Monday is a heavy teaching day for me and it is rare that I can find a moment to blog during the day, but luckily no one has come along to my office hour and I have time to sneak in a quick blog post before I go to my Historical Jesus class. Of all topics, we are today studying traditions about the family of Jesus. How's that for synergy? If you haven't yet heard about this story, the best place to start is the major new website released today:
The Lost Family Tomb of Jesus
That will tell you everything you need to know, and what's more, you have to admit that it is a gorgeously produced website. Reports about the discovery of Jesus' family tomb are all over the news today, and one is reminded of the alleged discovery of the James ossuary several years ago. One of the major differences between the release of this news and that is that back in 2002 blogging was in its infancy and there were few, if any, biblioblogs. I wasn't blogging. Even Jim Davila wasn't blogging, as far as I can remember. But now things are different, and in a couple of interesting ways. First, there are two bloggers who are actually involved in the project, one of them one of its major participants, James Tabor. His Jesus Dynasty Blog already begins the process of putting the case for the identification, Some Initial Thoughts on the Talpiot Tomb, with special emphasis on the statistical case (which I think flawed for reasons I hope to explain in due course if no one else does). The other is Darrell Bock, who was involved in a consultative capacity and who, like Tabor, was under a no-disclosure rule until today. He is highly sceptical of the claims made in the forthcoming documentary and posts his response on Bock's Blog in a post headed Hollywood Hype: The Oscars and Jesus’ Family Tomb, What Do They Share?.
The other respect in which blogging is already making a difference is in the sheer range of expertise among the bloggers who are gathering to hold the media to account. It is interesting to see the phenomenon of guest blogging here too, with Christopher Rollston on the Talpiot Tomb on Jim West's blog. Meanwhile Tony on Apocryphicity comments on The Jesus Tomb and the Acts of Philip, noting that "the Mariamne of Acts of Philip is not Mary Magdalene but Mary of Bethany", a telling observation given that the documentary makers are apparently drawing attention to the Acts of Philip for their identification.
As I mentioned last night, in a post headed "The Tomb that dare not speak its name", we have had this story before in the UK media, back in 1996. So far I have not seen anything in its new incarnation to persuade me that my scepticism then was misplaced, but one area that does need addressing is the statistical claim, and I'll come back to that later if no one beats me to it.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Sunday, February 25, 2007
"The Tomb That Dare not speak its name"
That was the headline on the front page of The Sunday Times News Review in the UK, 31 March 1996. The story created a little stir, but it was only a little stir. The theme was the discovery of a family tomb in the Talpiot area of Jerusalem which apparently contained ossuaries which featured several names in common with characters from the Gospel story, Jesus son of Joseph and Mary among them, though rather less promisingly also a Judas son of Jesus and a Matthew. Some speculated that the The Sunday Times story was an April Fools joke, but it turned out that it was in fact advance publicity for an Easter day edition of Heart of the Matter on BBC1, presented by Joan Bakewell, and featuring a documentary about the resurrection, with a study of the tomb, and then a debate featuring Gerd Lüdemann, Michael Goulder and Tom Wright. None of those in the studio would give the idea that the tomb had anything to do with Jesus of Nazareth a moment's consideration. The story passed and few thought any more about it.
Now, over a decade later, the story has resurfaced and this time it is coming with a blaze of publicity. Several blogs have already commented and it is clear that we have not heard the last of this. What may make this media event more interesting in the blogosphere is that James Tabor of the Jesus Dynasty Blog is involved in the project but he is keeping mum until the news conference in New York tomorrow. Discovery Channel has a major website on the forthcoming television programme.
Update (Monday, 8.14): Leen Ritmeyer has the most vociferous take on it yet among the bloggers. It is an "archaeologist’s worst nightmare" and "It is possibly the most cynical claim yet to be made in the field of Biblical Archaeology and only serves to give the subject a bad name." Watch out for more of the same. Meanwhile James Tabor of the Jesus Dynasty Blog counsels caution ahead of the News Conference today, "Because of a non-disclosure agreement that protected all of us working on this research I have not written in any detail beyond what I cover in the Introduction to The Jesus Dynasty. Following the press conference tomorrow that all changes." His current post stresses the four years of research on the tomb. I'll be looking out for anything that changes my highly sceptical reaction to the claims made in 1996 (above). I am not optimistic but, as always, will aim to approach the news with an open and critical mind.
Now, over a decade later, the story has resurfaced and this time it is coming with a blaze of publicity. Several blogs have already commented and it is clear that we have not heard the last of this. What may make this media event more interesting in the blogosphere is that James Tabor of the Jesus Dynasty Blog is involved in the project but he is keeping mum until the news conference in New York tomorrow. Discovery Channel has a major website on the forthcoming television programme.
Update (Monday, 8.14): Leen Ritmeyer has the most vociferous take on it yet among the bloggers. It is an "archaeologist’s worst nightmare" and "It is possibly the most cynical claim yet to be made in the field of Biblical Archaeology and only serves to give the subject a bad name." Watch out for more of the same. Meanwhile James Tabor of the Jesus Dynasty Blog counsels caution ahead of the News Conference today, "Because of a non-disclosure agreement that protected all of us working on this research I have not written in any detail beyond what I cover in the Introduction to The Jesus Dynasty. Following the press conference tomorrow that all changes." His current post stresses the four years of research on the tomb. I'll be looking out for anything that changes my highly sceptical reaction to the claims made in 1996 (above). I am not optimistic but, as always, will aim to approach the news with an open and critical mind.
Friday, February 23, 2007
What is the Purpose of Thomas?
Since Stephen Carlson initiated a thread on the GThomas e-list the other day on Why Was Thomas Written?, I have been thinking a lot about this enigmatic text, stimulated further by the advent of April DeConick's postings on Thomas on The Forbidden Gospels Blog, and still further by the graduate course I am taking on Thomas here at Duke at the moment. One thing that seems clear to me about the purpose of Thomas is that we will only be able to make good sense of it if we take seriously what Bruce Lincoln calls "a seeming paradox" in its nature. He writes:
On the one hand, it proclaims itself to be secret, or to contain secrets, as in the Prologue . . . . But on the other hand, the text was widely circulated, and states that this is as it should be . . . . . This contradiction, however, can be accounted for by recognizing that Thomas, like Ptolemaeus' Letter to Flora and numerous other religious documents, is a text that is addressed at the same time to initiates and non-initiates alike. Thus, the fact that the Thomas-community possessed secret knowledge was proclaimed loudly to outsiders, but the nature of that knowledge and its true meaning were disclosed only within the community itself in a program of detailed instruction which must have lasted over a period of several years." (Bruce Lincoln, "Thomas-Gospel and Thomas-Community: A New Approach to a Familiar Text", Novum Testamentum 19 (1977): 65-76 [68-9])Thomas points beyond itself. It is a text that demands explication, that encourages the hearer who has ears to hear to seek out what is hidden so that it will come to light.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
How was Thomas Written?
On The Forbidden Gospels Blog, April DeConick offers her thoughts on How was the Gospel of Thomas Written?, partly in response to recent discussion on the Gospel of Thomas E-List (see the thread beginning Why Was Thomas Written?, a thread to which I have contributed myself). Although the Thomas list thread has focused on issues focused more generally around the issue of the purpose of the Gospel of Thomas, DeConick's post focuses specially on the vexed question of literary dependence or independence, and I would like to make some of my own comments on her post here. Let me begin by saying that DeConick is a giant in Thomas studies, with several major publications, including the two recent key monographs published back to back. I have a huge respect for her scholarship, and studies of Thomas are all the richer for her contributions. By contrast, I am a mere beginner, having come to Thomas in the first place because of my interest in Q (e.g. see chapters seven and nine in The Case Against Q). Any comments I make on DeConick's current post, therefore, do not come from the same degree of rich research and expertise.
DeConick asks first "Why does the literary dependence appeal NOT work?" and lists several reasons for rejecting appeals to literary dependence. I am partly in agreement here in that I am pretty wary of the term "literary dependence" in relation to Thomas and the Synoptics. The phrase can be taken to suggest that Thomas is a fundamentally derivative Gospel, and that the most important thing about it is its relation to the Synoptic Gospels. Given that only about half of Thomas has parallels with the Synoptics, we need to hold open the possibility that the most important thing about Thomas is not the Synoptic parallel material but the non-Synoptic material. Perhaps it is in that 50% that we will learn most about Thomas. My preference, therefore, is to move the terminology away from "dependence" or "independence" and instead to talk about "familiarity" or otherwise. The term "familiarity" allows us to ask the question whether Thomas knows the Synoptic Gospels without prejudging the extent of their influence on his thinking.
Now, in relation to those parallels, of course the existence of those parallels in themselves demonstrates nothing about familiarity or otherwise (DeConick's first subheading). The key question is whether or not the parallels in question show evidence of Synoptic redaction (DeConick's second subheading). Here, DeConick comments on the proposition "Thomas contains parallels that have Synoptic 'redactional traces'" with the following:
DeConick's third point is that:
DeConick's fourth point is:
DeConick goes on to give a shorter section on the difficulties with the "independence" model and I agree with most of this, though I would add more examples of "redactional activity traceable to Synoptic hands", including good Matthean examples as well as Lucan ones. I also dispute the premise of the second point:
In the final section of the post, DeConick asks "Where does this leave us?" and answers:
More fundamentally, though, I think we need to think much more seriously about the half of Thomas that does not have parallels with the Synoptics, and I think it is high time we started paying serious attention to the way that the Gospel of Thomas conceives of itself, viz. as "the secret sayings of the living Jesus, which Didymus Judas Thomas wrote down" (Incipit). The obsessive focus in so much Thomas scholarship with Synoptic parallel material, whether among "dependence" or "independence" people, tends to focus attention on reconstructions of the Gospel's evolution and development, sometimes at the expense of working on the text as we have it, and building from there.
DeConick asks first "Why does the literary dependence appeal NOT work?" and lists several reasons for rejecting appeals to literary dependence. I am partly in agreement here in that I am pretty wary of the term "literary dependence" in relation to Thomas and the Synoptics. The phrase can be taken to suggest that Thomas is a fundamentally derivative Gospel, and that the most important thing about it is its relation to the Synoptic Gospels. Given that only about half of Thomas has parallels with the Synoptics, we need to hold open the possibility that the most important thing about Thomas is not the Synoptic parallel material but the non-Synoptic material. Perhaps it is in that 50% that we will learn most about Thomas. My preference, therefore, is to move the terminology away from "dependence" or "independence" and instead to talk about "familiarity" or otherwise. The term "familiarity" allows us to ask the question whether Thomas knows the Synoptic Gospels without prejudging the extent of their influence on his thinking.
Now, in relation to those parallels, of course the existence of those parallels in themselves demonstrates nothing about familiarity or otherwise (DeConick's first subheading). The key question is whether or not the parallels in question show evidence of Synoptic redaction (DeConick's second subheading). Here, DeConick comments on the proposition "Thomas contains parallels that have Synoptic 'redactional traces'" with the following:
This assumes that our sources (Quelle, Matthew, Luke, Mark) were fixed texts, and that they are the same copies that we have reconstructed as our eclectic Greek manuscript (NTG) from our late physical witnesses, none of which agree. This position does not allow for source variation and a lengthy complicated process of development of our sources, and scribing of our sources. Are we sure that the "redactional trace" is from Matthew or Luke? Or is it from a source(s) relied upon by Matthew or Luke? Or is it from an orator who reperformed the saying in light of his memory of a Synoptic version? Or is it from the hand of a later scribe harmonizing an older version of the saying to his memory of the Synoptic version?Of course all these possibilities need to be taken into consideration for Thomas / Synoptic relationships, but I don't think the situation is substantially different here than it is with the intra-Synoptic relationships, where we always bear such possibilities in mind, but do not appeal to them for every decision. Further, one of the values of a redaction-critical approach to the Synoptics is that it can often help us to see where a given evangelist is himself shaping the entirety of a particular passage, where there are clusters of characteristic themes, imagery, language and style. Where passages are like that, ones that are effectively generated by a given evangelist, and which then appear in Thomas, we have a good case for Thomasine familiarity. I have given one example recently, Luke 11.27-28 // Thomas 79.1-2, where the Lucan language, imagery, style and content is so strongly marked that that Thomas must be familiar with it from Luke. In other words, I am keen that we do not focus solely on so-called "redactional traces" (emphasis added) and move the discussion instead to pervasive presence of clusters of redactional features.
DeConick's third point is that:
The entire compositional process of a Thomasine author sitting down one day with canonical texts and cutting and pasting a word here and a word there into his own gospel of sayings does NOT fit what we know about ancient compositional practices.(and see her further comments). This point is well taken; we can do without weak appeals to cut-and-paste models of the way that Thomas, or, for that matter, any of the evangelists worked. I have criticized Synoptic Problem scholarship, and especially Q scholarship, on this very point. On the other hand, I think we have to be careful about excessive appeals to "orality as social location" (Robbins), or to "an essentially oral state of mind" (Kelber). I am not persuaded that Thomas exhibits "orality as social location" so much as Sayings Gospel as generic preference. A sayings book, as a generic necessity, has "an essentially oral state of mind," both in the ancient world and today. This claim will take a little teasing out and I will develop it in due course.
DeConick's fourth point is:
The literary dependence appeal has never been able to account for the differences in the versions of Thomas' sayings and the Synoptics.This is also important. As with the study of intra-Synoptic relationships, accounting for similarities and differences is the name of the game. In developing the point, DeConick asks,
I mean this seriously. We have spent so much time looking for "same" words, have we really looked at the differences and tried to account for them? Has anyone noticed (other than me) that the exact verbal agreement, lengthy sequences of words, and secondary features shared between the Triple Tradition and the Quelle versions FAR exceeds anything we find paralleled between the Gospel of Thomas and the Synoptics?I would say "Yes" but I may be misunderstanding the point. There is consensus that the Synoptic Problem is a problem of literary inter-relationships among the Synoptics, that there is such substantial verbatim agreement that there has to be some kind of literary relationship there. The reason that there is no consensus on this with respect to Thomas and the Synoptics is that the degree of agreement here is nothing like as strong as it is between the Synoptics.
DeConick goes on to give a shorter section on the difficulties with the "independence" model and I agree with most of this, though I would add more examples of "redactional activity traceable to Synoptic hands", including good Matthean examples as well as Lucan ones. I also dispute the premise of the second point:
2. The Thomas parables are not allegorized like their Synoptic counterparts.This works on the form-critical premise of the secondary nature of allegory, a premise with which I disagree in the light of the work of Michael Goulder and John Drury in particular, and on which I will have more to say in due course.There is at least one parable that is allegorized and several more interpreted. There is plenty of secondary material in the Gospel of Thomas, old sayings rewritten in new interpretative contexts.
In the final section of the post, DeConick asks "Where does this leave us?" and answers:
I hope it dislodges us from continuing to argue for direct literary dependence OR complete independence. If we keep slogging away at these same appeals, we will keep answering them with the same objections, and we will stay in the box.I have some sympathy with this answer, and would for that reason push for the use of the term "familiarity with" rather than "direct literary dependence on" the Synoptics. I think the reference to "secondary orality" here is helpful and I regard it as possible that that is the manner of Thomas's familiarity with the Synoptics.
More fundamentally, though, I think we need to think much more seriously about the half of Thomas that does not have parallels with the Synoptics, and I think it is high time we started paying serious attention to the way that the Gospel of Thomas conceives of itself, viz. as "the secret sayings of the living Jesus, which Didymus Judas Thomas wrote down" (Incipit). The obsessive focus in so much Thomas scholarship with Synoptic parallel material, whether among "dependence" or "independence" people, tends to focus attention on reconstructions of the Gospel's evolution and development, sometimes at the expense of working on the text as we have it, and building from there.
E. P. Sanders in Texas
Thanks to Mikeal Parsons for pointing out that Ed Sanders will be lecturing next week in Texas, first at Baylor University (see PDF flier below). The second is the Plenary Address of the SBL-SW in Dallas on March 3, where the title will be “Covenantal Nomism Revisited.” Here's the flyer for the first event:
E. P. Sanders Lecture at Baylor, March 3 2007 (Flyer)
E. P. Sanders Lecture at Baylor, March 3 2007 (Flyer)
The disciples writing the Gospels
Always hoped that I'd be an apostle
Knew that I could make it if I tried
Then when we retire we can write the Gospels
So they'll all talk about us when we have died
That's a bit of Jesus Christ Superstar, of course, from the Last Supper scene. This idea of the disciples themselves writing the Gospels is an old one. It is present, for example, in the ?mid-late second century Apocryphon of James (translation here):
Knew that I could make it if I tried
Then when we retire we can write the Gospels
So they'll all talk about us when we have died
That's a bit of Jesus Christ Superstar, of course, from the Last Supper scene. This idea of the disciples themselves writing the Gospels is an old one. It is present, for example, in the ?mid-late second century Apocryphon of James (translation here):
... the twelve disciples were all sitting together and recalling what the Saviour had said to each one of them, whether in secret or openly, and putting it in books.
New Electronic Edition of the Protevangelium Iacobi
Over on the University of Birmingham's ITSEE pages (news), there is a new Electronic Edition of the Protevangelium Iacobi (Infancy Gospel of James) prepared by Chris Jordan and Ali Welsby as part of their MA in Editing Texts in Religion. Go to ITSEE Online Resources or go straight to the edition here:
Electronic Edition of the Protevangelium Iacobi (The Infancy Gospel of James)
Including transcriptions of the nine surviving Greek manuscripts and a critical apparatus. Chris Jordan and Ali Welsby
Update (7 March, 23.46): thanks to Ali Welsby for the correct, fuller link to the resource, now changed above.
Electronic Edition of the Protevangelium Iacobi (The Infancy Gospel of James)
Including transcriptions of the nine surviving Greek manuscripts and a critical apparatus. Chris Jordan and Ali Welsby
Update (7 March, 23.46): thanks to Ali Welsby for the correct, fuller link to the resource, now changed above.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Formatting problem fixed
Gary Greenberg pointed out to me that this blog had some problems in some browsers. Specifically, the side bar was not rendering properly. I had a look in Internet Explorer, which I never normally use, and I was shocked to see what a mess it was. I took a long, hard look at my template and realized that I introduced two errors when I introduced the Google Reader, including putting a table in the side bar without a closing td tag. So this is to say that it should now be behaving properly again. Please let me know if it is not. I suppose the fact that no one else had commented shows that: (1) Everyone is now using Firefox; or (2) Everyone views the blog in a reader; or (3) People don't care what it looks like. I hope it is (1) and (2) rather than (3).
The Missing Middle in Thomas Synoptic Comparisons
There is a curious feature about several of the parallels between the Gospel of Thomas and the Synoptics. On at least four occasions where Thomas has lengthy parallels with the Synoptics, he lacks a parallel to the middle part of the story. It is a phenomenon I label the missing middle. It is easy to see when we lay out Thomas in parallel with the Synoptics. Here is the first example:
Log and Speck
Look at that wedge of white space on the right. It is unmissable. The middle of the story as it is found in Matthew and Luke is missing, but Thomas has clear parallels to the beginning and the end of the story. The same phenomenon happens again in the following example:
Wheat and Tares
Again, the middle of the story is missing, and this time to the detriment of the story's flow and logic in Thomas. The missing middle features the introduction of the servants who begin a conversation with their master. In Thomas, we just hear about "them" without introduction. The antecedent for "them" is missing, in a way similar to Synoptic examples of editorial fatigue.
There are further examples of the same phenomenon. In the Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.15-21 // Thomas 63), Thomas lacks the middle part of Luke's story, 12.18b-19, in which the Rich Fool is reflecting on his apparent great fortune, "And I’ll say to myself, 'You have plenty of good things laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.'" Thomas's fool is thinking things in his heart, but the full content of Luke's version provides a much better antecedent than the blander, truncated soliloquy of Thomas's version.
Similarly, in the Tribute to Caesar story (Matt. 22.15-22 // Mark 12.13-17 // Luke 20.20-26 // Thomas 100), Thomas lacks the middle part of the Synoptic story in which it is revealed that the coin has Caesar's image on it, the exchange that results in the aphorism shared with Thomas, "Render to Caesar . . ." (with Thomas's remarkable addition, ". . . . and to me what is mine").
It is interesting to see this repeated feature in Thomas's parallels to the Synoptics. My thesis is that it shows just how familiar Thomas is with the Synoptic stories he is retelling. In the rush to retell the familiar story, he does not notice that key parts have been left out. It reminds me of people who can't tell jokes, and who rush ahead too quickly, after having introduced it, to the punchline. Thomas sets the scene, gets the ball rolling, and then fast forwards to the story's conclusion. It may be that this is a casualty of writing a Sayings Gospel rather than a narrative Gospel. The Synoptic writers are all, to varying degrees, used to writing mini-narratives in their Gospels, and on the whole they make a good job of it. But Thomas is focused on shorter, self-contained sayings, with minimal narrative settings. When it comes to writing a fuller narrative, he is not as well practised as the Synoptic evangelists.
Log and Speck
| Matt. 7.3-5 3. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4. Or how can you say to your brother, `Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5. You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. | Luke 6.41-2 41. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 42. Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother’s eye. | Thomas 26 Jesus said, You see the speck in your brother’s eye, but you do not see the log in your own eye. When you take the log out of your own eye, then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother’s eye. |
Look at that wedge of white space on the right. It is unmissable. The middle of the story as it is found in Matthew and Luke is missing, but Thomas has clear parallels to the beginning and the end of the story. The same phenomenon happens again in the following example:
Wheat and Tares
| Matt. 13.24-30 24. Another parable he put before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. 27 And the servants of the householder came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then has it weeds?’ 28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ 29 But he said, ‘No; lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’” | Thomas 57 Jesus says, “The Kingdom of the Father is like a man who had [good] seed. His enemy came by night and sowed weeds among the good seed. The man did not allow them to pull up the weeds; he said to them, ‘I am afraid that you will go intending to pull up the weeds and pull up the wheat along with them.’ For on the day of the harvest the weeds will be plainly visible, and they will be pulled up and burned.” |
Again, the middle of the story is missing, and this time to the detriment of the story's flow and logic in Thomas. The missing middle features the introduction of the servants who begin a conversation with their master. In Thomas, we just hear about "them" without introduction. The antecedent for "them" is missing, in a way similar to Synoptic examples of editorial fatigue.
There are further examples of the same phenomenon. In the Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12.15-21 // Thomas 63), Thomas lacks the middle part of Luke's story, 12.18b-19, in which the Rich Fool is reflecting on his apparent great fortune, "And I’ll say to myself, 'You have plenty of good things laid up for many years. Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.'" Thomas's fool is thinking things in his heart, but the full content of Luke's version provides a much better antecedent than the blander, truncated soliloquy of Thomas's version.
Similarly, in the Tribute to Caesar story (Matt. 22.15-22 // Mark 12.13-17 // Luke 20.20-26 // Thomas 100), Thomas lacks the middle part of the Synoptic story in which it is revealed that the coin has Caesar's image on it, the exchange that results in the aphorism shared with Thomas, "Render to Caesar . . ." (with Thomas's remarkable addition, ". . . . and to me what is mine").
It is interesting to see this repeated feature in Thomas's parallels to the Synoptics. My thesis is that it shows just how familiar Thomas is with the Synoptic stories he is retelling. In the rush to retell the familiar story, he does not notice that key parts have been left out. It reminds me of people who can't tell jokes, and who rush ahead too quickly, after having introduced it, to the punchline. Thomas sets the scene, gets the ball rolling, and then fast forwards to the story's conclusion. It may be that this is a casualty of writing a Sayings Gospel rather than a narrative Gospel. The Synoptic writers are all, to varying degrees, used to writing mini-narratives in their Gospels, and on the whole they make a good job of it. But Thomas is focused on shorter, self-contained sayings, with minimal narrative settings. When it comes to writing a fuller narrative, he is not as well practised as the Synoptic evangelists.
Review of Biblical Literature latest
Latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature on the NT:
Tomas Bokedal
The Scriptures and the Lord: Formation and Significance of the Christian Biblical Canon; A Study in Text, Ritual and Interpretation
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas
David A. Brondos
Paul on the Cross: Reconstructing the Apostle's Story of Redemption
Reviewed by D. A. Carson
Philip L. Mayo
"Those Who Call Themselves Jews": The Church and Judaism in the Apocalypse of John
Reviewed by David L. Barr
Kim Paffenroth
The Heart Set Free: Sin and Redemption in the Gospels, Augustine, Dante, and Flannery O'Connor
Reviewed by Alice M. Sinnott
Udo Schnelle; trans. M. Eugene Boring
Apostle Paul: His Life and Theology
Reviewed by Kenneth Atkinson
Edward Stourton
Paul of Tarsus: A Visionary Life
Reviewed by Valérie Nicolet Anderson
Brian J. Walsh and Sylvia C. Keesmaat
Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire
Reviewed by Angela Standhartinger
I have also gone through and labelled all previous NT Gateway posts on the Review of Biblical Literature, so clicking the Review of Biblical Literature label will take one to a comprehensive list.
Tomas Bokedal
The Scriptures and the Lord: Formation and Significance of the Christian Biblical Canon; A Study in Text, Ritual and Interpretation
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas
David A. Brondos
Paul on the Cross: Reconstructing the Apostle's Story of Redemption
Reviewed by D. A. Carson
Philip L. Mayo
"Those Who Call Themselves Jews": The Church and Judaism in the Apocalypse of John
Reviewed by David L. Barr
Kim Paffenroth
The Heart Set Free: Sin and Redemption in the Gospels, Augustine, Dante, and Flannery O'Connor
Reviewed by Alice M. Sinnott
Udo Schnelle; trans. M. Eugene Boring
Apostle Paul: His Life and Theology
Reviewed by Kenneth Atkinson
Edward Stourton
Paul of Tarsus: A Visionary Life
Reviewed by Valérie Nicolet Anderson
Brian J. Walsh and Sylvia C. Keesmaat
Colossians Remixed: Subverting the Empire
Reviewed by Angela Standhartinger
I have also gone through and labelled all previous NT Gateway posts on the Review of Biblical Literature, so clicking the Review of Biblical Literature label will take one to a comprehensive list.
Apocalypse of Peter on-line
A couple of year's ago (Apocalypse of Peter on-line), I transcribed and uploaded the Greek text of the Apocalypse of Peter from Lic. Dr. Erich Klostermann (ed.), Apocrypha I: Reste Des Petrusevangeliums, Der Petrus-Apocakalypse und des Kerygmati Petri (Bonn: A. Marcus und E. Weber’s Verlag, 1903): 8-11. I have made a couple of minor updates to the MS Word and PDF of the files, which are still found here:
The Apocalypse of Peter (Akhmim Fragment) [MS Word]
Apocalypse of Peter (Akhmim Fragment) [PDF]
The Apocalypse of Peter (Akhmim Fragment) [MS Word]
Apocalypse of Peter (Akhmim Fragment) [PDF]
The Future of the New Testament Gateway
On Codex Blogspot, Religious Studies Review: Religion and the Internet, and now on Sansblogue, Online Biblical Scholarship, there is a discussion of the latest Religious Studies Review (Volume 32, number 4, October 2006), a special issue on Religion and the Internet. One of the articles in this journal is written by Matthew Mitchell, "Biblical Studies on the Internet". The article focuses on the following four resources:
The internet keeps on changing, and it is important to change with it if one's site is to stay current, to take advantage of new ways of doing things if a site is to mature. Blogging has definitely helped me with maintaining the NT Gateway, not least because the blog combines several elements that I was doing on the main site in a more clumsy way, e.g. Featured Links, Logbook and so on. When I began this blog three and a half years ago, I folded several of those elements into the blog. But what is next? What current trends on the net could help with the development of the NT Gateway? Given the issues mentioned above, there is no question now that the NT Gateway is only going to survive in good shape if elements of collaboration are added. For the NT Gateway to get bigger, I need to get smaller.
Over the coming months, I will be exploring ways of adding more collaborative features to the site. I would like at least some Wiki functionality so that people can go in and correct a broken link, for example, rather than emailing me to change it. There are, of course, issues about going wiki, and one of them is quality control. But I am not worried about that. My role would become more overseeing, and I can devote my time to that role. Nor would I simply open up the site to everyone indiscriminately. The big question, though, is how to achieve added wiki functionality. If I were starting the site from scratch, it would be straightforward. But it is much less straightforward to add wiki functionality to an existing site, especially one as large as the NT Gateway. I am still at the exploration stage with this, but I will be reporting back as time goes on. I have accepted an invitation to speak to the Computer Assisted Research Group at the SBL Annual Meeting in November on the future for internet resources on the NT, and I hope to have made significant progress on the transformation by then.
- The New Testament Gateway
- iTanakh: Resources for Academic Study
- K.C. Hanson’s Homepage
- The Orion Center for the Study of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature
For the study of the NT, the choice is extremely easy. Bart Ehrman (2004) recommends this site in his work The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings as his only Web resource, stating that it is one of the few that “will be around for a very long time and which provides trustworthy scholarly information” (xxix). There is little disagreement on this point. The New Testament Gateway is an exceptionally good resource and can be recommended with very little reservation . . .And so on. All very encouraging stuff. But Mitchell appears to be a thoughtful and critical observer, and he makes the following remarks that require some serious thinking:
. . . . This site is easily the best resource for biblical studies on the Web, even if simply as a gateway to other sites, and it is constantly evolving. Secondary materials are continually being added to the Weblog section . . . .
The recurrent problem with this site, if it can be called such, is that it is ultimately the work of a single person. Thus, “energy” issues are the only shortcoming as the sheer number of links inevitably results in some dead or broken ones no matter how energetic or dedicated Goodacre is. (Some links to the University of Birmingham remain.) Goodacre is a publishing NT scholar with full-time teaching duties and is also serving as the series editor of the Library of New Testament Studies. The credentials that make him well suited to create such a site must also make him occasionally wonder about the number of hours available in a given day for what is, all accolades aside, a professional service.In the past I have tended to answer points like this by reasserting my energy levels and saying that I continue enjoy working on the NT Gateway, and that the enjoyment is the stimulus to continue. Ultimately, though, that answer is of course inadequate. The sheer volume of on-line resources now makes it virtually impossible to keep up with everything, and I have to prioritise. It is no longer the case that one can cover the majority of good academic NT resources available free-for-all on the net, which was certainly the situation for the first few years of the site. And as the internet resources expand, my time to spend on the site diminishes. There is an academic career curve whereby one becomes ever more busy as one becomes better known, and every day more requests for one's time are made. I am actually quite good at saying "no" these days, but even then I have decreasing amounts of time to spend on the site, which I regret. A site that is so closely associated with just one person's efforts is only as good as that person's efforts. If the NT Gateway is still going to be around, and still found useful, for years to come, it's important to think about the future.
The internet keeps on changing, and it is important to change with it if one's site is to stay current, to take advantage of new ways of doing things if a site is to mature. Blogging has definitely helped me with maintaining the NT Gateway, not least because the blog combines several elements that I was doing on the main site in a more clumsy way, e.g. Featured Links, Logbook and so on. When I began this blog three and a half years ago, I folded several of those elements into the blog. But what is next? What current trends on the net could help with the development of the NT Gateway? Given the issues mentioned above, there is no question now that the NT Gateway is only going to survive in good shape if elements of collaboration are added. For the NT Gateway to get bigger, I need to get smaller.
Over the coming months, I will be exploring ways of adding more collaborative features to the site. I would like at least some Wiki functionality so that people can go in and correct a broken link, for example, rather than emailing me to change it. There are, of course, issues about going wiki, and one of them is quality control. But I am not worried about that. My role would become more overseeing, and I can devote my time to that role. Nor would I simply open up the site to everyone indiscriminately. The big question, though, is how to achieve added wiki functionality. If I were starting the site from scratch, it would be straightforward. But it is much less straightforward to add wiki functionality to an existing site, especially one as large as the NT Gateway. I am still at the exploration stage with this, but I will be reporting back as time goes on. I have accepted an invitation to speak to the Computer Assisted Research Group at the SBL Annual Meeting in November on the future for internet resources on the NT, and I hope to have made significant progress on the transformation by then.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Promotion and Tenure Criteria for New Media
Some of those brave pioneers who have celebrated what the internet has to offer the experience of university teaching, and who have looked towards the internet to enhance their offerings, may well have found it somewhat frustrating to find that their initiatives have not always met with wholehearted endorsement from their bosses. I am one of the lucky ones. I was in an institution (the University of Birmingham, Dept of Theology and Religion) that was open to initiatives in electronic media, and I always felt supported and encouraged in my attempts to try new things, something that was often controversial, especially in the relatively early days of the world wide web. Although I would not have managed promotion in that system if I had focused solely on electronic media for teaching and research, I did feel that the use of electronic media, especially in teaching, was recognized and valued. I think the same was true here in getting tenure in the Duke University Dept of Religion too, a sense that while print publications were paramount, the use of electronic media played a reasonable supporting role. I make these remarks to make clear that I have no personal axe to grind here, because it is clear that not everyone feels this way about their institutions, and I have talked to some scholars who have been pioneers in the use of internet resources in academia who have not felt supported by their institutions. It is felt that print publications will always trump the internet, and recognition will not be forthcoming for those who spend too long staring at their computer screen.
One of the difficulties is that in some institutions, those involved with appointments, promotions and tenure, have not yet realized how rapidly the scene has changed in the last decade or so, and just how valuable it can be to have academics who invest a lot of time and energy in new media. It is encouraging, therefore, to see reference on The Stoa Consortium to this piece from the University of Maine:
New Media Department, University of Maine
Promotion and Tenure Guidelines Addendum: Rationale for Redefined Criteria
New Criteria for New Media
One of the difficulties is that in some institutions, those involved with appointments, promotions and tenure, have not yet realized how rapidly the scene has changed in the last decade or so, and just how valuable it can be to have academics who invest a lot of time and energy in new media. It is encouraging, therefore, to see reference on The Stoa Consortium to this piece from the University of Maine:
New Media Department, University of Maine
Promotion and Tenure Guidelines Addendum: Rationale for Redefined Criteria
New Criteria for New Media
ABSTRACT: An argument for redefining promotion and tenure criteria for faculty in new media departments of today's universities.As the Stoa post comments, "It seems to provide an excellent point of departure for a discussion of how to include a proper assessment of new media contributions in the tenure and promotion processes in Humanities and Social Sciences." I agree. I hope to see other universities following suit.
Friday, February 16, 2007
James Robinson on the Jesus of Q
Latest from Augsburg Fortress, and on a topic that is a particular favourite of mine:
Who was Jesus, really? | ||||||
In Jesus: According to the Earliest Witness, James M. Robinson, one of the premier scholars of the New Testament and the Sayings Gospel Q, asks what we can know of Jesus from what many believe was the earliest written source behind the Gospels. Over the years perhaps no one has reflected more sensitively and insightfully on the significance of Q for our understanding of earliest Christianity than James M. Robinson....In these essays Robinson exhibits the broad-ranging historical exegesis for which he is so well known, but also with surprising candor, lays out what he thinks it all means and why it is so important to listen to the earliest remembered voice of Jesus. Robinson explores the trajectories in orthodox Christianity and Gnosticism alike, from this early witness to the canonical Gospels and beyond. Surprising insights abound and the author includes an autobiographical essay charting the important currents in New Testament scholarship over the last fifty years. | ||||||
More on Metzger
Evangelical Textual Criticism is collecting tributes to Bruce Metzger, so far Iain Torrance, Princeton Theological Seminary and Mike Holmes. No doubt there will be many more to come. Here's an obituary from the LA Times:
Bruce Manning Metzger, 93; New Testament scholar helped edit, update Bible translations
By Mary Rourke, Times Staff Writer
The piece focuses on some of the gender inclusive language in the NRSV translation:
Bruce Manning Metzger, 93; New Testament scholar helped edit, update Bible translations
By Mary Rourke, Times Staff Writer
The piece focuses on some of the gender inclusive language in the NRSV translation:
. . . . Soon after Metzger and his colleagues completed their work in 1989, he pointed out some of the changes in an interview with The Times.This reminds me of the one occasion I met Prof. Metzger. He came to lecture in Birmingham on the NRSV in 1996 and my colleague David Parker, a friend of Metzger's, introduced me -- and he was as delightful in person as everyone says he was. I remember one thing in particular from his lecture. When discussing the issue of gender inclusive translation, he explained the difficulties over translating sentences traditionally translated with male-specific language, like "Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear". Prof. Metzger explained that he had received a letter from someone strongly urging him to use the new gender inclusive pronoun "thon", thus "Whoever has ears to hear, let thon here." He said that he replied to her by saying that he would be willing to consider the use of "thon" as soon as it appeared in the Oxford English Dictionary.
The phrase, "Man shall not live by bread alone," from the Old Testament Book of Deuteronomy and the New Testament Gospels of Matthew and Luke, was adjusted to read, "One shall not live by bread alone."
"O men of little faith," in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, became "O you of little faith." The original Greek text did not use the word for man in that phrase, Metzger said. To insert it was "an unnecessary, restrictive" addition, he told The Times . . .
Ben Sira and Luke
Over on Scripta de Divinis, Tim Brookins has an introductory post on Ben Sira, including some NT parallels. One of the most remarkable parallels between Ben Sira and the NT is, I think, the Rich Fool parable in Luke:
Sirach 11.18-19 (RSV): [18] There is a man who is rich through his diligence and self-denial,The fact that this parable also appears in Thomas 63 raises some interesting questions about the relationship between Thomas, Luke and Ben Sira, but I don't have time to blog on them just now.
and this is the reward allotted to him:
[19] when he says, "I have found rest,
and now I shall enjoy my goods!"
he does not know how much time will pass
until he leaves them to others and dies.
Luke 12.15-21 (NASB): 12:15 Then He said to them, "Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions." 16 And He told them a parable, saying, "The land of a rich man was very productive. 17 "And he began reasoning to himself, saying, ''What shall I do, since I have no place to store my crops?'' 18 "Then he said, ''This is what I will do: I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. 19 ''And I will say to my soul, "Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years to come; take your ease, eat, drink and be merry."' 20 "But God said to him, ''You fool! This very night your soul is required of you; and now who will own what you have prepared?'' 21 "So is the man who stores up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God."
Over use of "precisely"
My contribution to the blogger-cooler discussion of Pet Peeves in the use of language features some easy targets. It seems I am not the only one who is irritated to an irrational degree by "Revelations", for example. So here is a more controversial example of a pet peeve that has developed in recent scholarly writing. It is the over use of the word "precisely", especially in contexts where it is modifying a conjunction as in "it is precisely because this issue is so important that I am trying to be precise about it".
The usage is widespread, but I think Tom Wright uses it more than most. Future generations who are trying to distinguish authentic Wright from pseudepigraphical Wright will be looking at percentages of the use of "precisely" in the writings in question. The article Paul's Gospel and Caesar's Empire, for example, features precisely eleven examples:
The usage is widespread, but I think Tom Wright uses it more than most. Future generations who are trying to distinguish authentic Wright from pseudepigraphical Wright will be looking at percentages of the use of "precisely" in the writings in question. The article Paul's Gospel and Caesar's Empire, for example, features precisely eleven examples:
The book thus invites us to approach what has been called Paul's theology, and to find in it, not simply a few social or political "implications", to be left safely to the final chapters of a lengthy theological tome, but a major challenge to precisely that imperial cult and ideology which was part of the air Paul and his converts breathed.My least favourite example of the usage is in the phrase "precisely because" since it is rare that it adds anything substantial to the clause. I suppose the point is to add some stress to the clause in question, as in "It really is because . . . . ."; "It is because of this very thing that I wish to stress. . . ." so it becomes a shorthand for adding emphasis. I don't want to give the impression that I am unfairly criticizing Wright's prose. Indeed it is precisely because I so admire his writing style that I can't help noticing this widespread feature of scholarly prose making such a marked impression on his writing. The usage is becoming difficult to avoid; it's one of those little language trends that we can't help finding ourselves pulled into. Although I would never consciously use it myself, it is a creeping usage that is becoming ever more pervasive.
Politically, it cannot but have been heard as a summons to allegiance to "another king", which is of course precisely what Luke says Paul was accused of saying (Acts 17.7).
What the older history-of-religions argument failed to reckon with was the Jewish understanding that, precisely because of Israel's status within the purposes of the creator god, Israel's king was always supposed to be the world's true king.
Paul endorsed this train of thought, and he believed it to have been fulfilled in Jesus. He knew, of course, that Jesus was very different from the other Messiahs who flit through first-century history, but it is precisely part of the characteristic tension of his whole theology to claim that this crucified Jesus was and is the Jewish Messiah promised in scripture.
Simultaneously, and precisely because of the inner dynamic of just this Jewish tradition, Paul was announcing that Jesus was the true King of Israel and hence the true Lord of the world, at exactly the time in history, and over exactly the geographical spread, where the Roman emperor was being proclaimed, in what styled itself a "gospel", in very similar terms.
When, therefore, God's righteousness was unveiled, the effect would be precisely that the world would receive justice: that rich, restorative, much-to-be-longed-for justice of which the Psalmists had spoken with such feeling.
And the point of having "citizenship in heaven", as has often been pointed out, is not that one might eventually go home to the mother city; Rome established colonies precisely because of overcrowding in the capital, and the desire to spread Roman civilization in the rest of the empire.
Before we pick up the stones of our post-enlightenment sensibilities to throw at Paul, or at any interpreter who dares to suggest that Paul might have done any such thing, we should recall that precisely this move was a standard way in which many Jewish groups in the second-Temple period would define themselves over against one another.
Paul is thus not only located on the map of second-Temple history, but, by employing an inner-Jewish rhetorical strategy in which one's opponents were cast as pseudo-pagans, he is able to use the device in a quite new way, setting up precisely this polemic so as to serve a new purpose, namely his anti-Caesar message.
Just as the Messiah had obeyed the covenant plan of God, and was now identified as the Lord of the world, so the Messiah's people were to find their covenant identity precisely "in" the Messiah, in his dying and rising, in his faithfulness, in the covenant membership which would be God's gift bestowed upon faithfulness.
It is precisely because they are assured they are indeed the people of the one true God, formed in the Messiah through his death and resurrection, that the Philippians will have the courage and confidence to trust him as saviour and lord and so to renounce the imperial claims of Caesar.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Pet Peeves
On Blue Cord, Kevin Wilson has a great list of pet peeves, following Chris Heard's lead on Higgaion. Well, isn't this what blogging is for? One of Kevin's is a pet peeve of mine, the incorrect use of "beg the question", now very common. Here are a few of mine, some found in scholarly writing, some in students' writing and some in popular culture:
- "Exegete" as a verb rather than "to do exegesis of / write an exegesis of".
- "Critique" as a verb rather than "to write a critique of".
- "Quote" as a noun. "To quote" is a verb. The noun is "quotation". This is even found in some scholarly writing.
- Unnecessary use of Latin, as in theologia crucis when "theology of the cross" will do just fine.
- "Revelations for Revelation (Book of). I find this irritating to an irrational degree. It is particularly common in film and fiction.
- Whingers. People who worry about minor little aberrations in the use of language. CHILL.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Bruce Metzger
On Evangelical Textual Criticism, P. J. Williams passes on the sad news of the death of Bruce Metzger yesterday. On the Novum Testamentum blog, Brandon Wason has links to news articles in the Home News Tribune and NewsDay.com
All Things Considered on Lampeter
One of my regular BBC podcasts is BBC Wales's weekly religion programme called All Things Considered. This week's episode was wholly devoted to a feature on and interviews with the Department of Theology and Religious Studies, University of Lampeter. It's not often (ever before?) you get an entire radio programme devoted to a Theology or Religion department. According to the programme, the department at Lampeter is the largest in the UK, with 49 academic members of staff. We used to say in Birmingham that we were the biggest, with almost 40, but it looks like Lampeter are now winning on the size front. The documentary is found here, either for download (podcast), or streaming. It begins with an excerpt from a class on the Gospel of Thomas:
All Things Considered
All Things Considered
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
JETS latest
The December 2006 issue of the Journal of the Evangelical Theology Society, which has free for all access over on FindArticles, is now available:
Journal of the Evangelical Theology Society (December 2006)
Articles include:
* MEANING OF MOP[Phi]H IN PHILIPPIANS 2:6-7, THE
by Jowers, Dennis W
PAUL CONFRONTS PAGANISM IN THE CHURCH: A CASE STUDY OF FIRST CORINTHIANS 15:45
by Jones, Peter
OF MUZZLES AND OXEN: DEUTERONOMY 25:4 AND 1 CORINTHIANS 9:9
by Verbruggen, Jan L
I won't link to all the book reviews relevant to the NT because it will take me too long to do so, but here is the list, and individual links can be found after going to the main link above. Authors of the reviews and not the books are listed:
* Contextualization in the New Testament: Patterns for Theology and Mission
by Larkin, William J
* Historical Jesus in Recent Research, The
by Ingolfsland, Dennis
* Rhetoric at the Boundaries: The Art and Theology of New Testament Chain-Link Transitions
by Harvey, John D
* Legend of the Septuagint: From Classical Antiquity to Today, The
by Jobes, Karen H
* Revelation of John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse, The
by Percer, Leo
* Colossians & Philemon
by Bateman, Herbert W IV
* Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, The
by Wallace, Daniel B
* Crux of Election: Paul's Critique of the Jewish Confidence in the Election of Israel, The
by Yinger, Kent L
* Acts
by Green, Joel B
* Johannine Discipleship as a Covenant Relationship
by Estes, Douglas
* Gospel according to Saint John, The
by Shidemantle, C Scott
* Studies in Matthew: Interpretation Past and Present
by Pennington, Jonathan T
* New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers. Vol. 1: The Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, The
by Warren, David H
* Jesus, the Tribulation, and the End of the Exile: Restoration Eschatology and the Origin of the Atonement
by Kennard, Doug
Journal of the Evangelical Theology Society (December 2006)
Articles include:
* MEANING OF MOP[Phi]H IN PHILIPPIANS 2:6-7, THE
by Jowers, Dennis W
PAUL CONFRONTS PAGANISM IN THE CHURCH: A CASE STUDY OF FIRST CORINTHIANS 15:45
by Jones, Peter
OF MUZZLES AND OXEN: DEUTERONOMY 25:4 AND 1 CORINTHIANS 9:9
by Verbruggen, Jan L
I won't link to all the book reviews relevant to the NT because it will take me too long to do so, but here is the list, and individual links can be found after going to the main link above. Authors of the reviews and not the books are listed:
* Contextualization in the New Testament: Patterns for Theology and Mission
by Larkin, William J
* Historical Jesus in Recent Research, The
by Ingolfsland, Dennis
* Rhetoric at the Boundaries: The Art and Theology of New Testament Chain-Link Transitions
by Harvey, John D
* Legend of the Septuagint: From Classical Antiquity to Today, The
by Jobes, Karen H
* Revelation of John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse, The
by Percer, Leo
* Colossians & Philemon
by Bateman, Herbert W IV
* Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, The
by Wallace, Daniel B
* Crux of Election: Paul's Critique of the Jewish Confidence in the Election of Israel, The
by Yinger, Kent L
* Acts
by Green, Joel B
* Johannine Discipleship as a Covenant Relationship
by Estes, Douglas
* Gospel according to Saint John, The
by Shidemantle, C Scott
* Studies in Matthew: Interpretation Past and Present
by Pennington, Jonathan T
* New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers. Vol. 1: The Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, The
by Warren, David H
* Jesus, the Tribulation, and the End of the Exile: Restoration Eschatology and the Origin of the Atonement
by Kennard, Doug
Life of Brian: The Musical Latest
Variety has the latest on Not the Messiah:
'Messiah' in Idle hands
'Spamalot' creator announces next project
By RICHARD OUZOUNIAN
'Messiah' in Idle hands
'Spamalot' creator announces next project
By RICHARD OUZOUNIAN
. . . . Idle was unwilling to disclose details about the work other than to say, "I promise it will be funnier than Handel, although probably not as good."H.T.: Peter Chattaway on Filmchat. Cf. also my previous post on it.
One question, though, is whether it will include "Brian's" best-known tune: "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life," already part of "Spamalot." . . . .
István Czachesz URL Update
I've adjusted the URL of Apostolic Commission Narratives in the Canonical and Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles by István Czachesz on my Non-Canonical Christian Texts page.
Historical Jesus articles update
A couple of updates on my Historical Jesus: Articles page: revised URL for Robert Miller's Jesus Seminar and Its Critics and the addition of E. P. Sanders, "The Question of Uniqueness in the Teaching of Jesus" (cf. my previous blog post on this).
Review of Biblical Literature latest
Latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literatue under the NT and related heading:
Thomas Hieke and Tobias Nicklas
"Die Worte der Prophetie dieses Buches": Offenbarung 22, 6-21 als Schlussstein der christlichen Bibel Alten und Neuen Testaments
Reviewed by Beate Kowalski
Deborah Krause
1 Timothy
Reviewed by Angela Standhartinger
Fergus Millar
A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief Under Theodosius II (408-450)
Reviewed by Daniel Schowalter
Annette Yoshiko Reed
Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity: The Reception of Enochic Literature
Reviewed by Siam Bhayro
E. Randolph Richards
Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection
Reviewed by William "Chip" Gruen
Thomas A. Robinson
Mastering New Testament Greek: Essential Tools for Students
Reviewed by Robert E. Van Voorst
Christine Schlund
"Kein Knochen soll gebrochen werden": Studien zu Bedeutung und Funktion des Pesachfests in Texten des frühen Judentums und im Johannesevangelium
Reviewed by Craig R. Koester
Shmuel Shepkaru
Jewish Martyrs in the Pagan and Christian Worlds
Reviewed by Daniel R. Schwartz
William Shiell
Reading Acts: The Lector and the Early Christian Audience
Reviewed by Verlyn D. Verbrugge
Dieter Zeller
Neues Testament und hellenistische Umwelt
Reviewed by Joseph Verheyden
Thomas Hieke and Tobias Nicklas
"Die Worte der Prophetie dieses Buches": Offenbarung 22, 6-21 als Schlussstein der christlichen Bibel Alten und Neuen Testaments
Reviewed by Beate Kowalski
Deborah Krause
1 Timothy
Reviewed by Angela Standhartinger
Fergus Millar
A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief Under Theodosius II (408-450)
Reviewed by Daniel Schowalter
Annette Yoshiko Reed
Fallen Angels and the History of Judaism and Christianity: The Reception of Enochic Literature
Reviewed by Siam Bhayro
E. Randolph Richards
Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection
Reviewed by William "Chip" Gruen
Thomas A. Robinson
Mastering New Testament Greek: Essential Tools for Students
Reviewed by Robert E. Van Voorst
Christine Schlund
"Kein Knochen soll gebrochen werden": Studien zu Bedeutung und Funktion des Pesachfests in Texten des frühen Judentums und im Johannesevangelium
Reviewed by Craig R. Koester
Shmuel Shepkaru
Jewish Martyrs in the Pagan and Christian Worlds
Reviewed by Daniel R. Schwartz
William Shiell
Reading Acts: The Lector and the Early Christian Audience
Reviewed by Verlyn D. Verbrugge
Dieter Zeller
Neues Testament und hellenistische Umwelt
Reviewed by Joseph Verheyden
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Journals page update
I have updated the New Testament Gateway: Journals page, with an adjusted URL for Bibliotheca Sacra, with thanks to Tommy Wasserman for pointing it out.
The Synoptic Problem in Eight Easy Steps
(a) The Synoptic Gospels are so similar in order and wording that there must be some kind of literary link between them.
(b) Mark is consistently the “middle term”, i.e. agreements between Matthew and Luke are often “mediated” via Mark. Matthew and Luke are rarely the middle term.
(c) The easiest way to explain Mark as middle term is that it was the major source for both Matthew and Luke. This explains all the “triple tradition” (Matthew // Mark // Luke) material.
(d) But two hundred verses or so of major agreements between Matthew and Luke remain, the “double tradition” (Matthew // Luke).
(e) If Matthew and Luke used Mark independently, the double tradition must be derived from an hypothetical source, called “Q” (for Quelle, source).
(f) Thus the “Two Source Theory”, that Matthew and Luke had two major sources, Mark and Q. It is the majority view.
(g) But there is good evidence that Luke knew Matthew as well as Mark, e.g. some major and many minor agreements between Matthew and Luke against Mark.
(h) Q is therefore unnecessary. Matthew knew Mark; Luke knew Mark and also Matthew. This is called the Farrer Theory.
(b) Mark is consistently the “middle term”, i.e. agreements between Matthew and Luke are often “mediated” via Mark. Matthew and Luke are rarely the middle term.
(c) The easiest way to explain Mark as middle term is that it was the major source for both Matthew and Luke. This explains all the “triple tradition” (Matthew // Mark // Luke) material.
(d) But two hundred verses or so of major agreements between Matthew and Luke remain, the “double tradition” (Matthew // Luke).
(e) If Matthew and Luke used Mark independently, the double tradition must be derived from an hypothetical source, called “Q” (for Quelle, source).
(f) Thus the “Two Source Theory”, that Matthew and Luke had two major sources, Mark and Q. It is the majority view.
(g) But there is good evidence that Luke knew Matthew as well as Mark, e.g. some major and many minor agreements between Matthew and Luke against Mark.
(h) Q is therefore unnecessary. Matthew knew Mark; Luke knew Mark and also Matthew. This is called the Farrer Theory.
Did Paul discourage Jewish Christians from keeping the Law?
Over on Euangelion, in a post headed Paul, the Law and the Jews, Michael Bird asks the question, "Did Paul expect Jewish Christians to adopt the non-Torah policy that he had for Gentiles?" and quotes a section from William Campbell's Paul's Gospel in an Intercultural Context, the first part of which is:
In the Campbell quotation above, it depends a bit on what we mean by the word "discourage". Given that Paul not living "under the Law" at all times, does that not act as a kind of discouragement to other Christian Jews from keeping the Law? Paul's "all things to all people" policy (1 Cor. 9.19-23) must have appeared to some as an encouragement to other Christian Jews not to keep the Law, whatever the content of Paul's actual preaching was. In other words, I find it easy to imagine how the charge of Acts 21.21 could have been made. Paul was not "teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs," but the charge had a ring of truth to it if one observed Paul's actual practice.
Because Paul cannot yield on this point [the gospel is available to Gentiles without having to proselytize] does not mean that he opposed all things Jewish or that he would discourage Jewish Christians from following a Jewish lifestyle after they had become Christians. This stipulation that Jewish Chrsitians recognise the right of Gentile Christians to be accepted into the people of God and continue to live a Gentile (Christian) lifestyle, does not mean that such Jewish Christians as recognised this, should not also have the freedom to continue to live in a Jewish life style.It is a fascinating question. One way I try to focus it when teaching Paul is to ask my students whether they think Paul would have encouraged his fellow Christian Jews to circumcise their male children at eight days. Let's face it: over twenty or thirty years, Paul must have come into contact with many Christian Jews who were in this situation. They have just had a baby boy. Do they circumcise him? What about Paul's nephew (Acts 23.16); did Paul encourage his sister to circumcise him when he was born, and what about his brothers, or their children?
In the Campbell quotation above, it depends a bit on what we mean by the word "discourage". Given that Paul not living "under the Law" at all times, does that not act as a kind of discouragement to other Christian Jews from keeping the Law? Paul's "all things to all people" policy (1 Cor. 9.19-23) must have appeared to some as an encouragement to other Christian Jews not to keep the Law, whatever the content of Paul's actual preaching was. In other words, I find it easy to imagine how the charge of Acts 21.21 could have been made. Paul was not "teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs," but the charge had a ring of truth to it if one observed Paul's actual practice.
Friday, February 09, 2007
Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
On the Stuff of Earth, Michael has news of the latest ZNW:
Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 98/1part2 (January 2007)
An RSS feed is available for future alerts, which I hadn't noticed before, so I've added it to my journals RSS feed.
Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 98/1part2 (January 2007)
An RSS feed is available for future alerts, which I hadn't noticed before, so I've added it to my journals RSS feed.
James Tabor on Early Christian Assumptions
James Tabor has an interesting and provocative post on the Jesus Dynasty Blog on:
What We Assume About Early Christianity
Here is an excerpt:
I have a couple of qualms, though, about the characterization of the preaching of the apostles in Acts 2 and 3 as pure "Paulinism", and from two different angles. First, and following Käsemann, Conzelmann et al, I can't help thinking that there is something very odd going on with the theologia crucis (theology of the cross) in Luke-Acts. The thing conspicuously absent from those early Acts sermons is any declaration that "Christ died for our sins". This is a really striking fact, all the more striking given the absence of Mark 10.45 (the "ransom for many" saying) in Luke.
My second qualm relates to the idea that things like "Christ died for our sins" are pure Paulinism. If there is one thing we do know from those "dark ages" of 30-50CE, it is that the earliest Christian preaching, which Paul gave to the Corinthians as of first importance, and which had been handed on to him, placed at its heart Jesus the Messiah's death for his people's sins according to the Scriptures, his burial, and his resurrection according to the Scriptures. Paul is pretty clear in 1 Corinthians 15.1-3 that this key material was traditional. On this, one of my favourite articles is Jeff Peterson, "The Extent of Christian Theological Diversity: Pauline Evidence", Restoration Quarterly 47 (2005): 1-12 [PDF], which I have mentioned on a previous occasion.
What We Assume About Early Christianity
Here is an excerpt:
. . . . Acts might well be called “From Jerusalem to Rome: The Story of Paul’s Triumph.” Luke is anxious of course to show great harmony between Peter and Paul, and even a kind of tacit agreement of James, the brother of Jesus, whom Luke has to relunctantly (sic) admit was the leader of the Jesus movement at that time. In fact the “kerygma” or “preaching” of the apostles according to Luke, as reflected in Peter’s speeches in Acts 2:22-38 and 3:11-26, is pure “Paulinism” in terms of its basic parameters–that Christ was sent from God as Messiah, that he died for the sins of mankind, that he was raised from the dead, and that he has ascended to heaven, soon to return as apocalyptic Judge.I would like to comment on a few things here. I agree about the way that Luke brings James on to the scene to offer "a kind of tacit agreement". Luke's portrait of James is quite odd, like that of a major historical character playing a minor role in the drama. It's like Hamlet in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead but more so. Indeed, it is worth noting that Luke never even identifies James as the brother of Jesus. We know that he is not James the son of Zebedee, who dies in Acts 12, but otherwise the reader unacquainted with other early Christian sources like Galatians 1-2 would have no idea who this character was.
I have a couple of qualms, though, about the characterization of the preaching of the apostles in Acts 2 and 3 as pure "Paulinism", and from two different angles. First, and following Käsemann, Conzelmann et al, I can't help thinking that there is something very odd going on with the theologia crucis (theology of the cross) in Luke-Acts. The thing conspicuously absent from those early Acts sermons is any declaration that "Christ died for our sins". This is a really striking fact, all the more striking given the absence of Mark 10.45 (the "ransom for many" saying) in Luke.
My second qualm relates to the idea that things like "Christ died for our sins" are pure Paulinism. If there is one thing we do know from those "dark ages" of 30-50CE, it is that the earliest Christian preaching, which Paul gave to the Corinthians as of first importance, and which had been handed on to him, placed at its heart Jesus the Messiah's death for his people's sins according to the Scriptures, his burial, and his resurrection according to the Scriptures. Paul is pretty clear in 1 Corinthians 15.1-3 that this key material was traditional. On this, one of my favourite articles is Jeff Peterson, "The Extent of Christian Theological Diversity: Pauline Evidence", Restoration Quarterly 47 (2005): 1-12 [PDF], which I have mentioned on a previous occasion.
Andrew Das, Solving the Romans Debate
Latest from Fortress:
Revealing the audience —and purpose —of Paul's most enigmatic letter
"Why did Paul address a long discussion of Jewish themes to a Gentile audience? Scholars have long debated the "double character" of Romans. Andrew Das promises to resolve the debate through a fresh understanding of the identity and attitudes of the Gentile Christians in Rome and of the expulsion of Jews from Rome under the emperor Claudius. Solving the Romans Debate offers new insight into Paul's concern for the Jewish roots of the Christ movement."
Andrew Das' Solving the Romans Debate powerfully and cogently argues a solution.... that makes perennial problems vanish and that produces a credible coherence that has been lacking in the Romans debate. All of those who are serious about that debate must read this book.
"Why did Paul address a long discussion of Jewish themes to a Gentile audience? Scholars have long debated the "double character" of Romans. Andrew Das promises to resolve the debate through a fresh understanding of the identity and attitudes of the Gentile Christians in Rome and of the expulsion of Jews from Rome under the emperor Claudius. Solving the Romans Debate offers new insight into Paul's concern for the Jewish roots of the Christ movement."
Andrew Das' Solving the Romans Debate powerfully and cogently argues a solution.... that makes perennial problems vanish and that produces a credible coherence that has been lacking in the Romans debate. All of those who are serious about that debate must read this book.
—Stanley Stowers, Professor of Religious Studies, Brown University
Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Blog
It's good to see that Jim Davila has opened up one of his famous course blogs and websites, this time on the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.
Thursday, February 08, 2007
The Trial and Death of Jesus
This book is new from Peeters. My copy arrived today:The Trial and Death of Jesus
Essays on the Passion Narrative in Mark
Series: Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology, 45
Editors: Van Oyen G., Shepherd T.
Year: 2006
ISBN: 90-429-1834-9
Pages: XI-268 p.
Price: 40 EURO
What is the significance of the trial and death of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark? In its annual meetings the Mark Group of the Society of Biblical Literature studied the trial of Jesus in 2003 and the death of Jesus in 2004. Both speakers and audience expressed the desire to bring some of the papers together in book form. The current volume fulfills this wish. The contributions presented here represent an up to date expression of one of the most important themes in Markan exegesis. The editors use the metaphor of a prism to illustrate the two sections of the book. Like a concave prism spreading light, the first section presents a range of understandings of the meaning of the death of Jesus. Like a convex prism focusing light, the second section uses multiple methodologies to focus attention on the trial of Jesus, particularly the charge of blasphemy. The papers together raise questions, challenge common views, and interrelate themes that push Markan scholarship forward.
---
I have an essay in the volume called "Scripturalization in Mark's Crucifixion Narrative". Here's the full list of contents:
Section One
The Meaning of Jesus’ Death
Sharyn DOWD and Elizabeth Struthers MALBON
The Significance of Jesus’ Death in Mark: Narrative Context and
Authorial Audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Mark GOODACRE
Scripturalization in Mark’s Crucifixion Narrative . . . . . . . . . 33
Geert VAN OYEN
The Meaning of the Death of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark: A Real
Reader Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Jocelyn MCWHIRTER
Messianic Exegesis in Mark’s Passion Narrative . . . . . . . . . 69
William SANGER CAMPBELL
“Why did you abandon me?” Abandonment Christology in Mark’s
Gospel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Stephen P. AHEARNE-KROLL
Challenging the Divine: LXX Psalm 21 in the Passion Narrative
of the Gospel of Mark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
Section Two
The Trial of Jesus
Adela YARBRO COLLINS
The Charge of Blasphemy in Mark 14:64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Jeffrey B. GIBSON
The Function of the Charge of Blasphemy in Mark 14:64 . . . . 171
Michael E. VINES
The “Trial Scene” Chronotype in Mark and the Jewish Novel . . 189
Kelli S. O’BRIEN
Innocence and Guilt: Apologetic, Martyr Stories, and Allusion in
the Markan Trial Narratives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Tom SHEPHERD
The Irony of Power in the Trial of Jesus and the Denial by Peter –
Mark 14:53-72 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
List of contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
Index of Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Index of Ancient texts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
Green Card Application Filed
One of the reasons for increased blog activity over the last few days, and increased happiness, is that I managed to get my application for lawful permanent residency last week. This is such an unbelievably massive job that it sucks all the life and energy out of you for a long time. So I feel like I have resurfaced again. The full story, with a picture, is over on The Americanization of Emily.
Sorting Unicode Greek in MS Word
Steven Craig Miller has written a great little macro to facilitate sorting in MS Word a list of accented Greek words in Greek alphabetical order. I offered to host it here on the NT Gateway, and have added a link on the NT Greek Computer Software page, to the following effect:
Sorting Unicode Greek in MS Word [Zip archive]Oh, and while I was at it, I updated all the links on that page too.
By Steven Craig Miller. Click on the link to download a macro which facilitates sorting in MS Word a list of accented Greek words in Greek alphabetical order. Instructions on how to use the macro and exactly what it does is in a PDF file, while the macro itself is in a text file entitled "ConvertUnicodeGreek2Uppercase". For security reasons, a copy of the macro is also in the PDF file. This archive is hosted here at the NT Gateway, but if you have any questions, please e-mail the author of the macro at: stevencraigmiller@comcast.net.
Kenneth Atkinson
I have added the following to the Scholars: A page:
Kenneth Atkinson
University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA
List of publications, Bio, Course Materials
Kenneth Atkinson
University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA
List of publications, Bio, Course Materials
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Joel Marcus and Gary Habermas to debate the resurrection
Thanks to Ken Olson for passing on news of this event:
Two Views on the Resurrection
Joel Marcus (Duke Divinity School) & Gary Habermas (Liberty University)
February 20 @ 12:20-1:20 – Gary Habermas: “The Resurrection of Jesus and Recent Scholarship”
February 20 @ 7:00-8:30 PM – Two Views on the Resurrection Dialogue (Marcus & Habermas)
Blog: http://resurrectiontwoviews.blogspot.com/
RSVP at resurrectiontwoviews@yahoo.com
Flyer (PDF)
Two Views on the Resurrection
Joel Marcus (Duke Divinity School) & Gary Habermas (Liberty University)
February 20 @ 12:20-1:20 – Gary Habermas: “The Resurrection of Jesus and Recent Scholarship”
February 20 @ 7:00-8:30 PM – Two Views on the Resurrection Dialogue (Marcus & Habermas)
Blog: http://resurrectiontwoviews.blogspot.com/
RSVP at resurrectiontwoviews@yahoo.com
Flyer (PDF)
TV Bible Adventure Stories to Air on BBC
From Christian Today:
TV Bible Adventure Stories to Air on BBC
A television series based on Bible stories for children has been scheduled for broadcast on the BBC's children's slot CBBC in March.
by Gretta Curtis
TV Bible Adventure Stories to Air on BBC
A television series based on Bible stories for children has been scheduled for broadcast on the BBC's children's slot CBBC in March.
by Gretta Curtis
A television series based on Bible stories for children has been scheduled for broadcast on the BBC's children's slot CBBC in March.Looks like fun.
Set in the first century AD, the UK-produced Friends and Heroes, is the epic animated tale of two young people - Macky and Portia - whose idealism and friendship leads them across the ancient world.
Through Macky and Portia, the Friends and Heroes series brings stories of the Old and New Testament to a new, worldwide generation of children in the twenty-first century, whatever their faith or background.
The 13 episodes will be broadcast on weekdays between March 12 and 23, sometimes twice a day, starting at 12 noon and 12.30pm, or in single episodes starting at 12.30pm. The series will form part of the BBC's factual output on CBBC which is also used by schools.
Grade inflation
There's an interesting piece in today's Duke Chronicle on the question of grade inflation, with the humanities the worst offenders:
Data Shows Rising Trend for Grades
Shuchi Parikh
Data Shows Rising Trend for Grades
Shuchi Parikh
When freshman Sharmistha Rudra chose her courses this semester, she aimed for balance.I have only had three full semesters at Duke, so I can't judge how far I am contributing to this problem. What I would say is that the quality of the work that comes in for the courses I teach (Introduction New Testament; Historical Jesus; Life and Letters of Paul) is remarkably high. Duke students are very bright and highly motivated. In other words, it's a nice problem to have. One amusing, or perhaps disturbing feature in the article above is to see a student choosing courses on the basis of ratemyprofessor.com, and on the basis of the alleged easiness of the courses in question.
To even out the heavy workload of her biochemistry and physics classes, she looked for a couple of "easy" humanities courses, deciding on a "Water and Conflict" seminar because it carried the lightest workload, according to www.ratemyprofessor.com.
Rudra's instinct that the University's liberal arts classes give out higher grades was not unfounded, according to data from the Office of the University Registrar.
And some evidence indicates that there has been consistent grade inflation in recent years. Latin honors, awarded to the top 25 percent of each graduating class, have had steadily increasing GPA cutoffs since the Class of 2001, the last year data was publicly available.
Summa cum laude, honoring the top five percent of the class, had a GPA cutoff for Trinity College graduates of 3.868 for the Class of 2005, but rose to 3.894 for the Class of 2007. The summa cum laude GPA cutoff for Pratt School of Engineering graduates rose from 3.905 to 3.950 over the same time period . . .
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Gordon Fee, Pauline Christology
On Pauline Perspectives, Matthew Montonini has news of 81 pages worth of sample pages from Gordon Fee's new book on Pauline Christology, at the Hendrickson's website:
Pauline Christology: An Exegetical-Theological Study
Pauline Christology: An Exegetical-Theological Study
Blogroll Clips
As I mentioned earlier, I have recently started using Google Reader. One of its nice features is that it provides a live "clip" service on your website and I have added one here, to the left of the screen. It picks up the latest additions to items on my blogroll, and flags them up for the reader. Or, for a fuller version you can follow the Read More link at the bottom of the clip box, or go to this link:
Blogroll Via Mark
Ultimately, I will probably phase out my older, more static Blogroll list, which is currently served via Bloglines.
Blogroll Via Mark
Ultimately, I will probably phase out my older, more static Blogroll list, which is currently served via Bloglines.
Earl Richard Lectures
I came across some useful on-line papers today at the Religious Studies Department at Loyola University. They have a lecture series there called the H. James Yamauchi, S.J. Lectures in Religion and several of these are available on-line, including some of interest to New Testament scholars and students:
Jesus, Mark and the Modern Reader
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, October 22 2000)
The Gnostic Gospel of Thomas: A Lost, Secret Vision of Jesus
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, October 17 1993)
The Rich Young Ruler or the Generous Centurion: Early Christianity and Worldly Possessions
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, March 5 1989)
Jesus, Mark and the Modern Reader
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, October 22 2000)
The Gnostic Gospel of Thomas: A Lost, Secret Vision of Jesus
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, October 17 1993)
The Rich Young Ruler or the Generous Centurion: Early Christianity and Worldly Possessions
Earl Richard (Loyola University Yamauchi Lecture, March 5 1989)
N. T. Wright Page latest
New on the N. T. Wright page:
Resurrecting Old Arguments: Responding to Four Essays
Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 3.2 (2005): 187–209
The essay is a response to four critiques of his mammoth tome, The Resurrection of the Son of God, by David Bryan, James Crossley, Michael Goulder and Larry Hurtado. It arose out of a couple of sessions at the Historical Jesus Seminar at the British New Testament Conference. I suppose my only regret about the availability of this essay free to all is that it is only one part of a five-part dialogue, and I can imagine that many will read this piece without reading and evaluating all contributors to the debate.
Resurrecting Old Arguments: Responding to Four Essays
Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 3.2 (2005): 187–209
The essay is a response to four critiques of his mammoth tome, The Resurrection of the Son of God, by David Bryan, James Crossley, Michael Goulder and Larry Hurtado. It arose out of a couple of sessions at the Historical Jesus Seminar at the British New Testament Conference. I suppose my only regret about the availability of this essay free to all is that it is only one part of a five-part dialogue, and I can imagine that many will read this piece without reading and evaluating all contributors to the debate.
Review of Biblical Literature latest
Latest from the SBL Review of Biblical Literature under the NT heading:
Youngmo Cho
Spirit and Kingdom in the Writings of Luke and Paul: An Attempt to Reconcile These Concepts
Reviewed by John T. Squires
Donald Jackson
Pentateuch: The Saint John's Bible
Reviewed by Walter A. Vogels
Luke Timothy Johnson
Hebrews: A Commentary
Reviewed by Craig R. Koester
Judith E. McKinlay
Reframing Her: Biblical Women in Postcolonial Focus
Reviewed by Valerie Bridgeman Davis
Daniel Patte and Cristina Grenholm, eds.
Gender, Tradition and Romans: Shared Ground, Uncertain Borders
Reviewed by Veronica Koperski
Marie Sabin
The Gospel According to Mark
Reviewed by Pieter J. J. Botha
Antonius Siew
The War between the Two Beasts and the Two Witnessess: A Chiastic Reading of Revelation 11.1-14.5
Reviewed by Pieter G. R. de Villiers
Leif E. Vaage, ed.
Religious Rivalries in the Early Roman Empire and the Rise of Christianity
Reviewed by Joseph Verheyden
Youngmo Cho
Spirit and Kingdom in the Writings of Luke and Paul: An Attempt to Reconcile These Concepts
Reviewed by John T. Squires
Donald Jackson
Pentateuch: The Saint John's Bible
Reviewed by Walter A. Vogels
Luke Timothy Johnson
Hebrews: A Commentary
Reviewed by Craig R. Koester
Judith E. McKinlay
Reframing Her: Biblical Women in Postcolonial Focus
Reviewed by Valerie Bridgeman Davis
Daniel Patte and Cristina Grenholm, eds.
Gender, Tradition and Romans: Shared Ground, Uncertain Borders
Reviewed by Veronica Koperski
Marie Sabin
The Gospel According to Mark
Reviewed by Pieter J. J. Botha
Antonius Siew
The War between the Two Beasts and the Two Witnessess: A Chiastic Reading of Revelation 11.1-14.5
Reviewed by Pieter G. R. de Villiers
Leif E. Vaage, ed.
Religious Rivalries in the Early Roman Empire and the Rise of Christianity
Reviewed by Joseph Verheyden
Switch to the new blogger and thoughts on Google Reader
If you had dozens of posts from this blog appear in your reader this morning, it is because I've just made the switch to the new blogger. I tried to switch a month or two ago but it wouldn't let me because my archive was too massive, and hosted off-site. But now it's allowing me to make the switch and I have done so. One of the features of the new blogger is that it enables labels, at last, so they will be a feature from now on. I will not, however, be adding labels retrospectively to old posts, though, not least since there are well over 2,000 of them.
I am also experimenting with the new Google Reader and I am enjoying it a good deal and it is on the road to persuading me to abandon Bloglines, especially as it turned out to be very easy to export all my feeds from Bloglines to Google. And there are features about Google Reader I like, especially the starring of posts, à la GMail. Since I am a fan of Google applications, and use dozens of them (e.g. Calendar, Docs and Spreadsheets, Notebook), it is probably just a matter of time before I switch fully to Google Reader too. The one thing that is holding me back is that Bloglines renders my blogroll here on this blog very well. As far as I can tell, Google Reader does not have quite the same facility, though it does produce other nice features like clips from my blogroll, which is a lot of fun.
I am also experimenting with the new Google Reader and I am enjoying it a good deal and it is on the road to persuading me to abandon Bloglines, especially as it turned out to be very easy to export all my feeds from Bloglines to Google. And there are features about Google Reader I like, especially the starring of posts, à la GMail. Since I am a fan of Google applications, and use dozens of them (e.g. Calendar, Docs and Spreadsheets, Notebook), it is probably just a matter of time before I switch fully to Google Reader too. The one thing that is holding me back is that Bloglines renders my blogroll here on this blog very well. As far as I can tell, Google Reader does not have quite the same facility, though it does produce other nice features like clips from my blogroll, which is a lot of fun.
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Biblical Studies Carnival XIV and February's Biblioblogger
On Thoughts on Antiquity, Chris Weimer has done an excellent job with the latest Biblical Studies Carnival:
Biblical Studies Carnival XIV
And this month's featured biblioblogger is Jim West in an entertaining interview:
Blogger of the Month February 2007
Biblical Studies Carnival XIV
And this month's featured biblioblogger is Jim West in an entertaining interview:
Blogger of the Month February 2007
Friday, February 02, 2007
Response to DeConick
Yesterday I posted a draft of my paper Luke 11.27-28 // Thom. 79a: A Case of Thomasine Dependence and April DeConick responds on her blog in Is the Gospel of Thomas Dependent on the Synoptics? The response is a general one, reacting more to arguments about dependence in general (Schrage, Schürmann) than to the specific case I make. Since I make observations here that have not been made before, I am not sure that the general appeal to earlier literature on Thomas, which I mention in the article, really addresses the specific argument made here, which focuses on pervasive and distinctive Lucan features that point to the saying's genesis in Luke's mind. In fact I agree with Prof. DeConick's dissatisfaction with some of the traditional arguments for dependence, which tend to focus on a word here and a word there. As she notes, "The arguments [for dependence] in all cases are based on the presence of words that some scholars regard as traditionally redactional, that is words that are thought to be from the Lukan hand." What I am keen to do in this specific example is to point not just to the odd, isolated word but to the presence of markedly Lucan language, theme, setting and imagery. By attempting to the move the argument away from solely focusing on isolated words, I am hoping to show that the case for Thomas's familiarity with Luke is stronger than it is usually perceived to be.
On this particular pericope, let me attempt to put my argument in a nutshell lest it is thought that I am arguing along the same lines as those like Schrage. I am arguing that this saying, as we have it, comes from Luke's mind and that there is nothing un-Lucan about it. Its presence in Thomas, where it is anomalous, is therefore an indication of Thomas's familiarity with Luke's Gospel.
This, of course, raises some fresh questions, for example: (1) Are there other examples like this? (2) If Thomas is familiar with the Synoptics, how does he hear them and appropriate them? My answer to question (1) is Yes, and perhaps I'll blog those too in due course, if there is sufficient interest. My answer to (2) is that the issues raised by Prof. DeConick briefly in her recent post and at length in her recent books are important ones that need addressing. I think that too much time has been spent in the past on discussing whether Thomas knew the Synoptics and not enough time has been spent in discussing how Thomas used them. More anon on that too.
On this particular pericope, let me attempt to put my argument in a nutshell lest it is thought that I am arguing along the same lines as those like Schrage. I am arguing that this saying, as we have it, comes from Luke's mind and that there is nothing un-Lucan about it. Its presence in Thomas, where it is anomalous, is therefore an indication of Thomas's familiarity with Luke's Gospel.
This, of course, raises some fresh questions, for example: (1) Are there other examples like this? (2) If Thomas is familiar with the Synoptics, how does he hear them and appropriate them? My answer to question (1) is Yes, and perhaps I'll blog those too in due course, if there is sufficient interest. My answer to (2) is that the issues raised by Prof. DeConick briefly in her recent post and at length in her recent books are important ones that need addressing. I think that too much time has been spent in the past on discussing whether Thomas knew the Synoptics and not enough time has been spent in discussing how Thomas used them. More anon on that too.
Latest JBL
I realize that most readers will get the SBL Publications alerts anyway, but for the sake of completeness I liked to mention them here too:
The winter issue of JBL 125.4 has been posted. Changes have been made to the way JBL is displayed on the site. You will have to go to the site and log in before you can see this issue.
For a review of the many new enhancements of JBL, click here.
The articles in JBL 125.4 include:
Bishlam's Archival Search Report in Nehemiah's Archive: Multiple Introductions and Reverse Chronological Order as Clues to the Origin of the Aramaic Letters in Ezra 4-6
Richard C. Steiner
Proverbs 8:22—31: Three Perspectives on Its Composition
Alan Lenzi
Analogical Reasoning in Romans 7:2—4: A Woman and the Believers in Rome
Peter Spitaler
Taming the Shrew, Shrike, and Shrimp: The Form and Function of Zoological Classification in Psalm 8
Richard Whitekettle
What Becomes of the Angels' "Wives"? A Text-Critical Study of 1 Enoch 19:2
Kelley Coblentz Bautch
Did Paul Loathe Manual Labor? Revisiting the Work of Ronald F. Hock on the Apostle's Tentmaking and Social Class
Todd D. Still
Book Reviews
Annual Index: Volume 125 (2006)
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Expository Times latest
The latest Expository Times is out, details and NT related highlights below:
Expository Times
1 February 2007; Vol. 118, No. 5
The Gospel of Judas
Simon Gathercole
The Expository Times 2007;118 209-215
Three Followers of Jesus
Paul Foster
The Expository Times 2007;118 227
Major Critical Tool for Studying the Nativity
Paul Foster
The Expository Times 2007;118 233
Exegetical Notes on John 12:1-8: The Anointing of Jesus
Susan Miller
The Expository Times 2007;118 240-241
Surveying Lukan Scholarship
Andrew Gregory
The Expository Times 2007;118 241
Book Review: Books on the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism
Timothy H. Lim
The Expository Times 2007;118 249-250
Book Review: Disciples as the New Covenant Community in John?
Andrew Lincoln
The Expository Times 2007;118 251
Book Review: The Historical Jesus and the Final Judgment
Paul Foster
The Expository Times 2007;118 252
Book Review: New Loeb Edition of the Life of Apollonius of Tyana
Mary-Rose Wyles
The Expository Times 2007;118 253-254
Book Review: The Thessalonian Epistles
Angus Paddison
The Expository Times 2007;118 254
Book Review: A Fine Commentary on Romans
A. J. M. Wedderburn
The Expository Times 2007;118 254-255
Book Review: Social Memory and Early Christianity
Chris Keith
The Expository Times 2007;118 255
Book Review: Origins of Rabbinic Judaism
Kevin Sullivan
The Expository Times 2007;118 256
Book Review: Keeping it in the Family
Helen K Bond
The Expository Times 2007;118 257-258
Book Review: Index of Books Reviewed
The Expository Times 2007;118 259
Expository Times
1 February 2007; Vol. 118, No. 5
The Gospel of Judas
Simon Gathercole
The Expository Times 2007;118 209-215
Three Followers of Jesus
Paul Foster
The Expository Times 2007;118 227
Major Critical Tool for Studying the Nativity
Paul Foster
The Expository Times 2007;118 233
Exegetical Notes on John 12:1-8: The Anointing of Jesus
Susan Miller
The Expository Times 2007;118 240-241
Surveying Lukan Scholarship
Andrew Gregory
The Expository Times 2007;118 241
Book Review: Books on the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism
Timothy H. Lim
The Expository Times 2007;118 249-250
Book Review: Disciples as the New Covenant Community in John?
Andrew Lincoln
The Expository Times 2007;118 251
Book Review: The Historical Jesus and the Final Judgment
Paul Foster
The Expository Times 2007;118 252
Book Review: New Loeb Edition of the Life of Apollonius of Tyana
Mary-Rose Wyles
The Expository Times 2007;118 253-254
Book Review: The Thessalonian Epistles
Angus Paddison
The Expository Times 2007;118 254
Book Review: A Fine Commentary on Romans
A. J. M. Wedderburn
The Expository Times 2007;118 254-255
Book Review: Social Memory and Early Christianity
Chris Keith
The Expository Times 2007;118 255
Book Review: Origins of Rabbinic Judaism
Kevin Sullivan
The Expository Times 2007;118 256
Book Review: Keeping it in the Family
Helen K Bond
The Expository Times 2007;118 257-258
Book Review: Index of Books Reviewed
The Expository Times 2007;118 259
Luke 11.27-28 // Thom. 79a: Thomas's dependence on Luke
I recently posted a temporary draft of an article I have written on the Gospel of Thomas's dependence on Luke 11.27-28. If you are interested in looking at the piece, I would be grateful for any feedback. It is at:
Luke 11.27-28 // Thom. 79a: A Case of Thomasine Dependence
Note: this is only going to be available on-line temporarily (latest update today at lunchtime). I am currently revising it in the light of feedback I am receiving ahead of sending it off for publication. I mentioned this on the Gospel of Thomas e-list just the other day and Mike Grondin asked April DeConick for her opinion. She kindly posts her response on her blog in a post entitled Is the Gospel of Thomas Dependent on the Synoptics. I will respond later.
Luke 11.27-28 // Thom. 79a: A Case of Thomasine Dependence
Note: this is only going to be available on-line temporarily (latest update today at lunchtime). I am currently revising it in the light of feedback I am receiving ahead of sending it off for publication. I mentioned this on the Gospel of Thomas e-list just the other day and Mike Grondin asked April DeConick for her opinion. She kindly posts her response on her blog in a post entitled Is the Gospel of Thomas Dependent on the Synoptics. I will respond later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)