Friday, September 15, 2006

The Pope on Harnack and the New Testament -- and Muslims

Pope Benedict's recent speech at the University of Regensburg in Germany (September 12), a celebration of the role played by logos as reason in theology, has some interesting remarks about "dehellenization" in the history of Christianity, which I draw to your attention lest you missed them in the current fracas surrounding other parts of the speech. Quoting from a (not great) English translation on The Guardian:
The liberal theology of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries ushered in a second stage in the process of dehellenization, with Adolf von Harnack as its outstanding representative. When I was a student, and in the early years of my teaching, this programme was highly influential in Catholic theology too. It took as its point of departure Pascal's distinction between the God of the philosophers and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

In my inaugural lecture at Bonn in 1959, I tried to address the issue, and I do not intend to repeat here what I said on that occasion, but I would like to describe at least briefly what was new about this second stage of dehellenization.

Harnack's central idea was to return simply to the man Jesus and to his simple message, underneath the accretions of theology and indeed of hellenization: this simple message was seen as the culmination of the religious development of humanity. Jesus was said to have put an end to worship in favour of morality. In the end he was presented as the father of a humanitarian moral message.

Fundamentally, Harnack's goal was to bring Christianity back into harmony with modern reason, liberating it, that is to say, from seemingly philosophical and theological elements, such as faith in Christ's divinity and the triune God. In this sense, historical-critical exegesis of the New Testament, as he saw it, restored to theology its place within the university: theology, for Harnack, is something essentially historical and therefore strictly scientific.

What it is able to say critically about Jesus is, so to speak, an expression of practical reason and consequently it can take its rightful place within the university . . . .

. . . . Before I draw the conclusions to which all this has been leading, I must briefly refer to the third stage of dehellenization, which is now in progress. In the light of our experience with cultural pluralism, it is often said nowadays that the synthesis with Hellenism achieved in the early Church was a preliminary inculturation which ought not to be binding on other cultures.

The latter are said to have the right to return to the simple message of the New Testament prior to that inculturation, in order to inculturate it anew in their own particular milieux. This thesis is not only false; it is coarse and lacking in precision. The New Testament was written in Greek and bears the imprint of the Greek spirit, which had already come to maturity as the Old Testament developed. True, there are elements in the evolution of the early Church which do not have to be integrated into all cultures. Nonetheless, the fundamental decisions made about the relationship between faith and the use of human reason are part of the faith itself; they are developments consonant with the nature of faith itself . . . .
The speech, especially in translation, does not make easy reading, and I have gone over it several times. How far those gathered would have been able to pick up some of the finer nuances, I'm not sure. What does seem clear is that the media could and should be reporting this speech more responsibly. I am neither a Catholic nor a Muslim, but it is clear that the remarks that are now being widely quoted function in the context of the speech in a way that is not being reported accurately. Most media sources (e.g. today's BBC One O'Clock news, which I often catch while eating my breakfast here) are able to see that when talking about violence, the Pope was quoting Manuel II Paleologus (described as "the erudite Byzantine emperor", late 14th century), but what is more important is that the remarks are quoted in order to get to what in fact is the theme of the whole speech, Faith, Reason and the University,
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident.
Nevertheless, I can't help thinking that a little extra caution might have been useful given the brief nature of the quotation and discussion of Manuel II Paleologus. I am not an expert on Islam, but I would be troubled by the implication that some might take that Islam does not embrace reason, especially here:
But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury [editor of the Manuel II Paleologus dialogue in question, MSG] quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.
This is where, I think, some additional clarity and sensitivity might make a useful contribution. And on the other side, those who are overreacting to the speech might well wish to demonstrate the importance of reason in their thinking by engaging it rather than caricaturing it.

Moreschini and Norelli, The Letters of Paul and of the Pauline Tradition

Many thanks to Holger Szesnat for this one, which I've just added to the Paul: Books and Articles page:

Claudio Moreschini and Enrico Norelli, “The Letters of Paul and of the Pauline Tradition”, Chapter 1 in Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature: A Literary History (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2005)

It's made available by Hendrickson as a PDF sample chapter. It's such an excellent, clear introduction to issues involved with the study of Paul that I will be recommending it to my undergraduate Paul class.

Thursday, September 14, 2006

Split between Paul and Barnabas II

I posted some thoughts the other day on the Split between Paul and Barnabas, wondering whether it might help us with some of those vexing issues of Pauline chronology. There were lots of useful comments, for which thanks to all concerned. A couple of things in particular arise from these: (1) The brief reference to Barnabas in 1 Cor. 9.6 need not imply friendship (e.g. Jim West). (2) The relevance of the data on Barnabas is adjusted if Galatians 2.1-10 = Acts 11.27-30; 12.25 rather than Galatians 2.1-10 = Acts 15. On the second point, I am not at all persuaded by the case that Acts 11.27-30 represents the visit to Jerusalem Paul is talking about in Galatians 2. The case that Acts 15 and Gal. 2 are talking about the same Jerusalem council seems to be to be very strong indeed. I'll blog on why I think so in due course, and also on what I think is going in in Acts 11.27-30. But (1) is, I think, an important objection to making anything of the 1 Cor. 9.6 reference to Barnabas, particularly given that:
  • There is no hint in the Corinthian correspondence that Barnabas played any role in the mission to Corinth. This is a significant silence (i.e. an argument about silence and not an argument from silence) given that others involved in Christian mission in Corinth are mentioned so often, Timothy, Titus, Apollo, Sosthenes.

  • The primary evidence from Paul lines up with the secondary evidence of Acts here, that the split with Barnabas had in fact already happened before the mission to Corinth, let alone 1 Corinthians.

  • If 1 Cor. 9.6 comes from a time before Paul's split with Barnabas, the window for the writing of 1 Corinthians that would be implied by this is simply too small. I can't believe that 1 Corinthians was written in between Jerusalem (Gal. 2.1-10) and Antioch (Gal. 2.11-20).
In short, then, and against my earlier speculation, I doubt that we can make much of 1 Cor. 9.6 as helping us out with Pauline chronology. The split between Paul and Barnabas had already happened by this point, but Barnabas is mentioned in the same way that Paul mentions others who are not actually his best mates, e.g. in the same context the brothers of the Lord and Cephas.

In an unexpected way, though, this has thrown up something relevant for reflecting on Pauline chronology. Given that 1 Corinthians and, indeed, the earlier mission to Corinth, appear to be post the Paul-and-Barnabas partnership, this is an important piece of evidence against Lüdemann's theory of an early mission to Corinth (early 40s). I need to go back to Lüdemann to see if he deals with this, and how.

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Teaching Notes 3: A Q Sceptic takes on Q

[Previous posts in this semester's Teaching Notes series: Teaching Paul; Teaching Notes 1; Teaching Notes 2: Playing with Paul on Powerpoint]

I have talked a little in my previous posts about teaching Paul in a course called Rel 108: The Life and Letters of Paul. I have not yet discussed the other undergraduate course I am taking this semester, Rel 102: Introduction to New Testament. This is now the third time that I have take the course at Duke, twice last year and once this (I am only teaching it once a year in future -- twice a year is far too much for the same course, however much fun it is). For some students, this will be their only NT course; for some their only Religion course. For others, it will form the basis for going on to Historical Jesus and / or Life and Letters of Paul. My philosophy with NT Introduction is to try to make it as balanced as possible without making it boring. As far as I am concerned, that means that it is important to take a little extra time if there is a topic of particular interest to the course instructor. It will not, therefore, surprise anyone that I like to take three (75 minute) sessions on the Synoptic Problem.

Broadly, I divide up these sessions into (1) Introduction plus data, (2) Triple Tradition and Marcan Priority, (3) Double Tradition and Q. The first is particularly important -- I am critical of those who launch into the study of the Synoptic Problem by jumping straight to solutions to it. This encourages people to view the data through the lens of the solution in question, usually the Two-Source Theory. In the session on Marcan Priority, I focus in on the competing claims of the Griesbach Hypothesis vs. Marcan Priority theories (i.e. Farrer and Two-Source). In today's session, the third, which focused on Double Tradition and Q, I took half the session to present the case for Q and the second half to present the case against. I thought it might be worth mentioning here since Tim Lewis has called on people to share their experiences of Teaching Q on his new Source Theory blog.

What I attempt to do is to present the case for Q as clearly and strongly as possible. I don't preview objections, I avoid using terms like "supposedly" and "allegedly" and in general make the attempt to imagine myself into the position of a real life Q theorist, something that is not too difficult because I know (and like) quite a lot of them. I enjoy this exercise very much and regard it as indispensable if the students are to get a feel for the generally perceived plausibility of the case for Q. Of course to do this in 30 minutes is not easy, but I distill it to four key arguments (Luke's order, Luke's lack of Matthew's additions to Mark, Luke's lack of M and Alternating Primitivity). After the break (we take a four-five minute break at the mid point), I present the case against Q, attempting to lay out my objections to the points made in the first half. I should add that I am aware that the overall rhetorical effect of doing things like this is to present my own view as the more plausible, and in general students are usually persuaded, at least if their comments and mid-term papers are anything to go by. Given those circumstances, I always make clear that my own view is the minority one, that the Q theory is the majority view and that it essential that they come to terms first hand with what the majority are saying. In an attempt to pursue that goal, for example, I set them Bart Ehrman's chapter on the Synoptic Problem before the class so that they can experience the consensus view directly.

There is one argument I never use in teaching but which always comes through in student written work and comments and I am never entirely sure what to make of it. It seems to worry most undergraduate students a great deal, far more than it worries me, that Q is hypothetical. I always get asked, "But what is the evidence for it?" where by evidence, they mean manuscript witness. When I explain that there isn't any, I get some funny looks. I then often have to explain that this is not as big a deal as it might sound to them, but I am seldom able to convince people about this. I can't imagine what it must be like for a Q theorist who has to deal with the same questions. Perhaps I get asked because they are precociously attempting to add to the problems they perceive that I have with it, but I don't think so.

One of the delights of teaching Duke students is that they so often anticipate objections before one has made them. When I was talking about alternating primitivity as an important argument in favour of Q, I used the text book examples of "Blessed are the poor" vs. "Blessed are the poor in spirit" and "Our father in heaven" vs. "Father". At the beginning of our second half, one student pronounced herself unconvinced by this argument since, she said, it could be that Luke simply liked less flowery, more concise terminology, as she did when she was redacting other people's material. Another pointed out that some appearances of greater primitivity might be illusory given a careful look at Luke's actual preferred characteristics and tendencies. Sometimes I think my job is a bit too easy. (But then again, I'm the one up, working after midnight, reflecting on my teaching!).

N. T. Wright on Trusting the Gospels

Over on Paleojudaica, Jim Davila draws attention to this new piece on Beliefnet:

Can We Trust the Gospels?
None of the Gnostic texts--or any other recently unearthed find--can trump the four canonical gospels
By N.T. Wright

It is apparently an excerpt from Simply Christian: Why Christianity Makes Sense, published earlier this year. Jim quotes the following piece:
The version of Thomas we now have, like most of the Nag Hammadi material, is written in Coptic, a language spoken in Egypt at the time. But it has been demonstrated that Thomas is a translation from Syriac, a language quite like the Aramaic that Jesus must have spoken (though he pretty certainly spoke Greek as well, just as many people in today's world speak English as a second language). But the Syriac traditions that Thomas embodies can be dated, quite reliably, not to the first century at all, but to the second half of the second century. That is over a hundred years after Jesus's own day--in other words, seventy to a hundred years after the time when the four canonical gospels were in widespread use across the early church.
Jim adds that he is "very skeptical in principle of our ability to say that Thomas was composed (or transmitted) specifically in Syriac". So am I. Wright's source for the claim is Nicholas Perrin's Thomas and Tatian: The Relationship Between the Gospel of Thomas and the Diatessaron, which attempts to demonstrate that Thomas was originally composed in Syriac and that it was dependent on the Diatessaron. Nick Perrin (my co-editor on Questioning Q) was Tom Wright's research assistant and it is clear that Wright himself is convinced by the case, but at this point I think it is fair to say that several others are not (e.g. see reviews by Parker, Poirier, Shedinger and Williams). My own qualms, which I have shared with Nick, relate to the verbatim agreement, in Greek, between Thomas and the Synoptics, which create difficulties for the Syriac composition theory.

The excerpt also notes:
What's more, despite efforts to prove the opposite, the sayings of Jesus as they appear in Thomas show clear indications that they are not as original as the parallel material (where it exists) in the canonical gospels. Sayings have, in many cases, been quietly doctored in Thomas to express a very different viewpoint.
I am very much inclined to agree, except that it is important to point out what Wright does not, that the canonical Gospels also feature material that has been "doctored to express a very different viewpoint". Indeed, that is the whole point of redaction criticism. I think one always needs to be careful, in discussions of canonical and non-canonical gospels aimed at beginners with no training in Biblical Studies, to make clear that what one sees in non-canonical gospels is at least in continuity with what is underway in canonical gospels, viz. changes are constantly being made that speak to the needs of that author's differing situation. Having said that, I am inclined to agree with Wright (see the continuation of the paragraph above, which I won't quote here), and against some Thomas scholars, that the "god" of Thomas is often difficult to equate with the God of the canonical Gospels, especially in relation to the role played by the Scriptures in Thomas. I can't see anything that implies respect for the Old Testament in Thomas and a lot that implies disdain.

Another statement needs some qualification, I think:
Thomas and the other works like it--that is, almost all the so-called "gospels" outside the New Testament--are collections of sayings. There is hardly any narrative about things Jesus did or things that happened to him.
This seems to me to be an overstatement. "Almost all"? Gospel of Peter, Protevangelium of James, just to mention two of the earliest?

On the other hand, it is always refreshing to hear Q scepticism making its way into popular books:
I have never shared the enthusiasm for a source widely referred to as "Q," which many suppose lies behind Matthew and Luke.
In my own case, I have always wished I could share the enthusiasm some have for Q because it would so greatly add to our concrete data from early Christianity to know that there was this written source that pre-dated Matthew and Luke. It is to Wright's credit that he does not take the easy road here popular with many a conservative critic to seize on the Q hypothesis as a means of securing early, accurate information about Jesus' preaching.

Update (Thursday, 20.24): Michael Bird comments on Perrin's book on Euangelion.

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Unnecessary abbreviation

I mentioned earlier a review of Mark Chancey's recent book and it gives me the opportunity to make a minor gripe. The reviewer begins "Mark Chancey (hereafter C.) . . ." and then for the rest of the review it is "C. says" etc. Is it just me or do others find this unnecessary abbreviation, even of authors' names, rather annoying? Does it really take so much longer to write "Chancey" than to write "C."? If one is annoyed by having to write that each time, one could easily write a little macro, or do a find and replace or similar. It certainly doesn't take any longer to read "Chancey" than "C."; in fact to read the actual name is quicker because you don't keep stopping to think, "Now who is the author again?" I take this review just as an example of this bizarre bit of contemporary style; it's now pretty common. Much too common for my liking.

Update (Wednesday, 20.55): See several useful comments on this post and especially Brandon Wason's remark that it is apparently obligatory for the BMCR, which I had forgotten. All the more reason for one to complain about it, of course. To encapsulate what I think is problematic and surprising about this usage: it is note form creeping into published prose, remarkable in an electronic era where one does not even need physically to type out every common word. This kind of thing should be becoming less common now and not more.

Richard Hays gives Prevatte Lecture Series

This news release appears on Campbell University's website and relates to a renowned colleague at Duke:

Campbell Divinity School to host Prevatte Lecture Series
Campbell University’s Divinity School will host its annual Prevatte Biblical Studies Lecture series next month.

Dr. Richard Hays, the George Washington Ivey Professor of New Testament at Duke Divinity School will deliver a series entitled “Reading Scripture Through the Eyes of the Gospel Writers”. The first lecture will be held Monday, October 23rd at 7:00 pm in Taylor Hall. The second and third lectures will be held on Tuesday, October 24th at 10:40 am and at 1:45 pm. Tuesday services will be held at Memorial Baptist Church, adjacent to campus. The series is open to students and alumni of the Divinity School as well as ministers and interested lay persons in the region . . .
Click on the link above for the full press release.

Mark Chancey, Greco-Roman Culture and the Galilee of Jesus

On his Novum Testamentum blog, Brandon Wason draws attention to this BMCR Review:

Mark A. Chancey, Greco-Roman Culture and the Galilee of Jesus (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series, 134; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)
Reviewed by Thomas J. Kraus, Hilpoltstein

I was delighted to hear about this second book from Chancey, following hot on the heels of his Myth of a Gentile Galilee, a revised version of his Duke PhD dissertation. A quick visit to the Cambridge University Press website gives one a good amount of information about the book including an excerpt (pp. 1-10 of the book, which breaks off just as you are getting interested, which, I suppose, is the point) and link to a Google Book Search on it:

Greco-Roman Culture and the Galilee of Jesus
Mark A. Chancey

Review of Biblical Literature latest

Latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature under the NT and related heading:

David Brakke
Demons and the Making of the Monk: Spiritual Combat in Early Christianity
Reviewed by Virginia Burrus

Jo-Ann Brant, Charles W. Hedrick, and Chris Shea, eds.
Ancient Fiction: The Matrix of Early Christian and Jewish Narrative
Reviewed by Loveday Alexander

Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken, eds.
Isaiah in the New Testament
Reviewed by Michael P. Knowles

John Nolland
The Gospel of Matthew
Reviewed by James P. Sweeney

James A. Smith
Marks of an Apostle: Deconstruction, Philippians, and Problematizing Pauline Theology
Reviewed by Veronica Koperski

Robert B. Stewart, ed.
The Resurrection of Jesus: John Dominic Crossan and N. T. Wright in Dialogue
Reviewed by Michael R. Licona

Stephen D. Renn, ed.
Expository Dictionary of Bible Words: Word Studies for Key English Bible Words Based on the Hebrew and Greek Texts: Coded to the Revised Strong's Numbering System
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas

R. S. Sugirtharajah, ed.
The Postcolonial Biblical Reader
Reviewed by Peter Smit

Friday, September 08, 2006

The Split between Paul and Barnabas

I have been wondering recently whether Barnabas might help us with some of the vexed problems of sorting out Paul's chronology. Paul and Luke are agreed that there was a major split between Paul and Barnabas, and they are agreed on the timing, not long after the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15 // Gal. 2.1-10), though they disagree on the content of the dispute between them:
Gal. 2. 11. But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12. For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. 13. The rest of the Judeans joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy.

Acts 15. 36 Some time later Paul said to Barnabas, "Let us go back and visit the brothers in all the towns where we preached the word of the Lord and see how they are doing." 37 Barnabas wanted to take John, also called Mark, with them, 38 but Paul did not think it wise to take him, because he had deserted them in Pamphylia and had not continued with them in the work. 39 They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. Barnabas took Mark and sailed for Cyprus, 40 but Paul chose Silas and left, commended by the brothers to the grace of the Lord.
He never appears again in Acts, nor does he appear again in Paul's correspondence except in 1 Corinthians 9, one tantalising, brief reference:
1 Cor. 9.6: “Or do only Barnabas and I not have a right to refrain from working?”
It looks like, when writing 1 Corinthians, Paul was still friendly with Barnabas. But if that is the case, we have only a narrow window for the writing of 1 Corinthians. The letter is clearly written after the Jerusalem Council since the collection is now underway (see 1 Cor. 16), but if it is also written while Paul is still friendly with Barnabas, it is written in that narrow window between the events reported in Gal. 2.1-10 (Jerusalem Council) and Gal. 2.11-20 (Dispute at Antioch). Is that a large enough window?

Introduction to Textual Criticism

Following on from Pete Williams's question about the best introduction to textual criticism, Stephen Carlson offers his opinion. Debate is between the Alands and Metzger. But I'd start anyone off with David Parker, The Living Text of the Gospels (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Amazon have it on "Search Inside" so you can get a good taster before buying. And there are limited previews on Google Books too, like a lot of CUP's stuff. I recommend this book because it introduces you not just to the discipline of textual criticism but also to why it matters and why it is interesting.

Source Theory Blog

Let me join Stephen Carlson in his welcome to Tim Lewis's new blog, Source Theory, which aims to "introduce the Synoptic Problem to students", one of my favourite topics, and something that has been on my mind over the last week or two since I am currently covering that with my New Introduction Class. Welcome, Tim. I've added the blog to my blogroll.

Thursday, September 07, 2006

Electronic editions of LNTS / JSNTS

Many thanks to Daniel Foster for the following news from Logos Software:

-----
We now have three prepublication products on offer that include volumes from JSNTS or articles from JSNT:

Library of NT Studies: JSNTS on Paul (17 volumes)

Library of NT Studies: JSNTS on the Gospels and Acts (16 volumes)

Sheffield Reader Collection (12 volumes)

These collections, along with the host of other products coming out of the Continuum über-license, enhance the theological breadth and variety of resources available for Logos Bible Software. We hope to attract new users who have never given a thought to Logos or who haven't checked in lately and don't realize what a wide range of material is being made available for our platform.
----
I have also belatedly added Logos Bible Software Blog to my blogroll. (I've dropped some other currently silent blogs into Limbo at the same time. As always, they return to the blogroll once they revive).

10,000 + spam messages

Is anyone else getting spammed furiously at the moment? Most of my spam goes straight into my Gmail spam folder -- Gmail has a pretty good filter. But because of the odd bit of bleed-through into my Inbox, one can spot trends and I noticed this morning that I had received over 10,000 (ten thousand) spam messages since last night. That is a seriously large amount, isn't it? Good thing I didn't have to delete them all manually.

Paula on Paul

On Paleojudaica, Jim Davila draws attention to a great interview with Paula Fredriksen on Vision:

Interviews: Paula Fredriksen
Paul and Paula

You can read the full interview, or you can watch a clip. It's full of interesting remarks, and would be ideal for new students of Paul -- I am going to recommend it to my class. Some personal highlights:
The way most modern people get their idea of ancient history is through the movies. In the movies, Romans dress differently from everybody else. The Romans are the ones speaking with a British accent, and the good, liberty-loving slaves are speaking with American accents. It’s an oral coding for the different populations.
It is so encouraging that an American has spotted that too, an aspect of American films British people often laugh about. (It's not just true of the ancient world; baddies in American films set in the contemporary world often have English accents, even when they are supposed to be French or German).
In I, Claudius, when Herod Agrippa comes on stage after he’s been home in Palestine for a few years, he has prayer curls the way an 18th-century Polish Jew would, because the movie has only a few seconds to indicate visually who the character is. But the historical Herod, of course, would have looked just like any other Roman. And Paul, for that matter, would probably have been clean-shaven too. People dress like each other if they’re contemporary. This idea of clearly separate populations comes from trying to code these people—historically, when we try to distinguish between them, and also visually, with movies, to make it easier to tell the story. In real life, these populations all swim in the same sea. The Western Jewish population is speaking the great Western vernacular of Greek, and there’s a normal tendency to adopt local habits.
I must admit that I've never imagined Paul as clean shaven, but come to think of it, that description of his appeareance in The Acts of Paul and Thecla does not mention a beard (and it does mention his eyebrows). I was also intrigued by Prof. Fredriksen's answer to the following:
DH: We hear increasingly about the new perspective on Paul; what exactly is the “old” perspective?

PF: The old perspective on Paul is that he became a Christian, and that that meant something other than being Jewish. It’s captured very nicely in a children’s Christian cartoon I once saw, where Paul is on the road to Damascus, and he has the Jewish male head covering—the kippa—on his head. He gets knocked down, the shining light is on him, Jesus speaks to him, and for the rest of the cartoon he doesn’t have a kippa anymore. Finished. He’s “Christian.” Christianity is so easily imagined as somehow the opposite of Judaism, because that’s how Christianity has presented Judaism to itself in the centuries long after Paul. In Paul’s lifetime, Christianity is only understandable as an extreme form of Judaism. And Paul thinks of himself as a Jew. What’s his choice? The only other option would be to think of himself as a gentile.
But I would also have liked to have heard her answer to the question "What is the new perspective?" because the answer to that question is not entirely clear to me. It's a bit like "What is the third quest of the historical Jesus?" It is coming to mean some quite different things to different people. I hope to post a little more on my thoughts on that, as it happens, in due course.

Judith Newman on Scripturalization

It's good to see the following abstract mentioned on Torrey Seland's Philo of Alexandria blog:

Judith H. Newman, University of Toronto
The Composition of Prayers and Songs in Philo's De Vita Contemplativa (30 min)
Discussion
(30 min)
Abstract: "In contrast to Greek pagan prayer and in spite of its infinite variety, early Jewish prayers are marked by their interpretive engagement with Torah. How can we account for this production of scripturalized prayers? This paper compares the "philosophy" practiced by the Therapeutae at Mareotis with the nature and function of prayers at Qumran to argue that all such utterances were offered as manifestations of internalized torah, conceived through the prophetic gift of divine spirit."

This is part of a session at the SBL Annual Meeting in November with the following information:

S19-72Philo of Alexandria
Joint Session With: Philo of Alexandria, History and Literature of Early Rabbinic Judaism
11/19/2006 1:00 PM to 3:30 PM Room: 140A - CC
Theme: Reception of Philo of Alexandria in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity: The Question Revisited

The entire session looks most interesting, and lines up James Kugel (Newman's teacher), Maren Niehoff and Daniel Boyarin. (Perhaps I may add that I am a fan of Kugel's work -- his The Bible as It Was is a real favourite).

The reason for my interest in Newman's work on what she calls "scripturalization" is that I have attempted to apply the same concept to New Testament texts and specifically the Passion Narrative. I have a piece due out soon on this called "Scripturalization in Mark's Crucifixion Narrative" in Geert Van Oyen and Tom Shepherd (eds.), The Passion in Mark (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology; Leuven: Peeters, 2006): 33-47. I have another article on the same topic due out next year.

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

Zhubert addition of LSJ

The fantastic Zhubert.com has now added access to Liddell-Scott (as well as Middle Liddell) via the Perseus site (see LSJ and Middle Liddell Lexicons Online). This means that you can click on a given word in the Greek NT on Zhubert and as well as word frequencies and all the other things you go to Zhubert for, you can also get a direct link to LSJ and Middle Liddell.

Teaching Notes 2: Playing with Paul on Powerpoint

[See also Teaching Paul and Teaching Notes 1]

Monday night was the second of my classes on The Life and Letters of Paul, another two-and-a-half hour slot. This one confirmed to me what I suspected from the first class, and what one could in any case have predicted, that this is a long session and that concentration and energy levels are flagging by the end, for the students too. The 15 minute break mid-way is very much needed, and I was pleased that there was a good amount of interaction from the students in the first half. I had asked them to read the second half of Acts as preparation (alongside a couple of chapters of Horrell) and they were full of interesting questions and observations. As the semester progresses, I am going to formalize the process of interacting on the pre-class reading by providing lists of questions they have to answer on the passages in question, and they will bring these to the class.

The topic yesterday was "The Paul of Acts and the Paul of the Letters". Some of this is enjoyably straightforward, introduction to the issues surrounding what Luke tells us about Paul and what Paul tells us about Paul, but other parts are more complex. In particular, Pauline chronology, and getting Acts alongside Galatians (and the rest) is a topic that is not easy to introduce to newcomers and it takes a little patience and teasing out. And for the first time in such a course, I decided to spend some time on the order (sequence) of Paul's letters, not least because it is a topic that I have begun to find fascinating and rewarding myself. Teaching is always so much more enjoyable, both for the teacher and the students, if the teacher has a particular perspective on the evidence, an original idea or a different slant.

As I was preparing my fairly detailed hand-out, I began to wonder whether the hand-out might on this occasion be usefully supplemented with a Powerpoint Presentation. As I mentioned last time, one of the perks of a larger class is that you get to teach in one of the nice large Divinity School classrooms, and these offer you far better technical facilities. In other words, you don't have to take in your own laptop and spend ages unlocking boxes and setting up. There is a console with full room controls, PC, CD and DVD player, big screen, microphone, the works. I don't think I have ever used Powerpoint before in a regular undergraduate lecture. I am one of those who sometimes uses it in public lectures or presentations, especially where I need to provide illustrations, but I find its usefulness limited in the weekly class. On this occasion, though, the thing that made me want to use it was the complexity of the data on the hand-out, with lots of quotations, views and ins-and-outs. I was concerned about two related things: (1) Would the students be able to follow the material on the hand-out, along with my lecture, over such a long period? (2) Would I be able to follow the material on the hand-out over such a long period? My concern on the latter is that I tend to prepare lectures carefully, but I deliver them largely from memory, occasionally using the hand-out to remind me of structure. But the more detailed the hand-out and the longer the class, the less straightforward it is to do that. So the Powerpoint Presentation acted as a kind of autocue, an aid for me keeping my thoughts coherent and ordered.

I was quite pleased with this as a device. It helped greatly in keeping me focused on the right material in the right order. Order is important -- it is too easy for me to leap to a related point that I might, in fact, have been planning to use at a different and more appropriate point. And it is too easy to miss out a given point altogether because one's eyes have slipped on the hand-out, or one's memory has forgotten the structure.

I began thinking about the use of Powerpoint again recently having read Scot McKnight's "curmudeongly carpings" in PowerPointing in Class: Not! on Jesus Creed, a post that received 68 comments, coming in all directions. I think I stand somewhere in the middle on this kind of debate. My general feeling is: use it if it is going to enhance your presentation in an important way; don't use if for its own sake. I suspect that Prof. McKnight might, one of these days, become a convert -- his seventh point, in which he admits that it has some uses, sounds like someone teetering on the edge of dabbling in it. Of his other points, the first, "it minimizes the word and the ability to speak with words", need only be the case if one uses it badly or inappropriately. One might as well say the same thing about hand-outs, which can also be used well or misused. The second point, though, I have a lot of sympathy with:
About 50% of the time something goes wrong: the computer doesn’t work, the connection doesn’t work, the screen doesn’t come down.
Too true; that's happened to me many a time, and I stopped using technology in classes in Birmingham for that reason. The only thing I'd add here is that it is ideal, if possible, to get to the classroom in good time, well ahead of the class. You can then check that everything is working fine. If you you are lucky enough to have Teaching Assistants, as I am, you can even ask them to do this (but I like to know for myself that everything's working -- a little neurosis doesn't do one any harm).

Further comments on Scot McKnight's critique:
Third, it’s an all-consuming passion for some to the effect that without PowerPoint they can’t teach. You can tell this when the stuff doesn’t work: they don’t know what to do with themselves.
If that's the case, then they are simply bad teachers and they have a lot of work to do. I must admit that I have sometimes wondered if Powerpoint helps to turn bad teachers into mediocre ones.
Fourth, most of the time it is just outlines on the screen; hand them out or speak your way through them. It permits more eye contact.
I agree that eye contact is important. One of the things that I dislike about Powerpoint is that it can encourage people to stare at the screen instead of engaging with me. The "hand them out" point, though, draws attention to one of the values of Powerpoint. If you have a detailed hand-out, you can then use Powerpoint to provide some visual representation of a handful of key points. In other words, I would always want to use it in addition to a hand-out and not instead. If you have hearing-impaired people in your class too, a detailed hand-out is ideal -- they then have a resource to take home and study and which can supplement the Powerpoint.
Fifth, it takes so much time to produce a presentation that its yield is less than its effort. How do I know this? I hear profs and preachers talk about how much time is involved.
No, I don't agree with this. It takes 30-40 minutes to put a simple Powerpoint presentation together, perhaps even less if you have already prepared your hand-out. And if you've used one once, you can go back and enhance it on another occasion.
Sixth — this is probably the bottom-line for me (that’s a pun) — it seems to me to be the transfer of the business model to the classroom, and teaching the arts and humanities is not business. Business dazzles. Human communication is not dazzling: it’s eye ball to eye ball talking.
Agreed, yet there are topics in our area that are data-intensive. This week I've had Pauline chronology on Monday and Synoptic Problem today, both data-rich, intensive subjects. Indeed, unless the students get a basic feeling for the data, they will have no idea how to navigate their way through the solutions (perhaps one of the reasons that some students want to rush to theories and solutions before they have mastered the data). I reckon that on such occasions, or on occasions where lots of pictures are going to be helpful, Powerpoint can be ideal. But it's like any tool: it's the way you use it that matters.

However, I am not sure whether I will use it again in the near future. One of the things that I dislike about it in the undergraduate regular lecture context is that it makes it harder to encourage student participation, not least because it gives the impression that they are an audience of a show, the passive participants in someone else's performance.

David Garland

This story appeared on The Baylor Lariat:

Truett assistant dean awarded position as Hinson Endowed Chair of Christian Scriptures
Sept. 6, 2006
By CLAIRE ST. AMANT
Reporter
"I don't know why you are interviewing me," said Dr. David E. Garland, assistant dean of George W. Truett Theological Seminary. "Really, I'm not that interesting."

His credentials and co-workers beg to differ.

Garland was recently named the William M. Hinson Endowed Chair of Christian Scriptures.

"When we were looking for an outstanding scholar to recognize, we realized that we didn't have to go any further than our own campus," Truett dean, Dr. Paul Powell, said.
Congratulations to Professor Garland. I looked up my Scholars pages and saw that his faculty page was not there, so I have added it.

Tuesday, September 05, 2006

Duke the best place to study theology?

Ben Witherington (via Generous Orthodoxy Think Tank) draws attention to the following article in First Things

First Things: On the Square (August 30 2006)
R. R. Reno
U.S. New [sic] & World Report has just published its annual rankings of higher education. In addition to calling the horse race for No. 1 university, the magazine also puts out rankings of graduate programs . . . .

. . . . . The ratings game got me thinking. The magazine has nothing to say about theology (or religious studies, as it is called at many universities). So I thought I might throw out some observations about the best places to pursue a doctoral degree in the sorts of fields I study—theology and ethics. I haven’t developed any objective method of analysis, but this is not the first time I have thought about graduate programs. Students often ask me for advice, so over the years I have formed some impressions about how the programs compare to one another. Here are the best schools, to my mind, followed by some comments about the also-rans.

At the top of my list is Duke. Richard Hays and Ellen Davis are leading a strong cohort of biblical scholars toward the recovery of a theological voice in biblical interpretation. Add to that the creative mind of Stanley Hauerwas, the rigorous mind of Reinhard Huetter, the learned mind of Geoffrey Wainwright, and the outspoken voice of David Steinmetz, as well as some excellent younger faculty (Amy Laura Hall, Warren Smith, Steve Chapman, and others), and you have a program firing on all cylinders. Three cheers for the Dean, Gregory Jones. He has done wonders in bucking the trends toward the banality and post-Christian distraction that afflict other mainline institutions. It isn’t perfect, but it’s as good as we have now in the United States . . . .
It's nice to see Reno rating Duke so highly, even if his criteria will not be shared by many looking into graduate programmes in religion. There are a few remarks I'd lack to add by way of clarification from an insider. The article does not make clear that the Graduate Program in Religion at Duke is jointly run by the Divinity School and the Department of Religion. One would not have realized that on the basis of this article. Indeed, one wonders whether it would have been a negative consideration if the author had realized (given his criteria). The link in his article goes to Divinity School and not to the Graduate Program. Moreover, as Andy Rowell points out:
As far as Duke, he must be talking about Duke University's Ph.D. program. But Jones is not the dean of this. He is the dean of Duke Divinity School which just accepted their first crop of Th.D. (doctoral) students for this fall.
The head of the Graduate Program is Grant Wacker who has just taken over from Eric Meyers.

Nevertheless, I'd want to argue that the joint involvement of these two different entities, the Divinity School and the Department of Religion, makes the Graduate Program strong and enhances the students' experience.

Incidentally, in USNews.com's overall rankings for American universities, Duke comes out eighth:

America's Best Colleges 2007

For further comment on the Reno article, see Kevin Wilson in Blue Cord.

Update (Wednesday, 7.36): On Hypotyposeis, Stephen Carlson refers to an interesting recent posting by Pete Williams on Evangelical Textual Criticism also asking about "Where to do a PhD", this time on the topic of Textual Criticism, and following on from a lengthy and interesting thread on the Textual Criticism e-list. Begin from that link and follow the thread; it includes several contributions from Bart Ehrman. I was happy to hear about my former institution, University of Birmingham, being so well spoken of.

BNTC 2006 Round-up

There are several reports from this year's BNTS among the bloggers. These are the ones up so far:
Great stuff, but we'd like some pictures, please.

Update (19.15): Jim Davila updates on Paleojudaica.
Update (Friday, 9.55): two more postmodernbible postings (added above).

Saturday, September 02, 2006

Three years old today

Happy blogiversary to me: the NT Gateway blogt is three years old today. The first post, Welcome to the NT Gateway Weblog was on 2 September 2003.

Update (15.44): And happy blogiversary to rogueclassicism too, also three today. In comments, Tyler asks if I'm the first that's still up and running. No -- Paleojudaica is a good six months and more older than NT Gateway Weblog. And speaking of Paleojudaica, thanks a bunch for the nice picture and message from Jim, along with my two former Birmingham graduate students Helen Ingram and Catherine Smith. (I wish I was there too!).

Biblioblogger of the month: Airton José da Silva

Test your Portuguese this month with Jim West's interview with Airton José da Silva on Biblioblogs.com:

Blogger of the Month: Airton José da Silva

I am afraid that I had to resort to the Google translation.

Friday, September 01, 2006

Google Books Revolution Rolls On

I've been meaning to mention the great news that Google Books has made available hundreds of classic public domain books for downloading (e.g. see The Guardian, Stoa, rogueclassicism and BBC News):

Download the classics
Starting today, you can go to Google Book Search and download full copies of out-of-copyright books to read at your own pace. You're free to choose from a diverse collection of public domain titles -- from well-known classics to obscure gems . . . .
Now, allow me to share with you one of the glories of this new development. One of the things that I love about old books is the look of them, their character, the fonts, the quaintness, the sketchy referencing, but best of all the hand annotations made by users. I never write in books, but many people do, even in library copies, and one of the nice things about some of these new downloadable Google books is that they retain the character of the individual book that was scanned. Take Aesop's Fables, for example. The edition is "chosen and phrased by Horace E. Scudder" and just above the "E.", the librarian (I assume) has pencilled in "Elisha", a librarian who has long since departed this world since the book dates from 1885.

As well as retaining the character of the original books scanned, these new downloadable texts have several advantages not yet mentioned anywhere I have seen: (1) the Table of Contents is usually hyperlinked, making it very easy to navigate your way around the book; (2) Likewise the Index (these examples also from Aesop's Fables).

I've been looking around to see what's available in our area, and there are riches to be found. I'll mention those I've found and am finding in the days to come (and I look forward to hearing from others what they have found too). Here's a particular treat:

Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S. Hunt (eds.), LOGIA IHSOU: Sayings of Our Lord from An Early Greek Papyrus
(London: Henry Frowde, 1897).

As with Aesop's Fables above, the librarian (at Harvard) has written in "Pyne" above the "P." and "Surridge" above the "S.". The only bad news here is that the plate is not available. (Wonder why?).

More anon.

Biblical Studies Carnival IX

Hosted this month by Stephen Carlson on Hypotyposeis, this is a total feast!

Biblical Studies Carnival IX

Among personal highlights were finding lots of posts I'd missed while away over the summer, e.g. Luke 23.34a on Evangelical Textual Criticism, re. the NTS article by Mikeal Parsons and Jason Whitlock. I was impressed too by Davide's Notes on Q and the Beelzebub Story, and his use of the Synoptic colouring system I favour for his nice, clear synopsis. I've added Davide's Notes and The Dilettante Exegete to my blogroll.

Thursday, August 31, 2006

British New Testament Conference 2006

On Paleojudaica, Jim Davila reminds us that the British New Testament Conference 2006 gets underway this afternoon in Sheffield. In fact, people are probably saying their hellos over drinking tea as I write, perusing the book display and looking forward to dinner tonight followed by the main paper, Prof. Graham Stanton on ‘Messianism and Christology: Mark, Matthew and Luke’. That's a paper I'd love to hear.

This will be the first BNTC I have missed in almost a decade. I'm actually quite sad about that because it is such an enjoyable conference and I look forward to meeting old friends. I was secretary of the society for three years, and webmaster for longer. Now Bridget Gilfillan-Upton is doing a superb job as secretary and the website is looking great under my former doctoral student Catherine Smith's control.

You can see the conference programme here (PDF) with more details on all the seminars (including some papers and lots of abstracts) here and short papers here.

Update (Friday, 8.49): I am really touched by this comment on Paleojudaica.

Apostle Matthew's Grave

On RogueClassicism, David Meadows notes a story on the Apostle Matthew's burial place, from Radio Free Europe:

Burial Place Of Apostle Matthew 'Found' In Kyrgyzstan
August 30, 2006 -- A Kyrgyz archaeologist believes he may have located the burial place of the Apostle Matthew.
Vladimir Ploskikh told a news briefing in Bishkek today that his team this summer uncovered on the northeastern shore of Lake Issyk-Kul what he believes are the remains of the Christian monastery that a 14th-century map indicates is the site where the Apostle Matthew was buried.

According to legends, Apostle Matthew died on his way to India and established several Christian communities during the course of his journey.

The document, which is kept in Venice and is known as the Catalan map, mentions a place named "Issicol," where it says there is "a cloister of the Armenian Brothers where the body of the Apostle and Evangelist Saint Matthew is."

Ploskikh, however, cautioned that further investigation is needed.
Right!

Update (17.38): Crystal has more on Perspective.

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Marcus Borg on Jesus' Mighty Deeds

Beliefnet have published a short article by Marcus Borg:

The Mighty Deeds of Jesus
Are there limits to the spectacular?
By Marcus Borg

It looks like a slightly older piece that they have brought forward to the main site.

Burnett Hillman Streeter by John Court

The latest Expository Times (Volume 118, no. 1, October 2006) is announced today and it includes a most enjoyable piece on the life of B. H. Streeter:

Burnett Hillman Streeter (17th November 1874–10th September 1937)
By JOHN M. COURT
Abstract: B. H. Streeter was one of the most distinguished of his generation of English New Testament scholars who wrote the standard work on the sources of the four Gospels, in which he drew heavily on German scholarship but also introduced ideas of his own. He was an academic and a churchman, a canon of Hereford Cathedral who was also attracted to Moral Rearmament.
I'm afraid that access is only to subscribers and subscribing institutions, but if you get a chance, do give it a read. It prevents a vivid, rounded picture of the man and his achievements and has several nice little anecdotes in there too, for example:
A personal impression of Streeter, on a visit to Cambridge, is contained in this anecdote by Christopher Evans. He describes how in 1931 he was
reading an essay to Hoskyns at a supervision on a Saturday morning when there was a knock on the door and Hoskyns said ‘Just a minute, Evans. You are about to see the largest pair of feet in the Church of England. Come in Streeter.’ He had come to preach on the Sunday, a terrible sermon because he said ‘Er’ every other word. I counted fifty and then gave up.
I was also amused by the following:
In support of his interests he travelled widely, with extensive tours of China and Japan, as well as visits to India and the USA. He never went to Jerusalem; he commented: ‘I don’t think my faith’s robust enough to go there. It was hopeless in the time of Christ and it has degenerated ever since!’
The only thing that slightly spoilt my enjoyment of the article was the following comment, which I thought unnecessary:
On the internet it is this work [on the Synoptic Problem] which still receives prominent documentation, as on the Stephen C. Carlson web pages dedicated to the Synoptic Problem:
The magnus (sic.) opus of B. H. Streeter, this book is responsible for firmly establishing the 2 Source Hypothesis in the English speaking world. A must-read for its influence and rhetoric, even if its main arguments have been shown to be fallacious.
Such a sweeping and somewhat illiterate judgment would have offended Streeter greatly; a more balanced assessment of his Synoptic work can be seen below.
Stephen Carlson's comment (which is not referenced) is of course "sweeping" in that it is a sentence in part of an Annotated Bibliography, which is necessarily succinct. The notion that it is "illiterate" will strike anyone who knows Carlson's work as particularly unfair. If that characterization is to do with the "magnus" typo, then I think it is an odd overstatement, especially as the typo is not present where Streeter's magnum opus is discussed in context (Two-Source Hypothesis).

But with that odd sentence aside, it's a super article and I am most grateful to John Court for a fine appreciation of the great man.

Next Biblical Studies Carnival

On Hypotyposeis, Stephen Carlson posts the last call for the ninth Biblical Studies Carnival. You can use the submission form at Blogcarnival.com to nominate your favourite posts this month. I haven't put my own nominations in yet, but top of the list for me this month would be Stephen's own series of posts on Brown on Morton Smith's Motives in JBL (which began at the end of July and continued into the first part of August). Also memorable for me have been Loren Rosson's posts on The Empty Tomb: Arguments against Historicity and The Empty Tomb: Arguments for Historicity. The other series of posts that springs straight to mind is from Michael Pahl, A Blogentary on 1 Thessalonians, an exciting, unfolding project.

Because I was away at the time, I did not get the chance to comment on the previous Biblical Studies Carnival, the eighth, a first class offering from Kevin Edgecomb at Biblicalia.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Donfried on Paul, Luther and the New Perspective

The September 2006 edition of The Lutheran features the following article:

Reading Paul (& Luther) today
New learnings about the apostle and his world boost our understanding
Karl P. Donfried

The article introduces newcomers to questions surrounding the contemporary interpretation of Paul, including the new perspective, with special emphasis on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Much of the first half of the article is an excellent introduction to some of the issues connected with seeing Paul in the context of Second Temple Judaism, e.g.:
No longer can it be maintained that the core of Paul’s theology is primarily influenced by the philosophical movements of the Graeco-Roman world. Rather it was precisely to Paul as a Jew that the Risen Lord revealed himself. It’s this Jewish Paul who addresses his Graeco-Roman congregations, as 1 Corinthians 10 illustrates. The coherence of Paul’s language and thought patterns with those found at certain points in the Dead Sea Scrolls demonstrates the “Jewishness” of his thinking.
But the second half of the article is much more controversial. I was a little struck with how dismissive Donfried was at several points, especially here:
Together with the emergence of credible re-evaluations of Paul, we must also be alert to readings of the apostle that are blatantly misguided. Some assert that the death of Jesus isn’t essential for our justification. Others argue that a text like Romans 3:22 shouldn’t be translated as “the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe” but rather as “the righteousness of God through the faith of Jesus Christ.” Both of these uncommon contemporary tendencies turn Paul’s theology on its head.
and here:
But the great weakness of Sander’s position is that in attempting to correct the “Lutheran” distortion of Judaism, he presents a warped view of Judaism. This view respects neither the internal diversification of the Judaisms of the period nor the conflicts and confrontations that existed among the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes with regard to their interpretations of the law.

Sander [sic] constructed an illusionary and artificial pattern of so-called Palestinian Judaism in which Rabbinic and Talmudic traditions of the post-second century are illegitimately thrust back upon the far more diverse and mutually antagonistic Judaisms of the first century.
Towards the end of the article, Donfried suggests that the new perspective is "perhaps, now, more appropriately the 'old perspective'”. I hope to find time to comment on the article later, and especially the quotation of 1QS 11.

Religion Timelines: Jewish History + Christian History

On the Stoa Consortium, Juan Garcés draws attention to a post on Semantic Humanities which references this remarkable new utility from MIT:

Simile: Timeline
Timeline is a DHTML-based AJAXy widget for visualizing time-based events. It is like Google Maps for time-based information.

Of particular interest in our area is the following:

Religion Timelines: Jewish History + Christian History

Move your mouse around see different parts of the timeline, and click on selected features to get more details on given events. We NT nerds will want to argue with a lot of the basis for the timeline, e.g. Q dated to the mid 60s and Paul's epistles to the 70s and 80s doesn't make a lot of sense, but if some of the data that has provided the basis for the timeline could be corrected, this is a fantastic tool. I was listening to a feature on Today on Radio 4 yesterday in which the question was being asked about whether British school children know enough of the grand sweep of history, the broad narrative, as they were calling it. (You can take their How's your history test to see what your knowledge of British history is like. I'm ashamed to say that I got one wrong!) Well, this kind of timeline project could very much help in encouraging students to get something of a feel for the "what happened when", the "card index" element of studying history. It's a great resource.

Teaching Notes 1

Further to my previous comments on beginning teaching again, I thought I might introduce a new feature here, where I give myself a little space for reflections on current courses as they progress, with the aim of sharing odd reflections, and actually writing down what often just remain strong mental notes, and looking for ways to improve my current offerings.

There were several firsts for me yesterday. One was teaching a regular course in an evening slot, a slot that at two and a half hours is a bit of a chonker. It's a course on the Life and Letters of Paul (see previous comments on Teaching Paul) and it runs from 6.15 to 8.45 pm. Another first for me is having a class of seventy. The dean here is encouraging us to raise the caps on our classes and to teach more students so I am experimenting this semester by raising the cap to seventy (from the 40/45 which is more normal here). I realize that by some standards that is still a small class, e.g. I hear that down the road Bart Ehrman has been known to have over 350 students on his Introduction to the New Testament class, but it is still more students than I have had in a regular class. I am helped by two fine teaching assistants, though, and without them I think it would be too large a load.

One of the pluses of the larger class is that I get a nicer room. In Religion, we tend to teach in the Gray Building, where we are all located, and the classrooms are adequate but not especially comfortable or well equipped. Because 70 wouldn't fit into one of the usual Gray classrooms, I have a room in Wesbtrook, which is part of the new Divinity School wing. It's a nice room with comfy seats, microphone and all mod cons. I don't normally like to use a microphone since projecting one's voice should be a basic skill for teachers, but it occurred to me that with a 150 minute class, it might be sensible for me to look after my voice.

I went down to the classroom several hours before the class started. Here's my little tip for teachers: always find your classroom long before the first class. Get used to the feel of it; work out where everything is, how everything works, where you are going to stand. And the big one: if you are going to use technology, make sure it's working long before the class begins. In Birmingham, I had given up using technology in the classroom by the end of my time there because I had so many bad experiences of equipment not arriving, not arriving on time, arriving but not working and so on. It's too stressful. Yesterday, in this new classroom, it took me a good half an hour or so to get on top of the technology too, not helped by the fact that the Divinity School classroom computers apparently have different usernames and passwords from the whole of the rest of the university, and they have no one available on tech support after five.

It was nice to be able to show a few pictures with my introductory lecture on Paul. We looked at a couple of classic pictures of Paul, I introduced them to the NT Gateway Paul pages and promised them that they would be getting updated as the course progresses, and we used several maps so that we could picture Paul's journeys, in particular through reflecting on Romans 15.15-19, and the grand sweep from Jerusalem to Illyricum. I took time to explain too that Paul would not have been at all familiar with our modern maps and would not have conceptualised the world in the same way as we do. There's a great (but little known?) article on this, including a fine discussion of Paul's use of the word κύκλῳ in Rom. 15.19 -- James M. Scott, “Paul’s ‘Imago Mundi’ and Scripture” in Otfried Hofius, et al (eds.), Evangelium - Schriftauslegung - Kirche. Festschrift für Peter Stuhlmacher (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996): 366-81).

To cope with the two and a half hour session, we took a 15-20 minute half-time break at about 7.25 pm and that gave me the chance to get something to eat. Tip for new teachers, a tip also relevant for students taking exams: EAT. It keeps your energy levels up and helps you to concentrate, especially in the evening. On this occasion, I talked for most of the session, not least because it was an introductory lecture and I wanted to sketch out some of the key issues in studying Paul, and to provide some framework for future discussions, including a bit of basic biography. In future, I am planning a first half which will predominantly be me lecturing and a second half in which we will look together at the texts and tasks of the week.

Don't do this again: slurp coffee close to a microphone. It sounds disgusting.

One great bonus came out of yesterday's class. I mentioned the TVM Peter and Paul, made in 1981 and starring Anthony Hopkins as Paul. I remember watching it and I particularly enjoyed the Antioch row between Paul and Peter. I have often thought what fun it would be to use that clip in a class, but whenever I have looked in the past, it has been unavailable. Well, two students, one during the lecture itself, kindly looked it up and discovered that it is available on Amazon. It turns out that it was released at the end of 2002 and it had bypassed me. So I ordered it last night and I am looking forward to seeing it again, for the first time in over twenty years.

One negative: I mentioned Horrell's book the other day. I had planned the syllabus around this and Sanders's Very Short Introduction. I knew that Horrell's book was out because I received my copy of the second edition back in May / June. On Thursday I received an email from Duke Text Book store letting me know that they have not been able to order it, and Amazon also show it as not yet released. Frustrating.

Review of Biblical Literature latest

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

Luc Devillers
La saga de Siloé: Jésus et la fete des Tente (Jean 7,1-10,21)
Reviewed by Johanna Brankaer

Laurence D. Guy
Introducing Early Christianity: A Topical Survey of Its Life, Beliefs and Practices
Reviewed by Peter J. Judge

Clay Alan Ham
The Coming King and the Rejected Shepherd: Matthew's Reading of Zechariah's Messianic Hope
Reviewed by Mark J. Boda

Tomasz Lewicki
"Weist nicht ab den Sprechenden!": Wort Gottes und Paraklese im Hebraerbrief
Reviewed by Harold W. Attridge

Douglas McCready
He Came Down From Heaven: The Preexistence of Christ and the Christian Faith
Reviewed by Martin Karrer

Monday, August 28, 2006

Commencement 2006 Pictures

Mark Goodacre speaking at Duke Religion Commencement 2006
Back in May, I attended my first Commencement at Duke, and spoke at our Religion gathering (I posted here some reflections, A Brit at Duke, which were the basis for the talk). Lots of nice photographs from the day are now available on the Duke Religion website:

Graduation 2006

When blogger is behaving better, I'll upload a pic of my talk too. These pictures were taken by Lucas Van Rompay, not only a brilliant scholar but, it turns out, a great photographer.

Death of David Hay

I was very sorry to hear of the death of David Hay today, reported on Philo of Alexandria Blog by Torrey Seland:

David M. Hay 1935-2006

Term starts at Duke

It's my first full academic year at Duke and so I am experiencing an August beginning of term for the first time ever. It is the strangest feeling to someone used to the much later British start. It's still roasting hot here, and there is no rustling through the leaves as one walks into university; there's not a jumper in sight, let alone any scarves or coats. In the UK it is Bank Holiday Monday today and everyone is on holiday, and that makes it even odder to be back to class here. I'm not complaining, though. I really like the earlier finish to the academic year here. And as someone who thoroughly enjoys teaching, it's great to be back to it again. In fact, I am always a bit shocked by academics who complain about teaching and it was refreshing to read Joel Willitts's comments in Euangelion
I am of the mind that good teaching is extremely important, and for me it is as important it not more important than good writing. But it appears to me that we spend much more of our time trying to be better researches and writers than we do being better teachers. Perhaps this is because it is in writing that we can make a name for ourselves (but that is another issue).
The fact that few of us get professional training as teachers should make us work all the harder at our own teaching. I think we are often not self-critical enough, we are too reticent to learn from peer review and we do not listen sufficiently to our students' feedback, especially on course evaluation forms. No doubt we have all heard academics in different institutions trying to avoid peer review, or playing down the importance of course evaluation forms. Too often, I think we look for an easier life. But the major personal trade-off in working hard on our teaching is that we enjoy it more and, hopefully, our students get more out of it. So I'd better get working on that next class!

Euangelion moves

Michael Bird's blog has moved to this new URL:

Euangelion

and Joel Willitts is now his co-blogger (and probably has been for a little while, but I am still catching up). I've changed the feed address on my blogroll.

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

Daniel Kirk's blog

At my previous institution, the University of Birmingham, there were many bloggers, especially among the graduate students in NT (and that's still the case). Here at Duke, there are not so many. In fact, I can't think of any. So it was good today to run across a recent Duke graduate's blog:

Sibboleth

It's by Daniel Kirk, who is now an Assistant Professor of New Testament at Biblical Seminary in Philadelphia, having finished his PhD at Duke under Richard Hays's supervision this year. I would say "Welcome to the biblioblogosphere" but it turns out that Daniel has been been blogging since January 2005.

Another blog I've recently added to my blogroll is Darrell Bock's Blog, which is relatively new. With Bock's blog you get the special treat of his mugshot on every post.

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Teaching Paul

As the sole teacher of New Testament in the Department of Religion at Duke, it falls to me to alternate each semester between teaching the Historical Jesus and Paul. I don't know whether the choice of Jesus and Paul goes back to Ed Sanders, who came to Duke in 1990 and retired last year, or whether it predates him, but it is an arrangment I am very happy with. The way we have worked out my own undergraduate teaching load for the present is that I take Introduction to New Testament once each year, in either Fall or Spring, and I take Paul each Fall and Jesus each Spring. Having taught my first course on the Historical Jesus last semester, it's time now to teach my first course on the Life and Letters of Paul. The first class is next Monday, and I'm looking forward to it.

I taught Paul for a decade in Birmingham, but in a rather different set up. When I arrived at Birmingham in 1995, I was appointed as the teaching relief for Frances Young, who had just been promoted to Dean of the Faculty of Arts (I had the dubious honour of being known as the "Dean's relief"). She had run a course known as "New Testament Theology", which was essentially, a bit like the course of the same name I had taken as an undergraduate in Oxford, all about Paul and John, i.e. everything that didn't fit into the Synoptic Gospels course. Perhaps Hebrews might get thrown in there too, and maybe even 1 Peter, James and Revelation, but it was largely a space for reflecting on Paul -- and John. As the years went on, and as David Parker and I did more team-teaching, New Testament Theology morphed more and more into a course about Paul. From time to time we would integrate other parts of the NT into the course, usually because we felt bad about the sole focus on Paul, but really Paul was the star.

One of the things that differs hugely between my experience at Birmingham and my experience now at Duke -- and I have no idea if this is a standard difference between the UK and the USA or not -- is that here everything is done in self-contained semesters. You begin the course at the beginning of the semester, get a mid-term half-way through, then get examined at the end, you get your grade and you move on to completely fresh courses the next semester. In Birmingham, on the other hand, we had single modules and double modules, but I tended to teach all double modules -- and the doubles were year-long. So you'd begin your study of Paul (say) in the September and run right through to the following May before you'd finished. What this means to me in the new context is that there will be an intensity to our study of Paul that I have not experienced before. One Duke semester is far longer than one Birmingham term (especially as there are three Birmingham terms vs. two Duke semesters), but nevertheless, we have fourteen weeks to get on top of the life and letters of Paul.

Another big difference between Duke and Birmingham, and here I think there is a difference between the UK and the USA more generally, is that there is much more of a text book culture here. Students want to buy one or two books that will see them through the course. It's pretty unnerving to someone who is not familiar with this set up, and you can rebel against it and make adjustments all you like, but the student expectations are that they will buy two or three books and will devour them. As y'all who teach NT will know, recommending text books is not easy, and no doubt lots of you, like me, don't really approve of the text book culture. But what I tend to do is to recommend a couple of books as essential and to work from there to the rest. It puts students' minds at rest to feel they've at least got some starting points.

The two I am recommending this semester for Paul are both little books, and to this extent it may be a risky strategy. But both are, in very different ways, ideal to students beginning their study of Paul. The first is pictured at the top of this post, David Horrell's Introduction to the Study of Paul in its second edition. I think this book is a cracker. In fact it may be a bit too good -- it presents in nice, natty little sections just what you really need to know about all those key topics, the law, the future of Israel and so on. Unlike the other introductions, this one is an introduction to the study of Paul, so it will tell you about Bultmann and Sanders and Hooker and Dodd and the rest, and not just about Paul and Jesus.

But I want my students also to get a taste first hand for the ground-breaking, exciting (relatively) recent scholarship on Paul too and for that, I am recommending E. P. Sanders, Paul: A Very Short Introduction. It's one of the great services to scholarship that Sanders wrote short, undergraduate friendly books on both Jesus and Paul. Both are superb, and if they don't give an undergraduate a passion for studying either figure, they are probably beyond hope. Incidentally, the "very short introduction" is identical to the earlier Past Masters Paul -- it was a master stroke of re-packaging and re-marketing that saw it being issued under a completely new title.

These are just a handful of initial reflections ahead of the new semester next week, and I look forward to following up with further thoughts as I teach the course.

SBL Midatlantic Region

The Midatlantic Region of the Society of Biblical Literature has announced their plenary speaker for 2007 and it is . . . me! I am grateful for the invitation to speak. It's the first time I've been asked to do a plenary at a conference so I feel very honoured. I have been asked to talk about Q and the Synoptic Problem, so I am going to have to do some thinking about that topic before next March. The meeting is on March 1-2 2007 at the Radisson Hotel at Cross Keys, 5100 Falls Road, Baltimore, Maryland 21210. Apparently more details are to follow.

Sunday, August 20, 2006

Call for Papers: Textual Criticism: Theological and Social Tendencies?

Over on ITSEE News at the University of Birmingham is notice of a call for papers:

--
The Fifth Birmingham Colloquium on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament will be held from 16-19 April 2007 at Woodbrooke Quaker Study Centre, Selly Oak, Birmingham.

The theme is:

"Textual Criticism: Theological and Social Tendencies?"

Proposals are invited for papers of 30 or 45 minutes. Suggestions for workshops, presenting work in progress, are also welcome. Please send these here.

Further details and a booking form will be available in October 2006.
--

Lazarus, Mary and Martha

This press release is from Fortress:

--
Why the Lazarus Story Meant So Much to Early Christians

MINNEAPOLIS (August 10, 2006)—The story of Lazarus in John 11–12 typically has been understood by scholars as a prototype of the resurrection of Christ. In the newly-released Lazarus, Mary and Martha: Social –Scientific Approaches to the Gospel of John, Philip F. Esler and Ronald Piper examine the raising of Lazarus, the relationship between him and his two sisters Mary and Martha, and the theological implications of a social-scientific critique of this relationship and the Lazarus story in general.

Using social identity theory, Esler and Piper set out what social identity theory actually means, how it works, and how it applies to John’s Gospel. They then show how their ecclesiological reading of the Lazarus story finds confirmation in the catacomb art from Rome. The book concludes by setting out some of the theological dimensions of the investigation, and ultimately provides fresh theological insight into this New Testament text.

Features

* Uses social-scientific insights into group identity to provide a new interpretation of Lazarus

* Includes four pages of full-color illustrations from the catacombs

Philip F. Esler is one of the foremost New Testament scholars in the world. Vice-Principal at the University of St. Andrews, Scotland, he is author of many works, including Fortress Press volumes Conflict and Identity in Romans (2003) and New Testament Theology (2005).

Ronald Piper currently holds two positions: Professor of Christian Origins in the Divinity School, and University Vice-Principal for Learning & Teaching at St. Andrews. Among his works is Wisdom in the Q Tradition (Cambridge University Press, 1989).

Lazarus, Mary and Martha
By Philip F. Esler and Ronald Piper
Format: 5.5” x 8.5”, paperback, 208 pp
ISBN: 0-8006-3830-1
Price: $22.00
Publisher: Fortress Press
Rights: North American English

To order Lazarus, Mary and Martha please call Fortress Press at 1-800-328-4648 or visit the Web site at www.fortresspress.com.

To request review copies (for media), or to discuss speaking engagements or interviews, please call 1-800-426-0115 ext. 234 or e-mail toddb@augsburgfortress.org

To request exam copies for classroom use (professors) go to www.fortresspress.com/examcopy.

MiniFlash Greek and Hebrew

Thanks to Jamie Macleod for letting me know of a new URL for his MiniFlash software:

MiniFlash

I've made the adjustment on the Computer Software page of the Greek NT Gateway.

Saturday, August 19, 2006

Review of Biblical Literature latest

The latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature under the NT heading is surely the richest offering ever, both in terms of books reviewed and reviewers:

Dale C. Allison
Resurrecting Jesus: The Earliest Christian Tradition and Its Interpreters
Reviewed by Michael R. Licona
Reviewed by J. Samuel Subramanian

Thomas L. Brodie
The Birthing of the New Testament: The Intertextual Development of the New Testament Writings
Reviewed by Margaret Daly-Denton

Ronald L. Farmer
Revelation
Reviewed by Jan A. du Rand

Christopher A. Frilingos
Spectacles of Empire: Monsters, Martyrs, and the Book of Revelation
Reviewed by Robert M. Royalty Jr.

Aaron M. Gale
Redefining Ancient Borders: The Jewish Scribal Framework of Matthew's Gospel
Reviewed by David C. Sim

Brian J. Incigneri
The Gospel to the Romans: The Setting and Rhetoric of Mark's Gospel
Reviewed by Zeba A. Crook

Loren Johns
The Lamb Christology of the Apocalypse of John: An Investigation into its Origins and Rhetorical Force
Reviewed by Robert M. Royalty Jr.

Xavier Leon-Dufour
To Act According to the Gospel
Reviewed by Richard A. Burridge

Scot McKnight
Jesus and His Death: Historiography, the Historical Jesus, and Atonement Theory
Reviewed by Craig A. Evans

Lidija Novakovic
Messiah, the Healer of the Sick: A Study of Jesus as the Son of David in the Gospel of Matthew
Reviewed by J. R. C. Cousland

Hendrika N. Roskam
The Purpose of the Gospel of Mark in Its Historical and Social Context
Reviewed by Zeba A. Crook

Gerard S. Sloyan
Jesus on Trial: A Study of the Gospel
Reviewed by Joel B. Green

Herman C. Waetjen
The Gospel of the Beloved Disciple: A Work in Two Editions
Reviewed by John Painter

Jan G. van der Watt, ed.,
Salvation in the New Testament: Perspectives on Soteriology
Reviewed by Frank J. Matera

K. K. (Khok-Khng) Yeo, Charles H. Cosgrove, and Herold Weiss
Cross-Cultural Paul: Journeys to Others, Journeys to Ourselves
Reviewed by Veronica Koperski
Reviewed by Sigurd Grindheim

Thursday, August 17, 2006

End of blogging holiday

Although I did break into the blogging holiday with the odd post here and there, the blogging holiday has now officially ended and normal service should be resumed fairly soon, though the email mountain makes that less likely than it might otherwise be. We arrived back from England late on Tuesday night / Wednesday morning, after something like 22 hours of travelling, with plenty of searches and queues and delays (I even had a pen confiscated). When we finally made it back to Raleigh-Durham airport, our luggage had not made it with us, including our house key, so we had to wake up the neighbour to get our spare key in order to get in. Viola has already blogged some of our trip on The Americanization of Emily, with several more posts to come in the coming days. It's good to be back. This will be my first full academic year at Duke (I arrived here at the end of September last year, and academic years run from the end of August) and I am looking forward to the teaching; I have some research projects I am excited about too, and hope to fit in some NT Gateway and NT Gateway blogging too.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

SBL Review of Biblical Literature

I break again briefly from my blogging holiday, currently in Cambridge in England, to give the links to the latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature under the NT heading:

Peter Balla
The Child-Parent Relationship in the New Testament and Its Environment
Reviewed by Reidar Aasgaard

Michael J. Kruger
The Gospel of the Savior: An Analysis of P. OXY. 840 and Its Place in the Gospel Traditions of Early Christianity
Reviewed by Joseph Verheyden

Scott M. Lewis
The Gospel according to John and the Johannine Letters
Reviewed by Paul N. Anderson

Sorin Sabou
Between Horror and Hope: Paul's Metaphorical Language of 'Death' in Romans 6:1-11
Reviewed by James C. Miller

Alistair I. Wilson
When Will These Things Happen? A Study of Jesus as Judge in Matthew 21-25
Reviewed by J. Samuel Subramanian