Biblical Studies Carnival 66 – “According to Mark”
Note: This biblioblogging carnival was published on my blog Euangelion Kata Markon for July 2012. Since that blog was intended to accompany my Ph.D. work on the Gospel of Mark, the carnival was designed to imitate the text of Mark.
The Beginning of the Carnival of Biblical Studies [of the bibliobloggers].
My original plan was to go all out on the Markan style with kai euthus, sandwich techniques, historical presents, odd gar explanations (“for it was not the season for figs”) and so on. But after a week packed with social events, moving, 9 hour flight and 7 hour time zone change I just needed to get it done, plus I thought the joke might get a little old after the 10th “and immediately,” so please if there are any critics be gentle 🙂 Anyways, on to the carnival…
As it is written in the prophet Isaiah…
There were a number of posts on the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, or what scholars in the area might call the real Bible before the Greek appendix. Chris Heard has reloaded his Exodus Decoding on his new blog so we all can enjoy the debunking all over again. Yosef Garfinkel challenges the low chronology paradigm based on the recent excavations at Khirbet Qeiyafa in BAR and Philip Davies responded; Claude Mariotinni also gives an overview of the so-called minimalist-maximalist debate. William R. Osborn, Jim West, Timothy Michael Law, John Hobbins, Nick Norelli and Drew Longacre all call attention to the Journal for the Evangelical Study of the Old Testament. John Hobbins looks at the particular type of historical narrative offered in Exodus-Numbers. Jared Calaway looks at the image of Moses in Philo and in Josephus. Steve Wiggins further problematizes the story of Noah’s flood and, in a similar vein, Robert Cargill and Scott Bailey upload a cartoon about Numbers 15:32-36. Rabbi Rachel Barenblat describes some theologically rich Jewish traditions on the priestly blessing and carrying of the ark of the covenant. Kevin Brown has a post on the witch of Endor in 1 Samuel 28. Charles Halton provides access to a prepublication article on the book of Ruth (see the positive comments of Tim Bulkeley) and Christian Brady is in the final stages of preparing his article on Targum Ruth. Ekaterini G. Tsalampouni links to a conference on Elijah. James Bradford Pate has been blogging through the Psalms so see Psalms 79, 80, 81 and 82. Shawna R.B. Atterbury provides a poem and several links to feminine images of the divine in passages such as Proverbs 8 and 9. Duane Smith looks at the relevance of Manfried Dietrich and Ozwald Loretz reading of the Tiryns Alphabetic Inscription to Hosea 4:12a. Cory Taylor has some text critical analysis of Isaiah 40:3-8. James McGrath asks why the king of Babylon in Isaiah 14:12 and Jesus in Rev 22:16 were compared to the “bright morning star” (Venus). Abram K-J looks at whether Michah portrays a God of mercy or wrath. Joseph Kelly interacts with blogger Charles Halton among others in his helpful review of articles in the IVP Dictionary on the Old Testament: Prophets. James Tabor reflects on the differences between the Testaments and his preference for the open-endedness of the Hebrew Bible.
John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins
Did we discover the bones of John the Baptist? Well, probably not, but do not worry because several bloggers set out to correct the typical media hype such as Mark Goodacre (noting Robert Cargill’s post 2 years ago), John Byron, Jim West, Michael Heiser, Claude Marionette, Dienekes, Christopher Rollston and James Tabor with a nice round-up of posts by James McGrath. Meanwhile Michael Barber has a post on the canonical portrait of John the Baptist and I explored the possible meaning and implications of the baptism scene in Mark.
In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee…
What is the fun of a month of biblioblogging without the endless debates about mythicism? After May’s launch of the Jesus Project (courtesy of Maurice Casey, Steph Fisher and R. Joseph Hoffman), Hoffman continued with posts about the arguments of Shirley Jackson Case and a post providing one explanation for the silence of Paul and an interpretation of Galatians 4:4. Mark Goodacre asks how Jesus would have went about proving his own existence. Ben Witherington conducts a series of interviews with Bart Ehrman on the historicity of Jesus here, here, here, here, here, here, here (also noted by Bart Ehrman here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here). If interested in the other side, last I checked Vridar got to Part 23 (!) on a response to Ehrman’s popularizing treatment. James Tabor discusses his reconstruction of the historical Jesus here, here and here. James Bradford Pate asks if Jesus spoke Hebrew. Of course, questing after the historical Jesus involves a question of sources. In the study of Jesus and Christian origins we need to be wary of fake sources or artifacts so thankfully Daniel McClellan continues to debunk the Jordan Codices. When one turns to the Synoptic Gospel sources and the problem of their literary relationship, Joel Watts has a fun solution and James Bradforth Pate notes Brad Young’s interesting take on the Synoptic Problem. Mike Bird discusses the relationship of John to the Synoptics and posts an excerpt from the late Martin Hengel’s Johannine Question on whether the same elder who allegedly wrote the Johannine corpus or his school produced the book of Revelation, while Matthew Montonini has put up some Marianne Meye Thompson videos on John’s distinctive theology. Judy Redman and Christopher Skinner asks those to drop the line about “the burden of proof” on one’s debating partners when discussing the complicated question of the relationship of the Gospel of Thomas with the Synoptic tradition (see also Stephen Carlson’s perspective from his law background).
Follow me and I will make you become fishers of men
No one can properly study the distinctive narrative presentation of the disciples in each of the four gospels without engaging redaction and narrative criticism; Ron Naiweld provides a useful parallel from the study of rabbinic literature as the Rabbis are redactors in that they both inherit and interpret older sources and create new ones (see also Jim Davila on this point that this description of redaction applies to ancient literature in general). Christopher Skinner appears in an interview on the increasing attention to literary approaches to Mark over at New Testament Perspectives. Christopher Skinner also has a four–part series on narrative characterization in the Gospel of John. John Bergsma makes the case for Petrine authority based on the text from Matthew and for Paul’s solidarity with Peter. Moving on to “disciples” throughout Christian history, Larry Hurtado proposes that one of the successes of “proto-orthodox” Christianity was its inclusion of diversity of Jesus followers against a narrow sectarianism (see also the positive comments on the article by Charles Halton). Josh Mann has a series of interviews with a number of modern scholar-pastors about the relationship of academy and the church such as Jim West, Darrell Bock, Andreas Köstenberger, George Guthrie, Terry Wilder, Todd Chipman and Con Cambell. Peter Enns empathizes with the plight of evangelical scholars who are caught between a rock and a hard place, between the demands of academia for innovative research and the appointed gatekeepers of theological orthodoxy. Diedre Good noted a conference on engaging the Bible in mainline churches.
And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; if he does, the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost, and so are the skins; but new wine is for fresh skins.
A few new publications were announced in June. Stephen Carlson made his new PhD thesis available online. Chris Tilling also announces the publication of his PhD thesis on Paul’s divine christology (with endorsements from Jim West, Nick Norelli, Mike Bird). Roland Boer has some new publications worth checking out and Jim West announces his copy of James Crossley’s new Jesus in an Age of Neo-Liberalism has arrived, the latter of which Tom Verenna has begun a book review. A new blog worth checking out, Ecclesiam Et Rabbanan, by a friend Simon Lasair who did his PhD in the Targums and aims “to offer both theological and practical suggestions as to how Christians and Jews can start rethinking their ongoing relationship” and “promote the cause of reconciliation and growth for all who follow me here.” Professor Vernon Robbins is famous for introducing “socio-rhetorical” interpretation into biblical studies and is apparently not happy with its usage by another scholar. Matthew Malcomb and Danny Zacharias note a very critical RBL review, but the debate about the origins and correct application of the term really heats up in the comments section of Michael Halcomb’s Pisteuomen.
To you has been given the mystery of the kingdom of God, but for those outside, everything comes in parables
Since Mark 4:11 and parallels was a favourite of Origen’s to justify his allegorical method, this seems to be a good lead in to the number of posts on Origen this month. Markus Vincent announced at the Oxford Patristics site the discovery of new homilies on the Psalms by Origen, which was also recounted by Roger Pierce (also here, here; Pierce also blogs on Origen’s comments on Genesis and Titus), Alin Suciu (also here, here, here, here), P.J. Williams, Dirk Jongkind and Michael Barber. Rod of Alexandria has a few thoughts on Origen on the 3rd commandment or on Free Will and Joel Watts links to an article showing that Origen had a very different understanding of “inerrancy” of Scripture than some modern advocates.
Who then is this, that even wind and sea obey him?
It is well known that one of the dominant emphases of the first half of Mark in on a Christology of Power. On the subject of Christology, Larry Hurtado links to and agrees with Peter Schafer’s fairly critical review of Daniel Boyarin’s The Jewish Gospels. Tony Burke speaks on some of the alternative versions of Jesus in week 5 of his NT Apocrypha Course. Turning to healings such as reported in the Gospels, my friend and fellow-Sheffieldian Naomi Jacobs looks at the relevance of the Bible and Christianity to people with disabilities from the perspective of a sociologist. David Stark interprets the story of the man born blind in John. James Bradford Pate looks at earthquakes and whether these are perceived as supernatural occurrences in Mark and Seneca.
You know that among the Gentiles those whom they recognize as their rulers lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. But it is not so among you…
Rachel Held Evans began a wonderful series called the Mutuality 2012 Synchroblog with all the links to several bibliobloggers who participated and I would happily add the voice of my blog for full egalitarianism in society and the church against the continuing patriarchy advocated in some Christian quarters. On that note Amanda MacInnis and Leslie Keeney encourage more women to get involved at ETS. Suzanne McCarthy corrects some misleading notes in the NET Bible that seek to downplay the prominent leadership roles of Phoebe and Junia. J.K. Gayle has an interesting interpretation of a problematic passage, 1 Timothy 2:11-12, on mutual learning in quietness. In the debate over marriage equality, Peter at the newer blog “Biblical masculinities” stresses that we should stop attributing agency to a book (the Bible) when it is flesh-and-blood readers who actively interpret it in oppressive or liberating ways.
But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.
Also going back to “the beginning,” Brian LePort has been doing an ongoing series where he read the story of Adam in Genesis alongside Collins and Enns with parts 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 during the month of June. Ken Schenck discusses how to interpret this famous passage above on divorce (he also discusses issues of practical interpretation for today here).
And the gospel must first be preached to all nations
There were a number of posts on the “apostle to the Gentiles.” Phillip Long lists his top commentaries on Romans, Corinthians, Galatians or Philippians. Andrew Perriman interprets the epistle to the Romans as well as his sermon at Pisidian Antioch according to Acts. Suzanne McCarthy looks at the meaning of the term ethnos in Paul’s letters. Richard Fellows discusses the Antioch incident and dispute with Cephas in light of a textual variant ἦλθεν (aorist singular “he came”) in Galatians 2:16. Tom Gombis continues his series on election in Paul with parts 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 in June. John Byron looks at the role of the letter-carrier as the first interpreter of Paul’s letters. Tony Burke looks at the reception of Paul in week 6 of his NT Apocrypha course. Moving on from specifically Pauline congregations in the Empire, Phil Harland’s podcast studies the degree of assimilation and acculturation of Christian groups in Asia Minor based on 1 Peter and Revelation.
For the Son of Man will go as it is written of him…
Doug Chaplin asks if Paul knew the Gethsemane story that became incorporated into Mark’s Passion Narrative. This is relevant to the discussion about mythicism above, but there was quite a debate over whether there was a pre-Christian tradition about a suffering Messiah by Richard Carrier and Thom Stark (here, here, here, here, here), with others such as James McGrath, Tom Verenna and Loren Rosson adding their own insights. Scott McKnight has written a lot at the scholarly and popular level on a theology of the atonement so his thoughts are worth checking out.
He has risen, he is not here; see the place where they laid him
Is it a bird or a plane… or a fish? The online activity about Talpiot Tomb B, “the Patio Tomb,” seems to have died down considerably, but James Tabor defends his view here and here. James Charlesworth also put forward his views in a paper at the Bible and Interpretation and Mark Goodacre responds with a helpful overview of his own and several other critiques. Jonathan Pearce questions whether the early Christians knew the site of Jesus’ tomb because it was not a site of Christian veneration early on. JD Kirk posts on the theological meaning of Easter here, here, here and here.
The Earliest Editions of this Carnival and some ancient witnesses do not include this ending
I have tried to publish everything that was sent me in the comments of the blog or by email as well as search through as many of the blogs I can find, but the number of blogs has grown so big even since I last did the carnival. If you feel I missed your post or if I made a mistake on your name or the subject of your post, please feel free to share it in the comments and I will try to update this accordingly. If they are not related to academic biblical studies in some way, another option might be to check out the Christian Carnival, the latest of which is to be found on Tyler William’s blog which was revived from the dead. That is all, so thanks to Jim Lineville for taking on the duty of carnival organizing on board and please pass on your submissions for July to the next carnival host Phil Long.
Biblical Studies Carnival 45 – Bible Themed Park
Note: This is a repost and was originally posted on “The Golden Rule” blog on September 1, 2009. Unfortunately, many (most?) of the links may no longer be active. For the rest of the biblical studies carnivals, check out The Biblioblog Reference Library.
Move aside Disney Land. There is a new Bible Theme Park in town, the Biblical Studies Carnival XLV. Those who do not have any desire to go to the Holy Land Experience in Florida can now experience all the exciting family-fun and biblically-based attractions just at the click of the mouse. So drum roll please…
In honor of his 125th birthday, Rudolf Bultmann lead the annual Parade of Biblical Scholars. For the Bultmanniacs out there, Jim West has the ultimate anniversary celebration, with tributes from Maurice Casey, Roland Boer, Stephanie Fisher and James Crossley. Chris Tilling celebrates Bultmann’s breathtaking vision, James McGrath highlights Bultmann’s hypothesis on the relationship of John to Mandaeism and Mark Goodacre has an article on Bultmann’s skepticism that we can write a Jesus biography. Bultmann was not the only super star of August. John Anderson interviews his favorite scholar Walter Brueggemann. Matt began a great series of scholar interviews including John Kloppenborg, Larry Hurtado and Andreas Köstenberger. Mike Bird interviews Kavin Rowe on his work on Luke-Acts. Rob Kashow had 10 questions for Daniel Wallace. Chris Tilling found a goldmine of conservative scholarship. Stephen Smuts links to a video with Chris Forbes on the references to Jesus in Josephus’ Antiquities, but the site also has a good interview with the late Martin Hengel. Nick Norelli links to a number of articles by Scott Hahn. Some scholars took a bit of a beating in August. Kevin Edgecomb argues that Wellhausen and other giants of German Liberal Protestant scholarship built on a rotten foundation of anti-Semitism. Shocking as it may sound, not everyone is fond of the good Bishop Wright. Paul Helm and Gerald Bray expressed their critiques, but the latter provoked some critical responses.
What better to follow up a parade than fireworks!!! An article that draws sharp distinctions between Religious Studies and Theology and denies the latter advances knowledge lighted up the blogosphere (though a late July post, Chris Heard deserves credit for getting the ball rolling on this one). This conversation continued with thought-provoking posts by Tyler Williams, Jim Linville, Flávio Souza, Douglas Mangum, David Miller, Art Boulet, Missive from Marx, Deane Galbraith and Roland Boer. Closely related is Joel Willitts’ reflection on what it means to be a Christian academic. So what is the relationship of Religious Studies and Theology and is there room for Theology, one time the ”Queen of the Sciences,” in the academy? I will leave that for the reader to decide. But the theologically inclined should check out Joseph Kelly and Doug Chaplin debate divine impassibility, Michael Halcomb’s theology of prayer or Rod, Aaron, Nick and Michael discuss the Trinity.
Step into The Time Machine, a state-of-the-art virtual reality ride that lets you travel back to the ancient world. Go as far back as the last century of the 3rd millennium BCE to the ancient Sumerian Third Dynasty of Ur with Charles Halton. Or live among the Israelites: Julia M. O’Brien writes on how to eat like an Israelite and Claude Mariotinni on how to dress like one. Fundamentalists who think Deut 22:5 is about who wear the pants may be in for a surprise. Witness the rise of Judea and Jerusalem under Assyrian hegemony and then let Neil Godfrey know whether Finkelstein or Thompson got it right. Fastforward through Jewish history spanning from the return from captivity in 538 BCE to the Jewish War in 66-73 CE with Ken Schenck as a guide. Josh Mann lets you see the Roman Empire through the eyes of a slave. Phil Harland has podcasts on the gods in the Roman Empire, the historical Jesus or issues in the Pauline churches. Doug Chaplin focuses in on the Corinthian congregation. You might never guess Paul had a sense of humour. Get acquanted with the Beloved Disciple, whom James Tabor identifies as Jesus’ brother James. Bill Heroman defends the historicity of John while April DeConick explores the soteriological paradigm of the Johannine community. Don’t stop there but continue with her on the road to Nicea. If you visit Alexandria or Antioch, try to spot the hermeneutical differences with Joel Watts. Learn about the historical processes that led to canonization and the creeds on Quadrilateral Thoughts. If the proto-orthodox church isn’t your cup of tea, hang out with the Rabbis and catch Simeon ben Gamaliel’s amazing juggling act on C. Orthodoxy. There are a number of biblical adventures to choose, for Daniel McClellan reminds us the Bible is not univocal.
The full-scale model of Noah’s Ark has live animals such as lions and tigers and bears (oh my), but don’t let the children feed the bears. David Ker proposed a creative meme and asks how to preach on Elisha and the Bears (2 Kgs 2:23-24) (don’t make fun of bald people??) and several bloggers joined in on the fun including JohnHobbins, Doug Chaplin, Douglas Mangum, Peter Kirk, Henry Neufeld, James McGrath, Matt Page, Tim Bulkely, Bob Macdonald and Sam Norton.
The Scriptorium has a fine collection of ancient manuscripts. A panel of experts oversees the exhibits to prevent dubious claims like the recent ones about the copper scroll that irritate Robert Cargill. In introducing the Hebrew Bible , it is important to note it was not written in a cultural vacuum. There are interesting points of comparison with the Akkadian prayers and prayer for healing to Shamash translated by Duane Smith. Alan Lenzi’s introduction to Ludlul and following interpretive summary has parallels with Job and shows that Theodicy is a really old problem. Tim Bulkeley has a series of OT Podcasts. Reception History was in this month and James Pate presented different interpretations of Adam becoming “like one of us“ (Gen 3:22) or Cain as a repentant sinner (Gen 4:13) while Slaveofone looks at different views on the fate of Enoch (Gen 5:24). John Anderson posts on the composition of the Pentateuch and debunks the Documentary Hypothesis. Daniel McClellan shows that sons of god and angels have been conflated in Deuteronomy 32:43 LXX. John Hobbins has a series of exegetical notes on Psalm 1 and Phil Sumpter has a number of posts on Psalm 24. Tyler Williams continues his series on Psalm 151 with a look at the evidence from Qumran, the Septuagint and retroverting the text. Alan Knox studies the 26 uses of kērussō (“preach”) in the Septuagint here, here and here. But if you struggle reading the LXX, both John Hobbins and Mike Aubrey review Muraoka’s Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint.
The NT and Christian literature is next. Matthew Burgesshas some thoughts on dating one of the earliest textual fragments papyrus 52 and Tommy Wasserman posts on new NT fragments. I am pleased to announce that one newly discovered manuscripts is the elusive Sayings Gospel Q… ok that part is a lie but the next best thing is Chris Zeichmann’s posts on academic reconstructions of Q. There was alot of exegesis of Paul: Esteban Vazquez weighs in on the pistis Christou debate, Con Cambell exegetes Gal 1:10, Alan Bandy reflects on different interpretations of Rom 1:17 and Michael Heisler looks at what Rom 5:12 might say about universalism. And if you think Paul’s use of ioudaismos (usually “Judaism”) and euangellion (usually “gospel”) is self-evident, take a look at Steve Mason’s recent article. Daniel and Tonya count the number of occurences of Temple (hieron or naos) in Paul and John. Over to the Gospels, Tony Siew looks at the chiastic structure of Mark 1:21-28. Stephen Carslon suffered from a case of exegetical whiplash from a commentary on Mark 9:1, but recovered to provide a translation of Philip the Side. Rod comments on the Logos in John 1. Finally, Jared Calaway blogs on eschatology and cosmology in Hebrews, Rick Brannan takes a closer look at passages in the Didache and Suzanne McCarthy has a three–part–series on Syriac traditions that represent the Spirit as feminine and as a Mother.
Beware the (biblically-themed of-course) Haunted House. Some posts may literally scare the Gehenna out of you! Watch out for the spirits of disembodied giants on Scotteriology or my follow up post on how the ancients understood demons. Steve Wiggins posts on storm gods, sea monsters and the devil. If you find cats a little creepy, do not check out Jim Linville’s Review of Biblical Literature. Mark Goodacre put up a video and a podcast discussing the mark of the Beast and it turns out it may not be 666. One video incites fear in gullible Americans that Barack Obama is the Antichrist, but J.K. Doyle, James McGrath, G. Brooke Lester, Mike Heiser, Bryan Bibb, Ken Schenck and Dan Wallace on Parchment and Pen reveal that what is even more scary is the awful exegesis (or rather eisegesis) and popular assumptions behind this film. And scariest of all, Matt Dabbs uncovers that the real antichrist is Big Bird. Doctors prescribe a healthy dose of Alan Bandy’s guide to apocalyptic symbols and imagery or an understanding of the historical context of Revelation to cure Mass Revelation Hysteria.
Before you leave don’t forget to browse our Blogger’s Gift Shop. We have tons of Bible translations, but the TNIV received the most attention this month as Suzanne’s roundup reveals. Many bloggers wrote book reviews for the month of August. See Josh Mann’s review of Jesus in An Age of Terror, James McGrath on Jesus and the God of Israel or my review of The Only True God. The Lost World of Genesis One had multiple reviews from Joel Watts, James McGrath, Scot McKnight and Jason. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary was reviewed by Matthew Burgess and Nick Norelli. Jim West has not yet finished his rolling review of The Historiographical Jesus. Trevin Wax reviews Are You the One to Come and gets a bonus interview. Pat McCullough,who is also indexing a book for Ra’anan Boustan, also pointed out Interpreting Biblical Literature. Kevin Scull recommended Ancient Letters and the New Testament while while Brante Pitre questions the inconsistency over the Gospel’s genre in Geza Vermes’ classic Jesus the Jew. Ben Witherington III gives readers a taste of his new book The Indelible Image. Check out J. Brian Tucker’s blog for his helpful reviews of authors ranging from Edward Adams, Mark Nanos, Denise Buell, Caroline Hodge, etc.
THANK YOU to so many people who responded by submitting posts. I tried to include everything I received unless it was a tad too homiletical rather than academic (you can try submitting it for the Christian Carnival). The next carnival will take place at Hebrew and Greek Reader, so make sure to continue lending a helping hand by submitting your posts to them for the month of September.
Note: This was originally posted on The Golden Rule Blog in response to the widespread concern about the under-representation of female voices in biblioblogging by recognizing the contributions of women to biblical and religious studies. Granted, there may be deeper structural issues to be dealt with (i.e. the patriarchal heritage within western religious traditions), but this meme was a small attempt as a community to raise awareness and promote egalitarianism. The meme asked different bloggers to name the top 5 most influential female biblical or religious studies scholars on their area of study, though some listed more. Indeed, with regards to my list below (i.e. Denise Kimber Buell, Paula Fredriksen, Michelle Murray, Judith Lieu, Mary Douglas) I would today add more scholars that have influenced my own scholarship (e.g., Brenda Deen Schildgen, Adela Collins, Mary Ann Tolbert, Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, Joanna Dewey, Morna Hooker, Adele Reinhartz, Catrin Williams, Margaret Mitchell, Margaret McDonald, Caroline Johnson Hodges, Pamela Eisenbaum, Love Sechrest, Loveday Alexander, Beverly Roberts Gaventa, etc.). Also, for further prominent and upcoming scholars, check out the blog Women Biblical Scholars.
Meme Results, September 7, 2009
April DeConick: Matilda Gage, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Rachel Elior, Jane Schaberg, Elizabeth Fiorenza, Daphna Arbel, Phyllis Trible, Rosemary Ruether, Holly Hearon, Elaine Pagels, Karen King, Anne McGuire, Elizabeth Clark, Virgina Burrus, Elizabeth Castelli, Madeleine Scopello, Ann Graham Brock.
Bob MacDonald: Susannah Ticciati, Tikva Frymer-Kensky, Jody Magness, Carolyn Osiek, Mary Coloe, Morna Hooker, Elizabeth Schlussle Fiorenza
Daniel and Tonya: Carol Dempsey, Rachel Williams, Cynthia Miller, April DeConick, Karyn Traphagen, Amy Jill-Levine.
Daniel O. McClellan: April DeConick, Alison Salveson, Jodi Magness, Martha Himmelfarb, Jo Anne Hackett.
Doug Chaplin: Frances Young, Morna Hooker, Paula Fredriksen, Margaret Thrall, April DeConick.
J. K. Gayle: Carolyn Osiek, April DeConick, Adele Berlin, Phyllis A. Bird, Julia Evelina Smith
James McGrath: Frances Young, Elisabeth S. Drower, Jorunn Jacobson Buckley, Elaine Pagels, April DeConick
Jim Linville: Wendy Doniger, Catherine Bell, Susan Niditch, Yvonee Sherwood, Katherine M. Hayes, Mary Douglas (honourable mention).
Jim West: Amy-Jill Levine, Gisela Kittel, Charlotte von Kirschenbaum, Helen K. Bond, Diane Edelman
John Anderson: Anathea Portier-Young, Paula Fredriksen, Phyllis Trible, Danna Nolan Fewell, Adele Berlin, Diana Lipton, Nancy deClaisse-Walford, Amy-Jill Levine, Diana Edelman, Mary Douglas, Susan Niditch
John Hobbins: Adele Berlin, Tikvah Frymer-Kensky, Carolyn Osiek, Elizabeth Schussler-Fiorenza, Phyllis Trible. (And outside of biblical studies), Leora Batnitzky, Mary Douglas, Martha Nussbaum, Simone Weil, Frances Young.
Judy Redman: Morna Hooker, Marjorie Procter-Smith, Elizabeth J Smith, Phyllis Trible, Rosemary Radford Reuther, Sallie McFague, Elizabeth Johnson, April DeConick, Majella Franzmann, Judith Plaskow, Carol Christ, Dorothy McRae-McMahon, Karen Armstrong, Luisa Schutroff
Ken Brown: Margaret Barker, Mary Coloe, Susan Niditch, Marianne Meye Thompson, Gale Yee
Matthew Burgess: Adela Yarbro Collins, Paula Fredriksen, Judith Kovacs, Elaine Pagels, Diana Swancutt
Michael Whiteton: Adela Yarbro Collins, Beverly Roberts Gaventa, Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, April DeConick, Carolyn Osiek.
Michael Kok: Denise Kimber Buell, Paula Fredriksen, Michelle Murray, Judith Lieu, Mary Douglas
Nick Norelli: Sarah Coakley, Marianne Meye Thompson, Frances M. Young
Patrick McCullough: Marriane Meye Thompson, Adela Yarbro Collins, Paula Fredriksen, Martha Himmelfarb, Margaret M. Mitchell, Judith Lieu, Reta Halteman Finger, Carolyn Osiek
Rachel Marszalek: (updated in comments on Golden Rule blog) Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza, Dr Elaine Storkey, Dr Phyllis Trible, Monica Furlong and R.M. Groothius
Rob Reid: Adela Yarbro Collins, Jamie Clark-Soles, Carolyn Osiek, Margret M. Mitchell, Paula Fredriksen
Rod Thomas: Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Renita Weems, Phyllis Trible, Julia A. Foote, Kwok Pui Lan, Cheryl Kirk Duggan
Ros Clarke: Ellen Davis, Adele Berlin, Phyllis Trible, Athalaya Brenner, Carey Ellen Walsh
Suzanne McCarthy: Linda Belleville, Carol Meyers, Elizabeth Schussler-Fiorenza, Catherine Booth, Karen King, Elaine Pagels, Katherine Bushnell
Tony Siew: Elizabeth Fiorenza, Adele Berlin, Carol Meyers, Edith Humphrey
Update: A few new submissions have come in, so the results have been updated
Update II: JK Gayle combines both Ken’s meme and mine to show some more interesting results.
If you are interested in how the votes came in from the meme, here is the list of top scholars as voted on by different bloggers. Let me know if I made any mistakes in counting. Here are how the votes broke down:
#1. The winners with 7 votes is Phyllis Trible, Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza and April DeConick.
#2. Paula Fredriksen and Carolyn Osiek received 6 votes.
#3. Adele Berlin received 5 votes.
#4. Frances Young received, Adela Yarbro Collins, Mary Douglas, and Elaine Pagels received 4 votes.
#5. Amy-Jill Levine, Susan Niditch, Marianne Meye Thompson, and Morna Hooker received 3 votes.
I try to link to the biblical studies carnivals whenever they are published, which highlights a blogger’s selection of the best postings of a particular month, or a meme when it is widely circulated throughout biblioblogdom. I have taken a semi-active role in the carnivals and memes over the years. Therefore, over the next couple of weeks I am going to repost the Female Scholars Meme and my own Biblical Studies Carnivals that I have created since I started to blog around 2008/9. Enjoy the blast from the past.
Since I linked to the Themelios review of my book, I want to also link to Christopher Skinner’s review for the Biblical Theological Bulletin here. I appreciated his positive and critical feedback and added my own reflections here. The most recent and thorough blog review of my book that I am aware is from James Bradford Pate (on WordPress and Blogspot). Thanks to all the reviewers.
I came across a review of The Gospel on the Margins: The Reception of Mark in the Second Century at the Gospel Coalition’s journal Themelios. I have wondered how my work might be received by a more conservative evangelical reviewer, especially as I share the desire to communicate scholarship to believers in the pews. Although the review has fair criticisms, I am appreciative of its accurate summaries and positive feedback. I want to clarify a few points.
I did not mean to be too ready to reject “conservative” arguments. I tried to equally criticize form critics who removed the eyewitnesses from the transmission of the Jesus tradition, redaction and literary critics who exaggerate the negative aspects of Peter’s portrayal in Mark, and historical critics who wrongly attack Mark’s knowledge of Judean geography and customs. Yet I would give the following reasons why I am not persuaded by Martin Hengel’s early dating of the standard Gospel titles:
- Following Helmut Koester, the term “gospel” (euangelion) seems to still be used for the oral proclamation of Jesus’ lordship rather than a literary genre in the early second century (though I allowed for exceptions in the Didache and 2 Clement).
- Some Patristic testimonies about the Gospels do not know the standard titles. Papias names a few evangelists without entitling their writings “Gospels,” Justin is familiar with the title “Gospels” (euangelia) that he prefers to call memoirs that he assigns to undifferentiated apostles, the Valentinian “Gnostic” Ptolemy and the Christian apologist Theophilus of Antioch attribute the Johannine Prologue to John, and Irenaeus has traditions on all four Gospels.
- The standard title “Gospel according to x” implies not just that there are multiple copies in a library, but the theological view that the essential “Gospel” remains intact even when proclaimed from different vantage points. The best context for this is when the fourfold Gospel canon came together: one unitary “good news” and four messengers.
My case that the figure of Mark was remembered in the earliest New Testament evidence as an associate of Paul (Philemon, Colossians) and with Peter in the later New Testament evidence (1 Peter, Acts 12) does partially depend on my dating, which is always tentative and open to challenge. I think I am in the broad critical consensus in dating 1 Peter between 70 – 95 CE, while a date for Acts in the first decade of the second century is an admittedly minority view. Again, I tried to be balanced in this section: I was open to the possibility that Paul wrote Colossians or his co-workers did after Paul’s demise and I was critical of those who would date 1 Peter and Acts far too late into the second century (e.g. see my critique of some recent scholarship dating canonical Luke-Acts after Marcion).
I really appreciate the reviewer’s final comments: “Kok’s discussion of the patristic context is informative, and his portrayal of the adoption of texts by Christian factions for ideological purposes is intriguing. While his argumentation does not consistently prove convincing, his thesis raises a pertinent question for the contemporary church: Do we allow scripture to authoritatively speak into our beliefs, practices and emphases, or do we simply adopt it to the extent that it supports our pre-conceived opinions?” Great question! I do not think we ever escape our own social location that conditions what questions we ask of biblical texts and the methods we use to interpret them, but we try our best to use honest exegetical methods to not just read our own presuppositions out of Scripture but to let Scripture inform and challenge our worldviews.
I taught a course on Romans at Taylor Seminary last semester and, in preparation for this upcoming lecture, asked the students to write a critical book review of Michael Gorman’s Becoming the Gospel: Paul, Participation, and Mission. The E. P. Wahl Centre at Taylor Seminary is hosting Professor Gorman on March 17, 2017 where he is going to elaborate on his missional reading of Romans. If you are in the Edmonton area around this time, you can check out more information and sign up here.
Jennifer Guo has posted a great round-up of posts for the December 2016 Biblical Studies Carnival at her blog. Jim West has announced that his own annual carnival will cease since he laments that biblioblogging is becoming passe. Since I have been blogging since around 2008/2009, I think I qualify as one of the “second generation [that] has long ago withered into dullness.” 🙂
The word “atonement” is simply an old English term for at-one-ment and the theories of the atonement ask the question about how the death of Jesus makes humans right with God. Since Paul and the rest of the New Testament authors left later theologians with a variety of images for how Jesus’ death works, there have been different attempts to integrate all of the New Testament data into a total systematic theology. Here are some of the proposals:
- Christus Victor (cf. Gustaf Aulén): Jesus’ death was a cosmic victory over the powers of darkness and death and liberates humanity from their control. In the Patristic and Medieval eras, this developed into the view that the death of Christ was a ransom paid to devil in order to release the devil’s captives. The spiritual forces of death, however, could not keep hold of Jesus and were defeated at Jesus’ resurrection.
- Recapitulation/Participation (Irenaeus of Lyons): Jesus becomes fully incarnate, taking on our fallen human nature from birth to death and reverses the effects of death by his resurrection. By united ourselves with Christ, we die to our old way of life and are raised to become a new creation being conformed to the divine image (cf. the symbolism of baptism in Romans 6:1-11 and 2 Corinthians 5:14-15)
- Satisfaction (Anselm of Canterbury): in a feudal political arrangement, land was given in exchange for honor and service. God is the ultimate lord who should be exalted and served, but rebellion is an affront to God’s honor. Christ’s obedience to the point of death pays back the honor that is due to the divine sovereign as a form of compensation and the merits of Christ can be attained by believers.
- Penal Substitution (John Calvin): humanity stands guilty of breaking God’s law before the divine court and should be condemned at the final judgment, but Jesus takes the punishment in our place. The “Govermental Theory” is a variation on this model in that Jesus is not so much taking the punishment that is due sinners as demonstrating God’s just wrath against sin itself.
- Moral Influence (Peter Abelard): the cross does not objectively atone for sin or satisfy divine wrath, but subjectively moves humans to repentance in response to Jesus’ example. Jesus’ death exemplifies divine love, selfless service, or non-violent resistance against the powers and sets a model for his followers to follow.
- Girardian Scapegoat (Rene Girard): mimetic rivalry turns people into rivals for the same object (i.e. I desire the same thing that you desire) and leads to conflict over it. To prevent violence from spiraling out of control, society redirects the violence towards a third party (i.e. scapegoat) so that social order is restored. Jesus’ is executed as a scapegoat and, as an innocent victim of society’s violence, exposes the injustice of the scapegoat mechanism.
In the last post, we looked at some of the images that Paul uses to convey the significance of Jesus’ death. Under the category “religious”, I listed Romans 3:25 as drawing on the imagery of the temple sacrificial system. There is some debate about the translation of the term hilastērion as “propitiation” or “expiation,” with the former meaning emphasizing that Jesus’ death satisfies God’s righteous anger or wrath and the latter meaning focusing on how the impure stain of sin is removed. Other scholars point to how this Greek term is used to translate the “mercy seat” where God was enthroned on the ark of the covenant as a symbol of the divine presence with the people. I find the article by Daniel Bailey entitled “Jesus as the Mercy Seat: The Semantics and Theology of Paul’s Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25” Tyndale Bulletin 51.1 (2000) 155-158 to be convincing on this issue. For Paul (or perhaps for the earlier writer of this creedal formulation), Jesus’ sacrificial death has made away from sinful humanity to dwell in the presence of a holy God.