vol. 28, No. 1

'Brood of Vipers' (Matthew 3.7; 12.34; 23.33)
Craig S. Keener
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2005; 28 3-11

Eunuchs and the Postgender Jesus: Matthew 19.12 and Transgressive Sexualities
J. David Hester
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2005; 28 13-40

The Incident of the Withered Fig Tree in Mark 11: A New Source and
Redactional Explanation
Philip F. Esler
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2005; 28 41-67

The Myth of the 'Traditional View of Paul' and the Role of the Apostle in Modern Jewish-Christian Polemics
Daniel R. Langton
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2005; 28 69-104

From Priestly Torah to Christ Cultus: The Re-Vision of Covenant and Cult in
Hebrews
Susan Haber
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2005; 28 105-124

Book Reviews: Biblical Greek Language and Lexicography: Essays in Honor of
Frederick W. Danker, A History of New Testament Lexicography
Moises Silva
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2005; 28 125-127

The links above will take you to the article abstracts and will give you the option of reading it if you are subscribed or if you have an institutional subscription.

Torrey Seland and SNTS

I'll join Jim West in offering congratulations to Torrey Seland who has been elected a member of SNTS. From the way he expresses it (Pleasant Surprise), it sounds like becoming a member is not too stressful.

BMCR Reviews

On Stuff of Earth Michael Pahl has a useful list of some of the latest Bryn Mawr Classical Review reviews that may be of interest in our area.

British New Testament Conference 2005 Seminars

I have spent some time tonight uploading details on the Seminar Programme for this year's British New Testament Conference, which will be in Liverpool from 1-3 September:

BNTC Seminars 2005

There are still a couple of seminars missing (Revelation and Second Temple Judaism), but otherwise it's almost complete. I've been sorry to do this work this year knowing that I am unlikely to be able to make it. As ever, there's lots on the programme of interest.

Update (11.59): Bridget has also sent over for me the missing NT and Second Temple Judaism abstracts and I have uploaded those too. So now we have a full seminar programme with only the exception of the Revelation seminar.

Golgotha Review

On Open Heaven Matthew Page has a review of a little known Jesus film from 1935 entitled Golgotha, directed by Julien Duvivier:

Film Review: Golgotha
A Review by Matthew Page

It's a film I've not seen myself yet and I'll have to add it to my list. I have recently managed to get hold of a video of Day of Triumph from ebay, another little known Jesus film, from 1953. I must refresh my Jesus film pages and add these. I'll add to my NT Gateway "to do" list.

Top Ten Lists

There have been lots of interesting blog posts on top ten lists of books on Paul and Jesus. For a good summary, see Michael Pahl's Stuff of Earth. On Hypotyposeis, What Books to Buy for Biblical Scholarship, Stephen Carlson hits a very important note, on how the beginner should build properly, from Critical Editions of the Bible, to Background texts, to Lexica and Indices and so on. There are some useful thoughts here, and for a similar reason one should be wary of embarking in a university setting on a Jesus / Paul course before one has done an Introduction to Biblical Studies as a prerequisite. I'd add something further in relation especially to Historical Jesus studies. I used to teach a one-term course on Jesus to second and third year students, but I found that it was very difficult to do this when they did not already have the necessary skills, background, methodology in place. How can you explain the way the Jesus Seminar works without first explaining how one gets to what they call the "Q Gospel"? How can one assess their assessment of the Gospel of Thomas unless one has first spent time studying that text? Happily, I was able to rework the course so that it became a two-term course, with term one on the critical study of the Gospels (and related literature) and then term two on the Gospels.

For similar reasons, and here I am influenced also by a conversation I recently had with Ken Olson, if I were to put together a top 10 list on Historical Jesus books, the majority would probably be key books you need to read before you can assess the books that are specially focused on Jesus. Yes, I'd like to have books like E. P. Sanders's Jesus and Judaism in there, of course, but I'd also strongly recommend something like Sanders' and Davies's Studying the Synoptic Gospels to get students a grounding in the preliminary questions. I might even hazard a guess that some of the problems in contemporary Historical Jesus study derive from the fact that people jump into Historical Jesus study, as if it is a discipline in its own right, before spending time working through the Synopsis, for example.

Which desk?

Occasionally the most absurd and yet surprisingly interesting threads break out on the blogs, and one is underway at the moment on bloggers' desks. So far we have Tyler Williams, Jim West, Tim Bulkeley and David Meadows; no doubt there are more I've forgotten. I am very tempted to join in, but regular readers will know of my rule to avoid being self-indulgent, so I will resist. But there's an assumption here that I don't share. Only one desk? Don't y'all have at least a couple, and those in addition to the makeshift desks where you take your blogging machines (kitchen table, settee, airport lounge, etc.)?

The Big Question

Among a ton of interesting posts this week on Codex Blogspot is one you might miss on a documentary filmed during the film of The Passion of the Christ. Tyler Williams links to the IMDb page on the film as well as its official site:

The Big Question

Goodness knows when we'll get to see it; it's not out on video or DVD yet as far as one can see. (Also mentioned by Jim West on Biblical Theology). If we are lucky, Peter Chattaway might be able to get a viewing and review it for us.

Cullmann on Baptism on-line

On BiblicalStudies.org.uk, Rob Bradshaw announces that the following large article is now available on his site as a PDF:

Oscar Cullman, Baptism in the New Testament (Studies in Biblical Theology No. 1; London: SCM, 1950)

Sansblogue on Open Source Online Biblical Studies

I had missed an interesting post in AKMA's Random Thoughts (AKMA: can't you give interesting posts like that more interesting headers than "Prior Art"?!) to which Tim Bulkeley draws attention in Sansblogue. The gist is on getting coordinated quality on-line Biblical Studies [AKMA: also Theology] materials available. Tim adds the following proposal:

So, I propose that:
(a) we begin to discuss such a proposal here in blogsphere
(b) those of us at SBL in Philadelphia try to meet - over coffee or a meal - to strengthen the network and begin identifying issues
(c) we work towards a (CARG sponsored?) day to really work things through before SBL in 2007

I'm sympathetic with the aims here, and we can start on (a) straight away. As a first step, I'd suggest that Tim (and perhaps AKMA too?) hone precisely what the goal(s) are here. So many people are already committed to the production of quality on-line resources in our area that one might argue that the kind of thing being talked about here is already well underway, and is evolving dynamically. If the essential proposal is: how can we get a big project financed (especially AKMA)?, then there is still a large part of me that just sighs. I have felt for some time that the key to the development of exciting on-line projects in our area is the voluntary efforts of people like us. The funding comes, if you like, from two places: (1) the educational institutions that employ us and which are committed to the dissemination of our scholarship not only within their walls but also outside of them, so that our salaries here are the funding, and the time we allocate is our decision about commitment to such an important goal; (2) the self-funding provided by the gifted and enthusiastic amateurs who make such a major contribution in this area by devoting their own time. But I am of course interested in seeing and hearing about different proposals. So I'd like to repeat my question that Tim or AKMA or others begin by explaining precisely what we need in the area that can only be provided by dedicated funding.

Harland @ SNTS

On the Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean Blog, it's good to read comments blogged from the current SNTS in Halle. In general, the SNTS has been something of a blog-free entity. I think AKMA has occasionally blogged from there, if memory serves, but I don't remember anyone else doing so. I suspect that this is as much as anything because few of the bibliobloggers are SNTS members. I am not, and have not been since 1997. I'd like to attend again one day.

E. P. Sanders interview

One not to miss, mentioned on The Stuff of Earth and previously on Primal Subversion, is this:

An Interview with E. P. Sanders
“Paul, Context, & Interpretation”
Michael Barnes Norton, Journal of Philosophy and Scripture
At the occasion of Syracuse University’s Postmodernism, Religion, and Culture conference, titled “Saint Paul among the Philosophers”, Michael Barnes Norton sat down with religious scholar and historian E. P. Sanders to discuss the issues at stake in philosophical interpretations of the enigmatic writings of Paul, and in general the contemporary use of ancient texts.

Michael and Sean also mention an interview with John Dominic Crossan, also worth looking at, but I give prominence to the Sanders one because it is so much rarer.

Codex Sinaiticus On-line

Helenann Hartley mentioned this yesterday, from BBC News. A similar piece, interviewing Scot Mckendrick, now appears on Christianity Today:

Oldest Known Bible to go Online

One of the best pieces of news about this excellent project is that the website "is planned to be free of charge". Note that the original British Library press release (11 March 2005) is still available, as is the following information page:

Showcase: Codex Sinaiticus

SBL Blogging Session

Several people have mentioned the CARG session on blogging at the forthcoming SBL Annual Meeting in Philadelphia. I'm pleased to hear that Torrey Seland is now a definite for the session too. If you haven't looked at it yet, Torrey has the programme for that session, which will be on the Saturday morning, just after breakfast.

Talking of breakfast, here's a tip for those at SBL on a budget (as I have often been in the past): get to one of those great American breakfast buffets and eat to your heart's content. Don't be put off by earnest looking professor types who only visit the buffet once. Keep going for as long as you can. Eat so much that you won't want lunch. You can then make it through to the evening when you'll be just peckish enough to enjoy something else. In fact you might even be invited to one of those receptions where there's lots of food in the evening too, and on days like that, you've only bought breakfast and the budget is looking healthier than it might have been.

Sean the Baptist / Σεαν ὁ βαπιστὴς

It was great to see on the Stuff of Earth a link to a new blog by my friend Sean Winter:

Sean the Baptist / Σεαν ὁ βαπιστὴς
The personal blog of Revd Dr Sean Winter, covering things of interest to me in the broad areas of Baptist life and theology in the UK and elsewhere, New Testament studies and hermeneutics

I've added it to my ever-expanding blogroll (left). Featuring comments on the now Bishop of Durham like "Yes, Tom does drink Earl Grey Tea", it's clear that this is going to be well worth reading.

Biblical Studies Bulletin 36

I thought that I'd have more time to blog since getting back to Birmingham, but alas, I spend all day every day either working (after all, the University of Birmingham are still paying me) or preparing in different ways for the move. Anyway, you don't want to know about that. Here's a link to the latest Biblical Studies Bulletin from Grove Books:

Biblical Studies Bulletin 36

Ignore the "35" at the top of the page -- it's an error. The guest editor this time is James Blandford-Baker and, as usual, there are several items of interest.

Review of Biblical Literature latest

Back to Birmingham; back to regular blogging (I hope). Here's the latest from the SBL's Review of Biblical Literature:

Cameron, Ron and Merrill P. Miller, eds.
Redescribing Christian Origins
Reviewed by Timothy Pettipiece

Dibelius, Martin
Edited by K. Hanson
The Book of Acts: Form, Style, and Theology
Reviewed by Craig Blomberg

Dibelius, Martin
Edited by K. Hanson
The Book of Acts: Form, Style, and Theology
Reviewed by Carl Toney

Dettwiler, Andreas, Jean-Daniel Kaestli, and Daniel Marguerat, eds.
Paul, une théologie en construction
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas

Marguerat, Daniel, ed.
Introduction au Nouveau Testament: Son histoire, son écriture, sa théologie
Reviewed by Sean Kealy

Draper, Jonathan A, ed.
Orality, Literacy, and Colonialism in Antiquity
Reviewed by James Loader

The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology

This will be of interest to some:
-----------
St Mary's College, University of St Andrews is pleased to announce its second conference on scripture and theology: The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology.

The conference will take place in St Andrews, Scotland, from 18-22 July, 2006. It features keynote speakers Richard Hays, Morna Hooker, and John Webster, in addition to several other internationally recognized scholars.

Those who traveled to St Andrews in 2003 to attend John & Theology will recall unique features of that conference, including a musical performance at the start of the week, a joint worship service at the end of the week, and dialogue sessions between major scholars on important issues. We fully expect Hebrews & Theology to build on these past successes.

Please consider this invitation to join us in St Andrews on 18 July 2006. For further particulars, visit our web page, clicking anywhere on the first page to enter the site:

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/divinity/hebrews2006

We expect this conference to be even more popular than the first. So book early!

Cordially,

Richard Bauckham
Trevor Hart
Nathan MacDonald
--------

Profile of a biblioblogger

On Euangelion Michael Bird profiles "the average NT biblio-blogger" and I think I'll have to stop blogging because I don't fit the bill:

Let me guess, early to mid thirties,

Well, not too far off, as it happens.

introverted,

I don't think so, but perhaps I'm wrong.

erratic personality disorder created by trying to solve the synoptic problme [sic],

No, though I used to worry about how I would persuade people that Farrer, Goulder and Sanders were right. Gosh, do some people really get that bothered about the Synoptic Problem? I suppose I ought to be encouraged -- there's help at hand for them.

liable to mood swings when favourite sporting team is loosing,

Now I'm beginning to think that Michael is describing someone in particular. Incidentally, the "loosing" perhaps should be added to Michael's 10 Ways to determine if you're an NT buff, the inadvertent, mistaken use of idionyncratic New Testament vocabulary like "binding" and "loosing" in every day contexts

and centrist-right convictions on the political spectrum.

Definitely not.

Maybe we'll find out at the BNTC in early September.

Alas, I don't think I can make it this year, and it will be my first one missed since 1997, so I won't get to meet Michael and others. But let me add that if it's anything like previous years, the best conversations will take place over a beer (or two) in the bar and not at some Maccy-Ds, thank goodness.

+Thomas Dunelm's Castle

Some time ago, there was a little discussion on the biblioblogs about Bishop Tom Wright's castle (e.g. here in Tom Wright's castle and also in Paleojudaica), when it became clear that it was common for us British academics to be living in castles. Well now, Tom Wright has the full justification out in this latest addition to the N. T. Wright page:

The Bishop's Ministry at Auckland Castle
Meeting of Church Commissioners and Auckland Castle Trustees, Directors and Supporters
Auckland Castle, July 13 2005
Briefing paper from the Bishop of Durham

The long and short of it is that he's not budging from Auckland Castle. Nor should he either. I've been looking around properties in North Carolina, USA this last week and I can assure you that they are nothing like the standard castle a British academic would live in.

New PRS website

The following announcement has recently been sent around to many in the UK Higher Education establishment, specifically those working in Philosophy and Religious Studies. It relates to a new website for PRS, the Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies in the Higher Education Academy:

NEW PRS WEBSITE

We are very pleased to reveal our new website for the Subject Centre.

The new site includes greatly improved searching and resource retrieval, resources catalogued by discipline specific categories, event listing for all the PRS disciplines, a new interface and design, improved accessibility for all users, a range of format choices and new information from external sites on the home page. It also incorporates the means to extract information and resources to embed in your own website (RSS).

Some aspects of the site are still under development and we need your feedback before the full launch. As a result, the site is currently undergoing user-testing, and we are very interested in your views and any suggestions for improvements as part of the development. There is an on-line form available for feedback and comments.

The new site is available as a link from the current site (home page):

http://prs.heacademy.ac.uk

We look forward to hearing from you.

The new site has several attractive features, including a right hand margin delivering news and jobs of interest from (for example) the BBC News site and the jobs.ac.uk website. There appears to be an RSS feed, but I can't seem to pick it up, though, at the moment.

Ben Witherington's blog out of the closet!

I'd like to join others (Michael Bird, Jim West and Sean du Toit) in welcoming Ben Witherington to the blogosphhere. As Sean du Toit comments, this is a surprising feat of "stealth blogging" in that it has apparently been going on for several months without any of us realizing, a strong achievement these days, but one that he's not been able to get away with for ever. The assumption must be that this is the New Testament scholar otherwise known as Dr Ben Witherington III. There are several telling clues, the link to Asbury Theological Seminary where he works and to Beliefnet for which he sometimes writes. Anyway, if it is that Ben Witherington III, a warm welcome to blogging and I would like to join others in looking forward to reading your thoughts.

Update (Tuesday, 10.53 pm, Eastern Time): as Eric Manuel notes, the following page puts the identification of the blog beyond doubt:

Dr Ben Witherington III

This is located at www.benwitherington.com and features a CV, a link to the blog and some reproductions of his personal works. I look forward to seeing more on this site, perhaps especially some full text article reproductions?

Review of Biblical Literature latest

As it turns out, there always seems to be a moment to blog the latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature. I'm in a hotel in Cary, North Carolina at the moment and so I hope that this is not too mundane a blog entry as my first from here:

Aitken, Ellen Bradshaw
Jesus' Death in Early Christian Memory: The Poetics of the Passion
Reviewed by Erik Heen

Kim, Jung Hoon
The Significance of Clothing Imagery in the Pauline Corpus
Reviewed by Lynn Huber

Kim, Jung Hoon
The Significance of Clothing Imagery in the Pauline Corpus
Reviewed by Roy Jeal

Kloppenborg, John S. and John W. Marshall, eds.
Apocalypticism, Anti-Semitism and the Historical Jesus: Subtexts in Criticism
Reviewed by Thomas Kraus

Kloppenborg, John S. and John W. Marshall, eds.
Apocalypticism, Anti-Semitism and the Historical Jesus: Subtexts in Criticism
Reviewed by Daniel Smith

Lührmann, Dieter
Die apokryph gewordenen Evangelien: Studien zu Neuen Texten und zu Neuen Fragen
Reviewed by Thomas Kraus

Rhoads, David
Reading Mark, Engaging the Gospel
Reviewed by Sean Kealy

Rhoads, David
Reading Mark, Engaging the Gospel
Reviewed by Joseph Verheyden

Blogging break

My current break from blogging will continue, I suspect, until the beginning of August, while we work on the transition from one job to another and one continent to another. I look forward to blogging again as soon as possible.

Pete Williams's web page and more

I've refreshed my Scholars: U-Z page with new URLs for Risto Uro, Francis Watson, Rikk Watts (why don't the people organizing these pages set up forwards?) and I've added also:

Peter J. Williams

This is a page with lots of full text article reproductions, very useful indeed.

Context and Nuance in Jesus' Sayings

I have enjoyed the blogging thread initiated by Michael Turton on The Sword and followed up by Stephen Carlson in Hypotyposeis with a contribution from Loren Rosson on The Busybody. Turton's post focuses on Mark 7.15, and the undue importance that is given to this saying in the work of the Jesus Seminar, The Five Gospels: What did Jesus Really Say. I'd like to add to what Michael, Stephen and Loren say by noting that the undue stress placed on this saying by the Jesus Seminar focuses a problem with Historical Jesus research, like theirs, that places so much stress on the authenticity and interpretation of particular sayings. One of the reasons that I am sceptical about the general attempt to sift sayings, highlight supposedly key ones and recontextualise them is the problem of context and nuance. We do not have the equivalent of the Nixon tapes when we are doing Historical Jesus research, and even if a given saying is in some respects original, we can never recover the context in which it was said or the particular nuances Jesus might have given it. There is an excellent warning on this topic in E. P. Sanders and M. Davies, Studying the Synoptic Gospels: 188:

'Ignorance of the precise context in which sayings were formulated often prevents the recovery of precision and nuance in interpreting Jesus' teaching. Meaning is determined by context, and sayings whose context is unknown cannot be pressed too hard in the quest of original meaning. Often we shall have to remain content with a more general understanding than we might wish.'

Consider, by analogy, the following editing and recontextualizing of something I have written in recent days:

Mark Goodacre . . . . may point to the reason for the lack of consensus on consensus when he observes, "consensus emerges over time and is something that is the result of ... conversations over a beer." Indeed, rather than giving greater confidence to outsiders, this seems to only give cause for Jim West's cynicism. (There is a general consensus among experts and non-experts that beer impairs judgment.) (my blog@anduril.ca)

Now let us say that Ken Ristau's enjoyably facetious post was not a blog post in which the link was provided to the original context for the saying, you would get quite the wrong gist about my views on the topic, and this even when Ken quotes me verbatim (except for the ellipsis).

Let us say that Jesus did say something like "It’s not what goes into a a person from the outside that can defile; rather, it’s what comes out of the person that defiles" (Mark 7.15). Could we really conclude, with the Jesus Seminar, that "Jesus is abrogating kosher food regulations across the board--a broadside against his own religious traditions" (Five Gospels: 30-31)? It is a somewhat hackneyed analogy, but still a valuable one, that Isaiah 1.15 speaks against prayer:

So when you spread out your hands in prayer,
I will hide My eyes from you;
Yes, even though you multiply prayers,
I will not listen.
Your hands are covered with blood.

Is this Isaiah's broadside against his own religious traditions like prayer? I don't think so. But this saying recontextualized and with loss of the nuance it currently has (in Isaiah 1, I mean) could be taken quite differently.

Update (18.37): Stephen Carlson has more of interest and relevance on Hypotyposeis, and further links to more. Colo(u)r me puzzled too. What's the Jesus Seminar's colour for puzzled?

The Journal Henoch and the Enoch Literature

This from Gabriele Boccaccini via Justin Winger:

I am pleased to inform you that I am the new Director of the Journal “HENOCH: Studies in Judaism and Christianity from Second Temple to Late Antiquity.”

The Journal HENOCH was founded in 1979 by Prof. Paolo Sacchi and has soon become a well-established international journal in Judaic Studies. Under my Direction, and with a new Publisher (www.morcelliana.it), it will start a new series with a more defined specialization (as the new sub-title clarifies), a stronger international emphasis, and English as its main language (articles in German, French, Spanish, and Italian will continue to be accepted, however).

The new Board of Directors is made of Profs. Paolo Sacchi, Claudio Gianotto, Yaron Eliav, and myself. Prof. Corrado Martone is the Secretary of the Board.

There will be two Editorial Boards, one in Ann Arbor (the American Editorial Board, under my direction) and one in Europe (the European Editorial Board, under Prof. Gianotto’s direction).

I am committed to make the HENOCH a leading voice in the study of Judaism and Christianity from Second Temple to Late Antiquity, an important companion of the Enoch Seminars, which so much have contributed to the development of our field. The members of the Board will have the privilege of submitting articles (theirs or others’) to the Editorial Boards of the Journal, and may be occasionally asked (but ONLY if they agree to do so) to give their opinion about articles submitted to the Journal.

The first issue of the new series of Henoch will be published by the end of this year. I am asking each of you to support this new enterprise with your advice, commitment and participation. I will certainly appreciate if you could check whether the library of your Institution already subscribes to the Journal or could be interested in subscribing to the new series.

I thank you for your attention. With my best wishes.

Gabriele Boccaccini

Blogs that stall

On Biblical Theology Jim West recently commented on the necessity to do a bit of house-cleaning from time to time because of the blogs that have stalled (my term):

By housecleaning I actually mean blog-cleaning. I've run through my bloglist and deleted blogs which have not seen activity in over a month. I'm not sure if the blog owners have lost interest (how???) or other things have taken over (like what????) or they have simply dropped out (as often happens in any endeavor, doesn't it?). In any event such blog-less-ness or blog-in-activity is something akin, to me, of the dreaded "page not found" message that plagues the internet. We all have run into pages we thought very useful and then one day when we went to check something on them, they were gone. Blogs that go unused are like that in that nothing reasonably new is mentioned on them and so pointing folks to them is like pointing them to a newspaper that hasn't published in a month.

What I do is to maintain my blogroll (left) via Bloglines, which enables me to manage the blogroll very straightforwardly. Newish blogs tend to go towards the bottom of the list and then work their way up as they publish more regularly. When blogs go moribund (or stall), which is always a substantial number of new blogs, I drop them down to a kind of limbo, which I monitor via bloglines but which does not appear on my blogroll. It's a doddle to do with their "public" and "private" categories. And that also means that stuff I want to look at that has nothing to do with the discipline, I keep in my private category. It is rare for a blog that has gone to my blogroll limbo to reappear but it has happened from time to time.

But why do some blogs never really get off the ground? Well, blogging is the kind of discipline that is very straightforward to start. How long does it take on Blogger? About five minutes? Regular consumers of blogs soon fancy setting up their own -- it's how we all started, I'd suspect. But you cannot know how well suited you are to blogging until you've actually had a go at it over a sustained period of time. There's no other way to test the water, though in general I'd suspect that those most suited to blogging are those who are already heavy consumers of the internet, e.g. who inhabit and contribute to e-lists, forums, newsgroups, or already run their own websites.

Jim Davila's recent SBL Forum article on blogging concluded:

. . . . I think we can look forward to a leaner, sharper, more cautious, and better informed press corps as time passes. If you want to hasten that process, then go and start a blog. It's easy.

I enjoyed that call to action, and it is quite right that it's easy to start one. What's tougher is to sustain a blog over time. For that, you need to become an addict.

Logos edition of Apostolic Fathers

Thanks to Rick Brannan of Ricoblog fame for this important information:

The Apostolic Fathers in Greek and English (3 Editions, with Morphology)

Rick writes:

This is something we call a "pre-publication". It is best thought of as a subscription. If we have enough people show interest (i.e., "subscribe" to the offering) then we'll make this a priority to complete.

Given enough interest, we intend to publish three editions of the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, each edition having Greek along with an English translation and other ancillary matter (such as marginal notes, text-critical notes, introductions, etc.). The editions are:

- Lightfoot/Harmer's edition (1 vol, 1898)
- Kirsopp Lake's edition (Loeb Classical Library, 2 vols, 1912)
- Michael Holmes' edition (Baker Book House, 1999). We're trying to get the latest edition of Holmes to include in this package.

The Greek components of each of these editions will be morphologically analyzed.

Thanks for that, Rick, and good luck with the project, which looks eminently worthwhile.

Update (Tuesday, 15.03): I meant to mention that Stephen Carlson has already commented on this on Hypotyposeis.

Review of Bibical Literature latest

The latest from the SBL's Review of Biblical Literature under the NT heading:

Carson, D. A., Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid, eds.
Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume 2: The Paradoxes of Paul
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas

de Boer, Esther A.
The Gospel of Mary: Beyond a Gnostic and a Biblical Mary Magdalene
Reviewed by F. Stanley Jones

Fitzgerald, John T., Dirk Obbink, and Glenn S. Holland, eds.
Philodemus and the New Testament World
Reviewed by Douglas Geyer

Hartin, Patrick J.
James of Jerusalem: Heir to Jesus of Nazareth
Reviewed by Peter Davids

Hartin, Patrick J.
James of Jerusalem: Heir to Jesus of Nazareth
Reviewed by Luke Timothy Johnson

Hartin, Patrick J.
James of Jerusalem: Heir to Jesus of Nazareth
Reviewed by Darian Lockett

Nwachukwu, Oliver O.
Beyond Vengeance and Protest: A Reflection on the Macarisms in Revelation
Reviewed by Heinz Giesen

Rastoin, Marc
Tarse et Jérusalem: La Double Culture de l'Apotre Paul en Galates 3,6-4,7
Reviewed by Stephan Witetschek

Talbert, Charles H.
Reading the Sermon on the Mount: Character Formation and Decision Making in Matthew 5-7
Reviewed by Robert Bryant

Less of a Consensus on Consensus

The general thread on Consensus, triggered by my post on Tom Wright on the Da Vinci Code and developed by Michael Pahl, then with further comments from Jim Davila, Jim West, Michael Pahl again and then me, is developing into a biblioblogging classic, now also with contributions from Ken Ristau, Ed Cook, Jim Davila again and Christopher Heard. The latter offers a "mild defense" (American sp.) of Jim West's comments:

. . . . While I can't endorse Jim's "definition" completely, Jim has hit on a tendency that is one of my own pet peeves. In my opinion, academics should immediately abandon the practice of using phrases like "It is generally agreed ..." as if those were arguments in favor of what follows. Sentences in the form "It is generally accepted that P," if they are true, serve at best as useful "tag lines" to a summary description of the state of scholarship on a particular topic (or public opinion, or whatever is under discussion). However, sentences like "It is generally accepted that P" can never prove the truth of P, because the number of people who agree that P is true is actually irrelevant to the question of whether or not P is true. Besides that, it seems to me that statements like "It is generally accepted that P" are quite often not true as they stand—by which I mean that P is often not as "generally accepted" as the statement claims.

Christopher is here bringing up some useful questions on the rhetoric of appeals to consensus, and I share some of Christopher's concern. As someone standing outside the consensus on one major issue (the Synoptic Problem), I have found it frustrating to see appeals to consensus used as an excuse for a refusal to think. Indeed, I have argued that the repetition of the consensus view simply because it is the consensus view is one of the things that has contributed to the dominance of that view. (As an aside, I have been happy to see on several occasions in recent years new students and new books speaking of the lack of consensus now on the Synoptic Problem; I sometimes hope that the tide might be turning). I'd like to add a couple of further comments on the way that appeals to consensus work:

(1) The kind of statement Christopher points to, "It is generally accepted that . . . " are as often, perhaps even more often, used in counter-consensus discussions. Have a look at the SBL Abstracts of a given year. Each time you get an abstract beginning with "It is generally accepted that . . ."; "it is axiomatic that . . ."; "the consensus on such and such is . . . .", you can be sure that it is the preface to someone who is about to disagree with that consensus, to attempt to break new ground in that area. This is one of the striking things about the use of this kind of language in scholarship -- sometimes you only begin to see that a consensus exists on a given issue when someone is smart enough or bold enough to question it. We've all experienced that thrill of being present at a paper that makes us seriously question a view which to that point we had taken for granted. An illustration: the existence of Gospel communities. It was the Bauckham edited book, The Gospels for All Christians that revealed the existence of a consensus so prevalent that no one up to this point was even bothering to argue for the existence of the thing this book was challenging. One of the things I love about the whole business of academia is the excitement of experiencing a convincing challenge to consensus.

(2) Appeals to consensus as an excuse for not thinking about the issue, or of bolstering an argument on something else, are indeed pretty lazy but I think that they are also quite vulnerable. I like to ask my students, if they do use one of those appeals, "But what is it about that consensus that you find persuasive?" I like to challenge people to try to think of fresh reasons for supporting a given consensus if they are persuaded by that consensus. And, as Christopher's remarks make clear, there is a danger in appealing to consensus when you may have someone respond with, "I disagree; I don't think the consensus lies there." And this is where this thread began, with my own remarks on where Tom Wright was placing the consensus, I thought incorrectly.

Update: Here's an article that looks worth reading on the general topic, John Poirier, “On the Use of Consensus in Historical Jesus Studies,” Theologische Zeitschrift 56 (2000): 97-107.

Update (20.33): Jim West comments.

Update (20.35): Joe Weaks comments:

. . . . Frankly, we can not decide for our own on every issue within Biblical scholarship--not even the most senior scholars can do that. One simply does not move from extensive study to the necessary intensive study of every single topic. We depend upon others' dating of material, generic conclusions, authorial speculations, etc. This is why we must be careful in these discussions to not suggest scholars, commentary writers, etc. should not appeal to consensus.

In the absence of it, we are empowerd to say nothing.

That's a useful corrective, but I don't feel so negative. Our field is not that huge. It only feels that way because of the increasing specialisation. And this is all a good reason for post graduate students to become minor experts in as many topics as possible. After all, one has to teach across a range of subjects; some intensive course work on a given topic can persuade one of how to approach a consensus well. Joe continues:

Having said that, a real downside is that the senior scholar is innately resistant to being convinced by an argument that overturns a consensus assertion when it would seem to render her/his past publications that assume that opinion outdated and hardly worth reading anymore. (The exception might be, of course, if the challenge to consensus is the work of their own scholarship.)

Again, I would not be quite so pessimistic. There are plenty of examples of scholars changing their mind on issues they've published on because they are persuaded by the evidence / the new presentation of the evidence. In the end, it is the ultimate test of a scholar's integrity and humility. Are you prepared to change your mind in the face of strong evidence and good argument to the contrary? Speaking for myself, I love getting a chance to change my mind on something when someone persuades me -- that's one of the great excitements of scholarship.

Update (Tuesday, 21.00): Jim Davila comments further and usefully on Paleojudaica, in particular to nuance one my points above:

. . . . We've even reached the point of specializations within specializations. It used to be that Qumran studies was a subfield of biblical studies. Now it is not only an independent field, it's one that itself contains various subfields. I can't form an expert opinion on every question in Qumran studies even though it's one of my areas of specialization . . . . When I teach -- even honours seminars on Qumran, let alone introductory Bible classes -- I rely very frequently on consensus positions rather than my own intensive research. I expect Mark does the same. If not, my hat is off to him.

Actually, I research everything I teach on in infinite detail and that's why I never sleep. No, of course. But I suppose that I like to encourage post graduate students to pursue the goal (fiction?) that it's possible to keep one's ear to the ground in such a way that one has a good feel for the lie of the land (sorry for the mixed metaphors). It's why attendance at conferences is so valuable, and attendance there at a range of presentations, if possible. It's why attendance at as many seminars at your own institution as you can make is valuable -- I always think it a mistake to cherry pick to the extent that you are preferring that extra hour and a half reading yet another article in the library vaguely related to your topic over going to hear a good speaker in the general area. And add to that that being a post-graduate can be a very lonely business -- it's always worth taking the opportunity to mix with people at seminars; goodness, you might even make some new friends! I am keeping the focus on post-graduate students because I think it is so easy there to get so very specialized on account of the need to get one's thesis finished, when the longer term goals of keeping a good bird's eye view are what will help, including with the thesis.

Widow's Mite @ Laudator

Don't miss a useful post on The Widow's Mite on Laudator Temporis Acti.

1 Peter page

I have also updated my 1 Peter page, refreshing the links and adding:

Karen H. Jobes, “Got Milk? Septuagint Psalm 33 and the Interpretation of 1 Peter 2:1-3”, Westminster Theological Journal 64 (2002): 1-14

Moises Silva on Galatians

I followed a link in Michael Bird's Euangelion to the Westminster Theological Journal and noted a couple of links I should have added some time ago. Here's the first:

Moises Silva, “Abraham, Faith and Works: Paul's Use of Scripture in Galatians 3.6-14", Westminster Theological Journal 63 (2001): 256-67

I've added it to the Paul: Books and Articles page.

James Crossley's new blog

Another new blog on the block (now a weekly treat!):

Earliest Christian History
James Crossley's blog. Mostly covers Christian origins but but will stray into general history, politics, music and possibly football

James is the co-chair of the Jesus Seminar at the British New Testament Conference and the author of a recent volume in the JSNTS called The Date of Mark's Gospel.

Neville Birdsall Obituary

The Times today has an obituary of Neville Birdsall:

J. Neville Birdsall
March 11, 1928 - July 1, 2005
New Testament scholar and champion of the traditional skills of textual criticism

It is written by my colleague Prof. David Parker.

BNTC 2005 latest

Although no longer secretary of the British New Testament Society, its website is still hosted here and I offered last year to continue to maintain it, though at that stage I did not realize, of course, that I would not be in the UK for much longer. Anyway, I've begun to do the work for one last time and some of the latest details are now available, specifically the Jesus Seminar, the Paul Seminar and the Acts Seminar.

Update (18 July, 21.20): Acts Seminar page updated with abstract from Jenny Read-Heimerdinger.

SNTS Monograph Series

On Ricoblog, Rick Brannan draws attention to this useful section of the Cambridge University Press website:

Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series

It allows one to view the series by author, date, list number and so on -- a very useful feature -- and it has excerpts available. I would very much like to see T & T Clark putting something similar together for the Library of New Testament Studies and I have got in touch with them to encourage them to take something like this seriously.

Footnote: why is the SNTS Monograph Series always listed as the Society for New testament Studies Monograph Series and never Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas Monograph Series? I wonder if it is because it has a UK publisher; perhaps they were nervous about the Latin for marketing purposes? But then they are one of the most prestigious academic publishers so that seems unlikely.

What is consensus?

Michael Pahl picks up on my post on Tom Wright on the Da Vinci Code and asks some interesting questions about what is meant by "consensus" in scholarship. The post is followed up with an interesting response by Jim Davila on Paleojudaica and some cynical comments from Jim West on Biblical Theology. Michael Pahl then responds further in the Stuff of Earth.

I have enjoyed the above posts and would like to add a couple of comments of my own.

(1) The Tom Wright piece that began the discussion interested me because it seemed to appeal to a consensus that I wished to dispute. And herewith lies the importance of the idea of consensus in scholarship, that by appealing to consensus one is making a public claim that is subject to disagreement and even refutation. When one appeals to consensus, one is doing something that is potentially risky because the appeal relies on a certain self-evident acceptance that what one has described would be accepted by one's peers. So if someone comes along and says, "No, it's not the case that the consensus is that the Gospels were all written by the 80s", the original appeal can looks pretty flaky. In other words, appeal to consensus is not something to undertake lightly. And that pressure itself exercises an influence -- it constrains the scholar not to make an appeal unless s/he thinks that the appeal will meet with widespread recognition.

(2) A related point. Michael brings up the question of polling and the like. Michael's second and third questions are "Who gets to be part of the polling sample? . . . ." and "How does one actually go about doing the polling to assess consensus? . . . ." But I am not sure that consensus can be easily and necessarily equated with "the majority view". A given consensus emerges over time and is something that is the result of the combined force of monographs by experts, the introductory level text books, websites, the passing comments in conference papers, conversations over a beer etc. I am not being facetious about the importance of the latter -- it is in the casual discussions that one begins to feel the existence of a consensus, or the lack of one. Of course there is some relationship between consensus and majority view -- I cannot imagine a consensus that is not also the majority view -- but consensus is about much more than just a count of heads.

Let me illustrate the point with Historical Jesus studies. These comments are, of course, subject to disagreement and refutation, but my reading of the current scene would be to say that the majority of scholars and graduate students hold broadly to the view that Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher (or words to that effect). But this is not the consensus view because there is a significant, vocal minority who hold to a different view, a view most commonly associated with John Dominic Crossan in particular and the Jesus Seminar in general. It's possible that in due course one or other of these views might attain to a consensus, I'd guess the apocalyptic Jesus view because I am persuaded, broadly, by those arguments, but I don't think that it could yet reasonably be called a "consensus".

(3) Another related point. It is often the case that a statement of the lack of consensus on a given point can be useful. Take, for example, the question of Thomas's knowledge of the Synoptic Gospels. Here is an area where I think it can be reasonably said that there is no consensus. And that is a useful thing to know -- I would mention something like that in my teaching so that it could give the students something of a feel of the lie of the land, or of a hotly disputed topic. Similarly, in another area that interests me, the question of Johannine knowledge of the Synoptics: there is no consensus in that area.

(4) Michael also raises the question of the expertise of those who are involved in establishing and declaring consensus,

"Who gets to be part of the polling sample? Only those working within a particular historical or theological perspective or methodological paradigm? All those who have published scholarly monographs on the subject? All scholars who have studied the subject in depth, whether they've published on it or not? And who determines what makes a "scholar" or appropriate authority on the subject?

This is an area where sometimes one needs to break the question down a little. I wrote in my introductory book on The Synoptic Problem that I thought that there was a major difference between those who might be regarded as experts on the Synoptic Problem, or specialists, and the rest. Among the former group, the specialists, there is no consensus -- those who have published on the Synoptic Problem in the last generation have come from a variety of perspectives and there is real disagreement on a solution. Among the latter group, I think that there is still a broad consensus, a consensus in favour of the traditional Two-Source Theory. I mention that as an example of the difficulty of judging the niceties of the establishment of consensus, and an interesting case of disagreement among specialists that has not always filtered down to the rest.

The Mystery of Mar Saba @ Hypotyposeis

One not to miss -- an interesting post on Hypotyposeis on the links between James M. Hunter, The Mystery of Mar Saba first published in 1940 and the Secret Gospel of Mark discovered by Morton Smith in 1958. There's a link to a post on a blog called Christian CADRE that spells out the story and provides further links of interest.

Say it with awe update

My quest to discover if the "Say it with awe" anecdote is apocryphal or not has not made a lot of progress, but I am grateful to Evy Nelson for mentioning this blurb on the film in Turner Classic Movies, which notes:

This anecdote probably never happened, but when John Wayne heard the story he even admitted to friends and associates that it made a great tale.

It's an interesting addition to the end of the anecdote and it appears elsewhere on the net, though never -- as far as I can find -- with any original attribution. It's also interesting because it is typical of the development of apocryphal stories and urban legends that they can add a statement of comment on the traditional story, a statement that distances the teller from the story so as to inoculate the teller against charges of naiveté and provide a clear indication that the teller is smiling too. It has the effect of underlining what a great story it is that the teller has told, with self-conscious recognition of its legendary origin.

Incidentally, I have added a link to the above blurb on my Greatest Story Ever Told page. I have also updated that page with links to the DVD release. I don't own that yet, but only the VHS, so I'll get hold of it, not least because it apparently has "New documentary including on camera interviews with the director and cast" and "Original "Making Of" documentary". You can buy it second hand for a snip too. It looks like that 2 DVD set is only available in the US (Region 1) and not yet in the UK, where we just have the ordinary DVD.

BooksPrice

I received the email below and it may be of interest to some readers. I've used the site and it looks useful:

My name is Lucy. I would like to inform you regarding a new web site that I hope you will find interesting for you and for the readers of the NT Gateway Weblog.

http://www.booksprice.com is a free innovative service of finding the best price on a purchase of several books together. This service is more useful than the standard services which perform one book comparison at a time, and can save more money when buying several books together. In addition to this multiple book comparison approach, booksprice.com offers another unique service of comparing book prices on Amazon wish lists.

I hope that you find the service interesting, and I will be happy to provide you with any explanations you may require.

Lucy Orbach
Marketing Manager

Barnes Tatum on Jesus

The Westar Institute have added a reproduction of an article by W. Barnes Tatum on the film Jesus (dir. Roger Young, 1999):

Jesus -- the Mini-Series: A Review
By W. Barnes Tatum, reproduced from The Fourth R 13/4 (July/August 2000)

I've added a link on the relevant page.

New Testament in Plain English Blog

Thanks to Dave Rattigan for letting me know about a new blog. Seems like it's a blog a day at the moment!

The New Testament in Plain English
A living project where mavericks and scholars translate the Bible into an English for everyone: The PROCESS is the AIM

It's interesting as a multi-author blog. One of its contributors is Wayne Leman and we already know him from Better Bibles Blog. Dave Rattigan is currently just given as "Dave", with no profile. The others are "King of Peace" and P. James Bowen. So my usual plea for full names.

E-Lists page adjustment

I have adjusted the NT Gateway E-Lists page with the up-to-date information about the new Synoptic-L. Incidentally, one hundred people are now signed up. That's good going for less than a week, but it's still much less than half of the original subscribers, so some have not yet caught up or are taking the opportunity to sign out.

Tom Wright on Da Vinci Code

There's another interesting link on the N. T. Wright page. It seems that Tom Wright has read The Da Vinci Code and is inspired to comment:

Decoding Da Vinci (1.8 Mb PDF)
Borderlands: A Journal of Theology and Education 4 (2005): 24-7

. . . . The fantastic popularity of The Da Vinci Code is only partly explicable by its being a real page-turner. Even I, while laughing at its ridiculous thesis, wanted to know what would happen next. (The end, by the way, is a total disappointment.) It plugs in to a major alternative view of Christian origins which has enormous energy behind it just now, especially in America. People want to believe something like this. The only real questions are, Why? And Is there an answer?. . . . .

Not surprisingly, Wright uses the article as a platform for refuting what he sees as "the mainstream liberal-American ‘myth of Christian origins’ which is widely believed, indeed taught, in many churches and seminaries" and he goes on to enumerate the items and to offer counters to them. Some comments:

By contrast, the canonical gospels – despite every effort to prove the contrary – are still regarded by the great majority of scholars as early, written by the 80s of the first century at the latest, i.e. within fifty years of Jesus’ lifetime. Here we are back with some of the foundational historical work done by two former Bishops of Durham, Lightfoot and Westcott. The New Testament
documents are solidly rooted in the first century. The gospels are dependent on traditions that are very early indeed. Professor Richard Bauckham of St Andrews, who knows more about early Christian traditions than most other scholars put together, is about to publish a book arguing for a much stronger eye-witness content in the canonical gospels than has normally been supposed.

The first sentence is an overstatement. I don't think the majority, let alone the great majority, date all four canonical gospels to the 80s, and certainly not the 80s "at the latest". My reading of the consensus would be that Mark is written by the 80s -- it's usually dated somewhere in the late 60s to early 70s -- but that Matthew, Luke and John are variously dated anywhere from the 80s to the early second century. The statement that "the gospels are dependent on traditions that are very early indeed" is also an overstatement. I would say that the consensus view is that the Gospels may contain some traditions that are early; the jury is very much out on how many, how far, which ones. On the Bauckham note, I look forward to the book. This is the first that I have heard of it, though Bauckham's article on the same topic in the first issue of the Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus is worth a look.

. . . . a strong political critique . . . . Jesus is Lord, therefore Caesar isn’t. That is there in Paul. It is there in Matthew. In John. In Revelation. That is why, from at least as early as the second century, the Roman empire was persecuting the people who were reading Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul and the rest – not, we note, the people who were reading ‘Thomas’, ‘Philip’ and the other Nag Hammadi codices. Why would Caesar worry about people rearranging their private spiritualities?

I recall Wright making a similar remark in his address at the BNTC last year and I am intrigued by it. How do we know that those being persecuted were those reading what became canonical? I suppose that there are signs that Ignatius was reading books that became canonical. No doubt there is other evidence too, but it's going to be a tough one to demonstrate, I'd have thought.

More on the Tom Wright Page

Another new article on the N. T. Wright Page:

Paul in Different Perspectives
Lecture 1: Starting Points and Opening Reflections
Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church, Monroe, Louisiana
3 January 2005

There's a link to another article too, and I want to comment on that separately.

Say it with awe

I enjoyed Jim Davila's post Apocrypha Now! on Paleojudaica concerning an urban legend on Ben Hur, with the link to the article here:

Apocrypha Now! Urban Legends of the Silver Screen
David Emery

Let me add something that I suspect of being an urband legend. In The Greatest Story Ever Told, there is a famous cameo for John Wayne. Here's a typical version of the story, from an interview with the late Brandon Lee:

Lee: Nope, no John Wayne. Did you ever hear the story about John Wayne when he was in Greatest Story Ever Told?

MAL: No.

Lee: Well, there he is at the bottom of the cross, Christ is dying, and I believe his line was, "Truly he was the son of God." So he said the line and the director came over to him and said, "You think could you do that with a little more awe?"

He said, "Sure," and so they roll the cameras for a second take and he said, (Brandon assumes a Texas twang) "Aweeee, truly he is the son of God." [laughter] It's suppose to be a true story, I don't know. [Source: Brandon Lee's Last Interview]

Well, I suspect it's just a great urban legend. I wonder if there is any way of finding out whether it is for certain though. Some internet sites hint that they think that it is (e.g. here). George Stevens and John Wayne have both been dead for a generation, so no one can now ask them. I wonder if anyone else has ever made an informed comment?