Saturday, September 11, 2004
Links opening in new windows
A correspondent suggested to me that it would be useful to have links in this blog opening in new windows (illustration). So I'll give that a go for a bit and see what users think. Please leave a comment if you have a strong view on this either way.
KALOS 2.9
KALÓS, the free classical Greek computer programme, has announced Version 2.9:
KALÓS 2.9
KALÓS 2.9
In this version we finally took our \"Tutti i verbi greci\" and did a dramatic overhaul of the morphological analysis.
There\'s still work to do but we think the results of our work will show. Notice how the full numbers of exploded forms that are generated when entering a word are presented to the user for filtering.
Other improvements and bug fixes in this version:
-the selection of verbs by category now works
-accents type and position on the vocalic contracted verbs were corrected
-several problems in the presentation of the verb listing were corrected
-more spacing has been given to the listings\' rows
-problems with the listings\' grouping were corrected
-the listings of the infinitive now show more than one form if available
-conjugations of very common verbs (TRE/YW, QNH|SKW, FHMI/, LAMBA/NW), presented problems that were corrected
-the participle listings of several -MI verbs failed, this has been corrected
-several liquid verbs presented problems in the infective (present and imperfect). This was corrected.
Besides ... yes, we have a normal WINDOWS SETUP! (applause).
We hope you enjoy our latest version. Please keep your comments and suggestions coming, your feedback helps us enormously improve the program.
Google Search
I've added a Google search now to this blog; my PicoSearch finally reached its 1,500 page limit this week and this necessitated the change. At present it's just available here on the NT Gateway weblog. If I decide that it's OK and that all is well, I'll replace all the PicoSearches on the New Testament Gateway proper too.
Friday, September 10, 2004
Greek Study Day
This message posted on behalf of Geoffrey Williams:
This is to give you advance notice of a proposed STUDY DAY for teachers of NT Greek in theological colleges and University departments of theology and religious studies.
It is to be held on WEDNESDAY 2 MARCH 2005 at the UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM, between 10.00 am and 4.00 pm.
It will be a practical day, and enable teachers to exchange ideas and develop the existing network which has been encouraged by the LTSN.
At least three themes will be considered during the day: how we enable students to develop strategies for translation when they are approaching NT texts; how we t4each participles to students at introductory and intermediate levels; and ho we organise and construct beginners' courses in Greek (the latter to be led by Glenn Balfour, who had just completed a new text-book)
The cost is likely to be of the order of £30.
Further details, including a registration form, will be sent out as soon as they are available, and will also appear on the New Testament Gateway website.
Jane McLarty (Cambridge University) jdm35@cam.ac.uk
Steve Walton (London School of Theology) s.walton@lst.ac.uk
Geoffrey Williams (Spurgeons College) geoffrey@gaw117.fsnet.co.uk
This is to give you advance notice of a proposed STUDY DAY for teachers of NT Greek in theological colleges and University departments of theology and religious studies.
It is to be held on WEDNESDAY 2 MARCH 2005 at the UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM, between 10.00 am and 4.00 pm.
It will be a practical day, and enable teachers to exchange ideas and develop the existing network which has been encouraged by the LTSN.
At least three themes will be considered during the day: how we enable students to develop strategies for translation when they are approaching NT texts; how we t4each participles to students at introductory and intermediate levels; and ho we organise and construct beginners' courses in Greek (the latter to be led by Glenn Balfour, who had just completed a new text-book)
The cost is likely to be of the order of £30.
Further details, including a registration form, will be sent out as soon as they are available, and will also appear on the New Testament Gateway website.
Jane McLarty (Cambridge University) jdm35@cam.ac.uk
Steve Walton (London School of Theology) s.walton@lst.ac.uk
Geoffrey Williams (Spurgeons College) geoffrey@gaw117.fsnet.co.uk
New blogger features
I've updated my blogger template to feature two of the new blogger facilities. First, I've added Blogger's own comments facility. This was not available when I began the blog and so I used Haloscan instead. The disadvantage with Haloscan are that the comments are hosted elsewhere; moreover, blogger's own comments provision allows one to see the comments on each individual post's page. But I did not want to lose all the Haloscan comments from the last year or so, at least not for the time being, so I have gone for the slightly unwieldly solution of keeping both. So please, from now on, use the "New Comments" link you see below rather than the "Comments" link. I've even added "Use this" for the time being to encourage everyone to click on the right link.
I've also enabled the "Email this" link -- post a link to a blog entry to a friend by clicking on the icon.
Of course if you are reading this in an aggregator, you will have to leave the aggregator to access those features.
The next thing I need to change is the search facility on the NT Gateway as a whole. I reached my Picosearch limit of 1,500 pages this week so will need to transfer over to Google's search. But that will take a little while to implement.
I've also enabled the "Email this" link -- post a link to a blog entry to a friend by clicking on the icon.
Of course if you are reading this in an aggregator, you will have to leave the aggregator to access those features.
The next thing I need to change is the search facility on the NT Gateway as a whole. I reached my Picosearch limit of 1,500 pages this week so will need to transfer over to Google's search. But that will take a little while to implement.
Elsewhere in the blogosphere
I was sorry to see the announcment this morning about the end of Νεφελοκοκκυγία.
More happily, it's good to see Deinde back on-line after an absence of a couple of weeks.
More happily, it's good to see Deinde back on-line after an absence of a couple of weeks.
Ancient Narratives of Crucifixion
It is encouraging that the E-Lists still have the ability to generate lively and intelligent discussion and so to help out with one's research. I've been working on the crucifixion narrative in Mark for the short term goal of an SBL Mark Group paper in November and the longer term goal of my book on the Passion Narrative. I began wondering when re-reading Mark's Passion Narrative recently whether this might be not only the first extant ancient narrative of the crucifixion of Jesus but also the first extant ancient narrative of any crucified hero. Members of the Xtalk list have provided many useful thoughts, references and further avenues to chase down, and the thread was generating responses last night at an enjoyably rapid rate.
The gist of my query is that we do not think enough about the challenge that Mark was facing in his attempt to construct the first narrative a crucified hero. How does one turn the instinctive shame and revulsion that the ancients felt concerning the very idea to a proclamation of good news? We have some idea of what might have been considered an honourable death, e.g. that which Florus (Epitome 2.8) reports for Spartacus, "Spartacus himself fell, as became a general, fighting most bravely in the front rank". Likewise, Spartacus gets depicted as dying fighting with his army. Jesus, on the other hand, dies abandoned and alone, his followers having fled. Now there are only some women watching from afar off. It is this utterly abject, lonely, shameful death, characterised by an eery silence, which provides the invitation to Mark to scripturalize the tradition, and thus to construct the first narrative of crucifixion by subverting the readers' expectations, to say that here, where you would least expect it, honour, glory and vindication are found.
The thread has thrown up several interesting thoughts and suggestions, Peter Kirby notes that though not exactly "crucifixion", the binding of Prometheus comes to mind.
The gist of my query is that we do not think enough about the challenge that Mark was facing in his attempt to construct the first narrative a crucified hero. How does one turn the instinctive shame and revulsion that the ancients felt concerning the very idea to a proclamation of good news? We have some idea of what might have been considered an honourable death, e.g. that which Florus (Epitome 2.8) reports for Spartacus, "Spartacus himself fell, as became a general, fighting most bravely in the front rank". Likewise, Spartacus gets depicted as dying fighting with his army. Jesus, on the other hand, dies abandoned and alone, his followers having fled. Now there are only some women watching from afar off. It is this utterly abject, lonely, shameful death, characterised by an eery silence, which provides the invitation to Mark to scripturalize the tradition, and thus to construct the first narrative of crucifixion by subverting the readers' expectations, to say that here, where you would least expect it, honour, glory and vindication are found.
The thread has thrown up several interesting thoughts and suggestions, Peter Kirby notes that though not exactly "crucifixion", the binding of Prometheus comes to mind.
Thursday, September 09, 2004
Passion of the Christ DVD sales rocket
Thanks to Helenann Hartley for this one from BBC News:
Passion 'beats Rings DVD record'
Passion 'beats Rings DVD record'
Biblical epic The Passion of the Christ has broken the record for sales of a live action movie on DVD and VHS in one week in the US, according to a report.
It sold almost nine million copies in its first week on release, beating The Lord of the Rings titles, according to the Hollywood Reporter trade paper . . .
. . . . Of the nine million DVD and VHS sales, more than four million were bought on its first day on release.
Philip Esler, Conflict and Identity in Romans
 | Here is another one I'm adding to my Reading List: |
Esler's book on Galatians is one of the best things I've ever read on Galatians, which is recommendation enough for the new Romans volume, but Loren Rosson offers an enthusiastic review on Amazon. Unfortunately, there are no on-line excerpts, though Fortress have the table of contents.
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
Gospel of Mark: Articles
I've made some additions and have updated some URLs on the Gospel of Mark: Articles page, new URLs for J. D. H. Amador, “Dramatic Inconclusion: Irony and the Narrative rhetoric of the Ending of Mark” and Susan Garrett, “Disciples on Trial”, a return for:
Craig A. Evans, “Mark's Incipit and the Priene Calendar Inscription: From Jewish Gospel to Greco-Roman Gospel”
and three new articles:
John S. Kloppenborg, “Egyptian Viticultural Practices and the Citation of Isa 5:1-7 in Mark 12:1-9”
John S. Kloppenborg, “Isa 5:1-7 LXX and Mark 12:1, 9, Again”
John J. Pilch, “Death with Honor: The Mediterranean Style Death of Jesus in Mark”
Full citations on the Gospel of Mark: Articles page.
Update (Wednesday, 10.01 a.m.): thanks to Wieland Willker for pointing out that I had the same URL for the two Kloppenborg articles above. I have now adjusted this both above and on the Gospel of Mark: Articles page.
Craig A. Evans, “Mark's Incipit and the Priene Calendar Inscription: From Jewish Gospel to Greco-Roman Gospel”
and three new articles:
John S. Kloppenborg, “Egyptian Viticultural Practices and the Citation of Isa 5:1-7 in Mark 12:1-9”
John S. Kloppenborg, “Isa 5:1-7 LXX and Mark 12:1, 9, Again”
John J. Pilch, “Death with Honor: The Mediterranean Style Death of Jesus in Mark”
Full citations on the Gospel of Mark: Articles page.
Update (Wednesday, 10.01 a.m.): thanks to Wieland Willker for pointing out that I had the same URL for the two Kloppenborg articles above. I have now adjusted this both above and on the Gospel of Mark: Articles page.
Lionel Casson, Libraries in the Ancient World
On About Ancient / Classical History, N. S. Gill writes one of her short, helpful reviews of Lionel Casson, Libraries in the Ancient World:
Review: Libraries in the Ancient World
I've not read the book myself but it looks most interesting and I've added it to my reading list.
Review: Libraries in the Ancient World
I've not read the book myself but it looks most interesting and I've added it to my reading list.
Carlson on Kloppenborg on Goodacre
Over on Hypotyposeis, Stephen Carlson offers some opening reflections on an article that John Kloppenborg wrote in response to my Case Against Q. It reminds me that I have still to write my own response to Kloppenborg's article and the delay in doing this says nothing about my opinion of Kloppenborg's piece -- I was hugely grateful to have the book taken so seriously by one of the experts in the field. The delay is rather to do with the fact that after a major project, one wants to move on to other pieces of research, at least for a short while, lest one gets bogged down in just one rarefied area of research. Stephen's post is here:
Kloppenborg, "On Dispensing with Q?" @ NTS
What Stephen does not mention is that Kloppenborg's article is publicly available, as part of the open access revolution, on Kloppenborg's home page:
John S. Kloppenborg, "On Dispensing with Q? Goodacre on the Relation of Luke to Matthew", New Testament Studies 49/2 (2003) 210-236 [PDF]
Stephen comments on nomenclature and puts his finger on the thing that concerns me with the term Kloppenborg now prefers for the Farrer Theory, "Mark Without Q": it defines someone else's theory by contrasting it with your own, i.e. by what is present (Marcan Priority) and what is absent (Q). Admittedly, I used this title for a while for my web site, as Kloppenborg points out. But my reason for dropping it was that it kept getting misunderstood by cursory users who would ask questions like "But I didn't think Mark had any Q in it anyway; isn't it Matthew and Luke who have Q". It was a strategic decision to try that term, to draw attention to the role played by Marcan Priority so as to contrast it with the Griesbach Theory, which also dispenses with Q but on very different grounds. I was also influenced by E. P. Sanders and M. Davies who used this term in their Studying the Synoptic Gospels. I am pleased, though, that Kloppenborg has dropped the term "Farrer-Goulder", which I think unduly draws attention to Goulder's particular take on the theory, which is convenient for some because it gives them grounds for attacking the theory that are not intrinsic to the theory. I like Stephen's suggested terms like "Mark-Matthew theory" but wonder if now adding yet a fresh designation will only end up with more confusion.
But on to the question of substance raised in Stephen's post, I think he centres in effectively on what to me is the most troubling (or encouraging) element in Kloppenborg's article:
Kloppenborg, "On Dispensing with Q?" @ NTS
What Stephen does not mention is that Kloppenborg's article is publicly available, as part of the open access revolution, on Kloppenborg's home page:
John S. Kloppenborg, "On Dispensing with Q? Goodacre on the Relation of Luke to Matthew", New Testament Studies 49/2 (2003) 210-236 [PDF]
Stephen comments on nomenclature and puts his finger on the thing that concerns me with the term Kloppenborg now prefers for the Farrer Theory, "Mark Without Q": it defines someone else's theory by contrasting it with your own, i.e. by what is present (Marcan Priority) and what is absent (Q). Admittedly, I used this title for a while for my web site, as Kloppenborg points out. But my reason for dropping it was that it kept getting misunderstood by cursory users who would ask questions like "But I didn't think Mark had any Q in it anyway; isn't it Matthew and Luke who have Q". It was a strategic decision to try that term, to draw attention to the role played by Marcan Priority so as to contrast it with the Griesbach Theory, which also dispenses with Q but on very different grounds. I was also influenced by E. P. Sanders and M. Davies who used this term in their Studying the Synoptic Gospels. I am pleased, though, that Kloppenborg has dropped the term "Farrer-Goulder", which I think unduly draws attention to Goulder's particular take on the theory, which is convenient for some because it gives them grounds for attacking the theory that are not intrinsic to the theory. I like Stephen's suggested terms like "Mark-Matthew theory" but wonder if now adding yet a fresh designation will only end up with more confusion.
But on to the question of substance raised in Stephen's post, I think he centres in effectively on what to me is the most troubling (or encouraging) element in Kloppenborg's article:
Although Goodacre has presented an interesting case defending the possibility of Luke's direct dependence on Matthew, none of his arguments can be considered sufficiently weighty to displace the alternative scenario, which is at least as plausible, that Luke and Matthew independently drew on Q. (236)What I found interesting about this statement was the assumption here that the two theories, Farrer and Two-Source, were effectively competing on a par. For given that one theory involves an additional, hypothetical document and one does not, I would have thought that the one that does not ought to be accorded priority. This is where I think that Occam's Razor genuinely has a role to play in Synoptic studies. Given that a good case can be made for Luke's use of Matthew, and given that entities should not be multiplied beyond what is necessary, then the Farrer theory should be preferred to the Two-Source Theory.
BNTC Papers
I have received several emails asking me if the main papers from this year's British New Testament Conference are available or will become available on-line. The answer is: no, I am afraid not; or not, at least, on the BNTC web site. Each of the three papers will no doubt make it to print eventually, and if and when I see them I'll make a note here. In Tom Wright's case, it is worth keeping an eye on the N. T. Wright page which has a whole host of on-line lectures, papers and the like.
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
Visual Bible International Struggles
I am sorry to see that the Visual Bible International company, who made Matthew and the recent Gospel of John, are still in difficulties. This is from the Globe and Mail:
Drabinsky, Gottlieb roles in firm probed by RCMP
By PAUL WALDIE
Drabinsky, Gottlieb roles in firm probed by RCMP
By PAUL WALDIE
The RCMP are looking into the roles of Garth Drabinsky and Myron Gottlieb in a Toronto-based film company to determine whether they have violated the conditions of their bail.The news is not good for the projected Gospel of Mark film, something I'd have very much liked to see:
Mr. Drabinsky and Mr. Gottlieb have been involved since 2002 in Visual Bible International Inc., whose shares trade in Canada and the United States. Both men were hired as consultants to produce the film The Gospel of John, which made its debut last year.
Mr. Drabinsky and Mr. Gottlieb were released on bail in 2002 after each was charged with 19 counts of fraud related to their involvement in defunct theatre company Livent Inc. Both have denied any wrongdoing.
One of the conditions of their bail was that they could not serve as a director or officer in any public company.
In a lawsuit filed last month, Visual Bible's former chief financial officer, Harold Kramer, alleges that Mr. Drabinsky and Mr. Gottlieb are in "de facto control over the business and affairs of [Visual Bible]" and exercise "power and authority as if they were directors or officers." Mr. Kramer also alleges their role has not been fully disclosed to securities regulators . . .
Visual Bible has struggled recently with poor sales, mass resignations and a flurry of lawsuits, including one from a former company chairman.It needs to be added that videos and DVDs of The Gospel of John are available (official web site; Amazon marketplace), though at the moment only in North America. I've not seen any sign of a British release, either theatrical or on DVD / Video.
The company once boasted a high-profile board that included former Ontario premier Mike Harris, former broadcaster Pamela Wallin, architect Moshe Safdie and media mogul Moses Znaimer. All have since left the board, along with several others.
The company planned to sell videos and DVDs of The Gospel of John and produce another film based on the Gospel of Mark. But sales have been sluggish and the second film is on hold. Last week, the company reported it lost $5.8-million in the second quarter of 2004, compared with a loss of $2.2-million a year earlier. Total sales were $2.5-million.
Annual Seminar on the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament
This information in from Steve Moyise:
Annual Seminar on the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament
Location of Seminar
St Deiniol’s Library, Hawarden, Flintshire, NorthWales CH5 3DF (deiniol.conferences@btinternet.com Tel: 01244 532350)
Dates
Thurs March 17 (for dinner) to Saturday March 19 (after lunch), 2005
Call for Papers
Please send proposal and short abstract (100 words) to s.moyise@ucc.ac.uk, for either a full paper (45 mins) or short paper (30 mins) by 2nd Dec 2004.
Registration
The cost of the conference (including meals and accommodation) is £88, with reductions for clergy (£66) and students (£55). To book a place, please complete the form below and send a non-refundable deposit of £15, payable to “St Deiniol’s Library” by 2nd Dec 2004, and indicate if you have any special dietary requirements. Participants from overseas can pay the full amount in cash at the Conference. The full programme will be sent out in January. Travel directions can be accessed from St Deiniol’s website: http://st-deiniols.chester.ac.uk
Annual Seminar on the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament
Location of Seminar
St Deiniol’s Library, Hawarden, Flintshire, NorthWales CH5 3DF (deiniol.conferences@btinternet.com Tel: 01244 532350)
Dates
Thurs March 17 (for dinner) to Saturday March 19 (after lunch), 2005
Call for Papers
Please send proposal and short abstract (100 words) to s.moyise@ucc.ac.uk, for either a full paper (45 mins) or short paper (30 mins) by 2nd Dec 2004.
Registration
The cost of the conference (including meals and accommodation) is £88, with reductions for clergy (£66) and students (£55). To book a place, please complete the form below and send a non-refundable deposit of £15, payable to “St Deiniol’s Library” by 2nd Dec 2004, and indicate if you have any special dietary requirements. Participants from overseas can pay the full amount in cash at the Conference. The full programme will be sent out in January. Travel directions can be accessed from St Deiniol’s website: http://st-deiniols.chester.ac.uk
SBL Forum latest
The SBL Forum has new content for September and "this month SBL Forum features essays related to biblical scholarship and theological reflection":
The Bible, Theology, and Theological Interpretation
by Joel B. Green
From Biblical Exegesis to Theological Construction: Reflections on Methodology
by W. Dennis Tucker, Jr.
"Open Systems": Constructive Philosophical and Theological Issues in Biblical Theology
by Christine Helmer
Why I Still Write Book Reviews
by Mark McEntire
The Bible, Theology, and Theological Interpretation
by Joel B. Green
From Biblical Exegesis to Theological Construction: Reflections on Methodology
by W. Dennis Tucker, Jr.
"Open Systems": Constructive Philosophical and Theological Issues in Biblical Theology
by Christine Helmer
Why I Still Write Book Reviews
by Mark McEntire
Review of Biblical Literature latest
The latest additions to the SBL's Review of Biblical Literature under the NT and related heading:
Das, A. Andrew
Paul and the Jews
Reviewed by Timothy Gombis
Keener, Craig S.
The Gospel of John: A Commentary
Reviewed by Edward Klink
Koester, Craig R.
Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community
Reviewed by Mark A. Matson
Lapham, Fred
An Introduction to the New Testament Apocrypha
Reviewed by Daniel Gurtner
Lapham, Fred
An Introduction to the New Testament Apocrypha
Reviewed by Thierry Legrand
Mason, Steven and Tom Robinson, eds.
Early Christian Reader: Christian Texts from the First and Second Centuries in Contemporary English Translations including the New Revised Standard Version of the New Testament
Reviewed by Judith Anne Jones
Walsh, Richard
Reading the Gospels in the Dark: Portrayals of Jesus in Film
Reviewed by Jan Willem Van Henten
Westerholm, Stephen
Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The "Lutheran" Paul and His Critics
Reviewed by Michael Kaler
Markschies, Christoph
Gnosis: An Introduction
Reviewed by Michael A. Williams
Schüssler, Karlheinz, ed.
Biblia Coptica: Die koptischen Bibeltexte: Band 3: Das sahidische Alte und Neue Testament. Vollständiges Verzeichnis mit Standorten Lieferung 2: sa 521-540
Reviewed by Robert Seesengood
Via, Dan O. and Robert A. J. Gagnon
Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views
Reviewed by Jack L. Berezov
Via, Dan O. and Robert A. J. Gagnon
Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views
Reviewed by Martti Nissinen
Das, A. Andrew
Paul and the Jews
Reviewed by Timothy Gombis
Keener, Craig S.
The Gospel of John: A Commentary
Reviewed by Edward Klink
Koester, Craig R.
Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel: Meaning, Mystery, Community
Reviewed by Mark A. Matson
Lapham, Fred
An Introduction to the New Testament Apocrypha
Reviewed by Daniel Gurtner
Lapham, Fred
An Introduction to the New Testament Apocrypha
Reviewed by Thierry Legrand
Mason, Steven and Tom Robinson, eds.
Early Christian Reader: Christian Texts from the First and Second Centuries in Contemporary English Translations including the New Revised Standard Version of the New Testament
Reviewed by Judith Anne Jones
Walsh, Richard
Reading the Gospels in the Dark: Portrayals of Jesus in Film
Reviewed by Jan Willem Van Henten
Westerholm, Stephen
Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The "Lutheran" Paul and His Critics
Reviewed by Michael Kaler
Markschies, Christoph
Gnosis: An Introduction
Reviewed by Michael A. Williams
Schüssler, Karlheinz, ed.
Biblia Coptica: Die koptischen Bibeltexte: Band 3: Das sahidische Alte und Neue Testament. Vollständiges Verzeichnis mit Standorten Lieferung 2: sa 521-540
Reviewed by Robert Seesengood
Via, Dan O. and Robert A. J. Gagnon
Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views
Reviewed by Jack L. Berezov
Via, Dan O. and Robert A. J. Gagnon
Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views
Reviewed by Martti Nissinen
Monday, September 06, 2004
Birthday wishes
Thanks very much to Jim Davila for his birthday greetings for this blog, one year old last Thursday. I should mention a small typo -- it is, of course, the blog that is a year old and not the New Testament Gateway, which is roughly seven years old.
BNTC 2004: others' comments
Jim Davila has comments on Paleojudaica, including a good summary of Jimmy Dunn's fine and funny exposition of how the society developed from its charismatic, free origins without officers or organisation, to its now heavily institutionalised format, with officers and a constitution. I must admit that I've always found the conference / society distinction a bit over done. As a matter of fact, it is a society, registered as such under Scottish charity law.
Jacob Knee has his own interesting and lively reflections on Crosstalk, British New Testament Conference, BNTC Part 2 and BNTC Part 3. Like Jacob, I find it interesting to see how students live. I imagine that the tea and coffee making facilities in the rooms are put there specially for conference delegates, but I may be wrong. I was impressed by the ethernet sockets in each room, and there was even a faint wifi signal, but alas, no way that ordinary conference punters like us could access the net -- or no way that I could find. Like Jacob too, I couldn't help reflecting on the different skills shown by the various speakers in delivering papers. I heard every word of Bart Ehrman's paper, and most of Tom Wright's. I would add that I was delighted this year to see the seminars all trying different formats like panel discussions, short papers with two or more respondents, book review sessions, half-sessions with a different paper in each and so on. I had the feeling that the seminars were coming of age and that their leaders were showing their imagination. This year we did not just get 90 minutes featuring a 50 minute paper plus questions. And the seminars were all the more enjoyable for that.
Jacob Knee has his own interesting and lively reflections on Crosstalk, British New Testament Conference, BNTC Part 2 and BNTC Part 3. Like Jacob, I find it interesting to see how students live. I imagine that the tea and coffee making facilities in the rooms are put there specially for conference delegates, but I may be wrong. I was impressed by the ethernet sockets in each room, and there was even a faint wifi signal, but alas, no way that ordinary conference punters like us could access the net -- or no way that I could find. Like Jacob too, I couldn't help reflecting on the different skills shown by the various speakers in delivering papers. I heard every word of Bart Ehrman's paper, and most of Tom Wright's. I would add that I was delighted this year to see the seminars all trying different formats like panel discussions, short papers with two or more respondents, book review sessions, half-sessions with a different paper in each and so on. I had the feeling that the seminars were coming of age and that their leaders were showing their imagination. This year we did not just get 90 minutes featuring a 50 minute paper plus questions. And the seminars were all the more enjoyable for that.
BNTC 2004 comments concluded
The setting for the conference was ideal. With the exception of the Friday evening excursion to New College, everything was on the one site at Pollock Halls, overlooking a mountain which one could see from most of the locations and watch people climbing steadily to the top. The accommodation, the food, the main papers, the short simultaneous papers and the seminars, all on the same site (I wonder what my running frantically around the site would have been like if everything was more spread out -- I dread to think). The book display was well positioned too, right in the area where we had coffee and tea breaks. This is always a good idea and the publishers definitely appreciate being in a central location where delegates can browse books as they congregate, chat and drink. And the weather was lovely -- sunny throughout.
I can't comment on the Simultaneous Short Papers because society administration and organisation took me away at this point. One real oddity, though, was that one of the speakers, John Dennis, simply did not turn up to the conference at all. So those sitting in that session had an extra 30 minutes to do what they wanted with (we waited 15 to see if he would arrive). This was a new one on me -- had never had a speaker simply not turn up. Incidentally, there was some anxiety on the Thursday evening when Tom Wright arrived much later than expected, and only just before he was due to give the first plenary session.
That leaves just one thing, I think, a session on the Saturday morning on The Passion of the Christ. This was a joint session of two seminars, Hermeneutics: Theory and Practice and New Testament: Use and Influence. It was a well attended and lively seminar, a panel discussion featuring Richard Burridge, Helenann Hartley and me. Typically, and when will I learn?, I took it upon myself to try to find an electrical extension lead so that the data projector's very short wire could be extended and we could have something on screen that was bigger than the postage stamp sized image that was being projected. I ran around the site asking dozens of people and one finally arrived half way through the session, after the first clip had been shown. So all my dashing around achieved was to make me sweaty and rushed rather than calm and collected.
The three panelists took ten minutes each to give their reactions to the film, Richard Burridge first, a typically lively presentation focusing largely on his own experiences at a preview screening in Leicester Square and his arguments afterwards with The Sun newspaper who wanted to turn all their coverage, including Burridge, into comments solely on the anti-Semitism. Helenann developed her thoughts from her review reproduced here. I summarised my article found in Jesus and Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, taking each of six headings for my reflections on the way in which the community of Biblical scholars has reacted and over-reacted to the film.
I found it an enjoyable session on the whole, well attended, and with some who had seen the film and some who had not. I had just one point of criticism of Richard Burridge's presentation; I disputed that the depiction of Herod Antipas in the film was "straight out of Jesus Christ Superstar", arguing that like so much of The Passion of the Christ it came straight out of Anne Catherine Emmerich's The Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ (see blog entry Herod Antipas in The Passion of the Christ).
Tom Wright's wife Maggie was in attendance and commented on her own experience of watching the film, aimed mainly at my comments on the film's violence. She and the bishop apparently had an advanced screening in Auckland Castle (the Bishop of Durham's residence) and she said that the very term that came to mind during the scourging scene was pornography. She made clear that she did watch a lot of films, though Tom did not, but that she did not like the violence at all.
One of the main discussion points in the session was over who the implied audience of the film was. Martin Kitchen and Bridget Gilfillan Upton pressed me in particular on this point, annoyed in part that I attempted to answer it in relation to an anecdote of an experience I had on one of my viewings of the film. The story goes like this. As I was buying my nachos, the lady selling them to me asked if I knew anything about the Bible. "A bit", I replied. She said that that was a good thing because when she had watched the film the previous evening, she did not have much idea of who was who, what was going on and why. What this made me realize was the extent to which the film takes for granted the viewer's knowledge of the identity of characters like John, Mary Magdalene, Peter, Judas and so on. It requires the viewer to provide some context. Or, in other words, the implied viewer already knows who these characters are and why these things are happening. Anyway, the panelists all agreed that the implied audience was best conceived as the devout Christian with knowledge of the Bible and Catholic tradition. It's a question I do want to think a little more about, though. My article does deal with genre, and with those who attempt to read the film against the grain, but it would be profitable to talk about the implied audience.
I could continue on about this panel discussion, but I'll leave it there, at least for now. A profitable session, anyway, and I was grateful for the opportunity to take part. I am still not quite finished with this film yet. I will be blogging a review of the recent book Perspectives on the Passion of the Christ later this week, I hope. (I thought it was pretty grim).
One thing I meant to blog earlier: on Friday we took our usual collection just after the business meeting; the purpose of this is to provide money for financial assistance for post graduates travelling to the conference. This year we had the smallest collection I can remember from the largest number of delegates I can remember (under £300). And we had the most applications to the travel fund since I've been secretary (over £1000). Of course I was only able to help a little, therefore, with post graduates' travel expenses, which I thought a shame. Of course a large part of the reason for this is that the increased numbers at the conference are largely made up of more post graduates. The situation is something the society needs to continue thinking about in the future.
Finally, another word of huge appreciation to the organisers of the conference at the University of Edinburgh, with thanks to Larry Hurtado, Helen Bond and Paul Foster, with a special mention for Paul Middleton, for an excellent and memorable conference.
I can't comment on the Simultaneous Short Papers because society administration and organisation took me away at this point. One real oddity, though, was that one of the speakers, John Dennis, simply did not turn up to the conference at all. So those sitting in that session had an extra 30 minutes to do what they wanted with (we waited 15 to see if he would arrive). This was a new one on me -- had never had a speaker simply not turn up. Incidentally, there was some anxiety on the Thursday evening when Tom Wright arrived much later than expected, and only just before he was due to give the first plenary session.
That leaves just one thing, I think, a session on the Saturday morning on The Passion of the Christ. This was a joint session of two seminars, Hermeneutics: Theory and Practice and New Testament: Use and Influence. It was a well attended and lively seminar, a panel discussion featuring Richard Burridge, Helenann Hartley and me. Typically, and when will I learn?, I took it upon myself to try to find an electrical extension lead so that the data projector's very short wire could be extended and we could have something on screen that was bigger than the postage stamp sized image that was being projected. I ran around the site asking dozens of people and one finally arrived half way through the session, after the first clip had been shown. So all my dashing around achieved was to make me sweaty and rushed rather than calm and collected.
The three panelists took ten minutes each to give their reactions to the film, Richard Burridge first, a typically lively presentation focusing largely on his own experiences at a preview screening in Leicester Square and his arguments afterwards with The Sun newspaper who wanted to turn all their coverage, including Burridge, into comments solely on the anti-Semitism. Helenann developed her thoughts from her review reproduced here. I summarised my article found in Jesus and Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, taking each of six headings for my reflections on the way in which the community of Biblical scholars has reacted and over-reacted to the film.
I found it an enjoyable session on the whole, well attended, and with some who had seen the film and some who had not. I had just one point of criticism of Richard Burridge's presentation; I disputed that the depiction of Herod Antipas in the film was "straight out of Jesus Christ Superstar", arguing that like so much of The Passion of the Christ it came straight out of Anne Catherine Emmerich's The Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ (see blog entry Herod Antipas in The Passion of the Christ).
Tom Wright's wife Maggie was in attendance and commented on her own experience of watching the film, aimed mainly at my comments on the film's violence. She and the bishop apparently had an advanced screening in Auckland Castle (the Bishop of Durham's residence) and she said that the very term that came to mind during the scourging scene was pornography. She made clear that she did watch a lot of films, though Tom did not, but that she did not like the violence at all.
One of the main discussion points in the session was over who the implied audience of the film was. Martin Kitchen and Bridget Gilfillan Upton pressed me in particular on this point, annoyed in part that I attempted to answer it in relation to an anecdote of an experience I had on one of my viewings of the film. The story goes like this. As I was buying my nachos, the lady selling them to me asked if I knew anything about the Bible. "A bit", I replied. She said that that was a good thing because when she had watched the film the previous evening, she did not have much idea of who was who, what was going on and why. What this made me realize was the extent to which the film takes for granted the viewer's knowledge of the identity of characters like John, Mary Magdalene, Peter, Judas and so on. It requires the viewer to provide some context. Or, in other words, the implied viewer already knows who these characters are and why these things are happening. Anyway, the panelists all agreed that the implied audience was best conceived as the devout Christian with knowledge of the Bible and Catholic tradition. It's a question I do want to think a little more about, though. My article does deal with genre, and with those who attempt to read the film against the grain, but it would be profitable to talk about the implied audience.
I could continue on about this panel discussion, but I'll leave it there, at least for now. A profitable session, anyway, and I was grateful for the opportunity to take part. I am still not quite finished with this film yet. I will be blogging a review of the recent book Perspectives on the Passion of the Christ later this week, I hope. (I thought it was pretty grim).
One thing I meant to blog earlier: on Friday we took our usual collection just after the business meeting; the purpose of this is to provide money for financial assistance for post graduates travelling to the conference. This year we had the smallest collection I can remember from the largest number of delegates I can remember (under £300). And we had the most applications to the travel fund since I've been secretary (over £1000). Of course I was only able to help a little, therefore, with post graduates' travel expenses, which I thought a shame. Of course a large part of the reason for this is that the increased numbers at the conference are largely made up of more post graduates. The situation is something the society needs to continue thinking about in the future.
Finally, another word of huge appreciation to the organisers of the conference at the University of Edinburgh, with thanks to Larry Hurtado, Helen Bond and Paul Foster, with a special mention for Paul Middleton, for an excellent and memorable conference.
BNTC 2004 illustrated
Jim Davila has really got this blogging lark sussed -- you can see some of his photographs from the British New Testament Conference on Paleojudaica including one of my grinning face with Catherine Smith and Helen Ingram.
Sunday, September 05, 2004
BNTC 2004 further reflections
The two other main papers were Bishop Tom Wright on the Thursday evening and Prof. Judith Lieu on the Saturday morning. Bishop Tom spoke on "Many perspectives on Paul: Can they be integreated" and was at his most entertaining when he launched a vociferous attack on a recent book by Stephen Westerholm, about which he had not a good word to say. There were lots of other interesting bits in Tom's talk but I struggled with it a little, primarily because my all too regular habit of drifting off to sleep in even the most interesting papers kicked in half-way through. I also slept through almost all of the first seminar papers session on the Friday morning, and half of Judith Lieu's on the Saturday, when I simply had to find a place to lie down (cf. earlier comments on extensive dashing around). Judith Lieu's paper was about Orality and Textuality in early Christianity.
Bishop Tom was also present at the first two meetings of the Jesus Seminar (not the Jesus Seminar, of course, but the BNTC's own Jesus Seminar) where the topic was his book The Resurrection of the Son of God. Although I missed most of the first session through fatigue, I stayed awake all the way through the second at which the focus was on the New Testament material and included responses to Wright's book from James Crossley and Larry Hurtado, both of whom made some good poins. It was a well attended seminar too. Larry began his paper by pointing out that Tom's work is essentially apologetic. I thought that right and asked a question about this later on, concerning the way that Tom deals, in the book, with Matt. 27.51-3, where the saints are raised at the earthquake at the death of Jesus, where Tom's argument strikes me as more apologetic than history, not least given its weak remarks to the effect that odd things do happen in history. Of course they do, but the question is whether this particular odd thing happened and whether placing a question mark over its historicity might actually help Tom out when it comes to arguing for the historicity of the resurrection traditions. Tom's answer was that if he were to acknowledge redaction and legend here, then his opponents would say, "The why not everywhere", which strikes me as weak. He went on to claim that his arguments have been crafted by the kind of dialogue partners he has had to engage with, and a particularly silly (he used that word) period in North American scholarship.
More later . . .
Bishop Tom was also present at the first two meetings of the Jesus Seminar (not the Jesus Seminar, of course, but the BNTC's own Jesus Seminar) where the topic was his book The Resurrection of the Son of God. Although I missed most of the first session through fatigue, I stayed awake all the way through the second at which the focus was on the New Testament material and included responses to Wright's book from James Crossley and Larry Hurtado, both of whom made some good poins. It was a well attended seminar too. Larry began his paper by pointing out that Tom's work is essentially apologetic. I thought that right and asked a question about this later on, concerning the way that Tom deals, in the book, with Matt. 27.51-3, where the saints are raised at the earthquake at the death of Jesus, where Tom's argument strikes me as more apologetic than history, not least given its weak remarks to the effect that odd things do happen in history. Of course they do, but the question is whether this particular odd thing happened and whether placing a question mark over its historicity might actually help Tom out when it comes to arguing for the historicity of the resurrection traditions. Tom's answer was that if he were to acknowledge redaction and legend here, then his opponents would say, "The why not everywhere", which strikes me as weak. He went on to claim that his arguments have been crafted by the kind of dialogue partners he has had to engage with, and a particularly silly (he used that word) period in North American scholarship.
More later . . .
BNTC 2004 highlights continued
At the end of the dinner, Graham Stanton gave a toast to celebrate the society's twenty-fifth anniversary. It was excellent and got lots of laughs; afterwards Jimmy Dunn, also present at the conception of the society, gave his own reflections on the society's history. I had added a note of confusion to proceedings on the previous day by explaining to the committee that I thought Jimmy mistaken that this was the society's twenty-fifth anniversary. He had told me this last year and I'd happily accepted it, thinking that such an expert on oral tradition and memory would surely have got such an important detail correct. But when I consulted the written record on Wednesday night, it seemed that the first meeting of the British New Testament Conference was in Glasgow in 1980. 1980-2004 is twenty-four years, not twenty-five, isn't it? So I think that our twenty-fifth anniversary is next year, 2005. To add to this, it turns out that this conference was not, as we have been advertising, our 22nd, nor was Birmingham our 21st, Cambridge our 20th, Manchester our 19th or Roehampton our 18th, all of which we had said in our publicity. I counted up the conferences from 1980 onwards and it's pretty clear -- this one is our 23rd and not our 22nd (the conference did not meet in 1983 or 1988 when there were SNTS meetings in the UK). Someone had clearly miscalculated when it was said that Roehamption was number 18 -- this was the source of the error. It should have been 19. So here was another useful reminder -- don't rely on oral tradition when there is a text you can check.
But back to the question of whether this is, indeed, our twenty-fifth year or not, Graham Stanton and Jimmy Dunn made a robust but not entirely convincing case that it was indeed right that we should be celebrating. Graham Stanton's case was that the first gathering at which the first conference was planned was twenty-five years ago in 1979, at a meeting of the SNTS in Durham. And the conception was a year earlier even than that in 1978. Now the current president of the society, elected at the 2003 Birmingham meeting, is Morna Hooker. She expressed her delight at presiding over the society on what was turning out to be a rolling anniversary schedule, this year twenty-five years since the planning of the first meeting, next year twenty-five years since the the first meeting, the year after our twenty-fifth meeting. It's like a perpetual jubilee.
The big conference dinner on Friday evening also provided the oppurtunity for Larry Hurtado, who coordinated the conference this year, to thank the local organisers. Larry pointed out that his great skill was simply in having delegated to extraordinarily capable people. Special mention was rightly made of Paul Middleton who handled the vast bulk of the local organising, and did an excellent, good-humoured and very unfussy job. I have found it a delight, as secretary, to work with him over the last few months. What was even more remarkable was that Paul did all this on top of presenting a paper in the Short Simultaneous Papers session on Friday, and then, apparently, having his PhD viva on Saturday afternoon! My only criticism (and I have to indulge myself by thinking that something was better about Birmingham 2003) would be that the big thanks were not accompanied by the presentation of flowers.
But back to the question of whether this is, indeed, our twenty-fifth year or not, Graham Stanton and Jimmy Dunn made a robust but not entirely convincing case that it was indeed right that we should be celebrating. Graham Stanton's case was that the first gathering at which the first conference was planned was twenty-five years ago in 1979, at a meeting of the SNTS in Durham. And the conception was a year earlier even than that in 1978. Now the current president of the society, elected at the 2003 Birmingham meeting, is Morna Hooker. She expressed her delight at presiding over the society on what was turning out to be a rolling anniversary schedule, this year twenty-five years since the planning of the first meeting, next year twenty-five years since the the first meeting, the year after our twenty-fifth meeting. It's like a perpetual jubilee.
The big conference dinner on Friday evening also provided the oppurtunity for Larry Hurtado, who coordinated the conference this year, to thank the local organisers. Larry pointed out that his great skill was simply in having delegated to extraordinarily capable people. Special mention was rightly made of Paul Middleton who handled the vast bulk of the local organising, and did an excellent, good-humoured and very unfussy job. I have found it a delight, as secretary, to work with him over the last few months. What was even more remarkable was that Paul did all this on top of presenting a paper in the Short Simultaneous Papers session on Friday, and then, apparently, having his PhD viva on Saturday afternoon! My only criticism (and I have to indulge myself by thinking that something was better about Birmingham 2003) would be that the big thanks were not accompanied by the presentation of flowers.
![[Valid Atom]](valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom feed"){kind=small}
