Latest Currents in Biblical Research

The latest issue of CBR 4.2 (2006) includes:











Alan J. Hauser, Scot McKnight, and Jonathan Klawans
Editorial Foreword

R. D. Miller, II
Yahweh and His Clio: Critical Theory and the Historical Criticism of the Hebrew Bible

Keith Bodner
Ark-Eology: Shifting Emphases in ‘Ark Narrative’ Scholarship

Mark Dubis
Research on 1 Peter: A Survey of Scholarly Literature Since 1985

Ellen Birnbaum
Two Millennia Later: General Resources and Particular Perspectives on Philo the Jew

Get Ready to Rumble: Crossley versus Bird

The current debates about secular versus faith-based scholarship provides the right climate to announce a forthcoming volume by myself and James Crossley called:

Two Views of Christian Origins:
An Evangelical and Secular Conversation

To be published by SPCK around summer 2008.

Here's the concept:

The objective of “Two Views” is to present two contrasting perspectives on the history of early Christianity. The contrast is evidently sharp as one co-author comes from a conservative Christian background (Michael Bird), whilst the other co-author (James Crossley) approaches the matter from a secular standpoint. The volume works sequentially through Christian origins and addresses various topics including the historical Jesus, the resurrection of Jesus, the Apostle Paul, the Gospels, and the early church. Each author in turn examines these subjects and lays out his historical arguments concerning their origin and meaning. The volume also includes responses by two other scholars (Maurice Casey and Scot McKnight) to the arguments of Bird and Crossley as to give an even handed and broad evaluation of the arguments and debates that unfold.

Forget Neo versus Agent Smith. Forget Obi-wan versus Anacan Skywalker. Forget Manchester United versus the Dingwall Academy under 14s - this will be the mother-of-all historical debates about Christian Origins. More positively, we hope that the volume will lead to a mutual appreciation of different perspectives New Testament studies.

The outline for the volume runs:

Section One – The Historical Jesus

Crossley: What’s historical about the historical Jesus?
Bird: “This is the prophet Jesus from Nazareth of Galilee”

Section Two – The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Bird: “He is risen!” – or is he?
Crossley: Was there really a bodily resurrection?

Section Three – The Apostle Paul

Crossley: The origins of the Pauline mission
Bird: A funny thing happened on the road to Damascus

Section Four – The Gospels

Bird: Four Gospels and one Jesus
Crossley: Four Gospels and the multiple Jesus

Section Five – The Early Church

Crossley: Causal explanations of the early Jesus movement
Bird: Fish, bread, wine and the new empire of the Son

Section Six – Responses

Bird: Response to James Crossley
Crossley: Response to Michael Bird

Scot McKnight: Response to James Crossley
Maurice Casey: Response to Michael Bird


James is a most worthy opponent so it should be a cracking good scuffle and I am sure that Maurice Casey and Scot McKnight will have some learned thoughts to contribute to the debate too.

Sample Chapters from Smyth & Helwys

The American Baptist publishers Smyth & Helwys have have several sample chapters available from their excellent commentary series in PDF. Volumes include:

Leviticus-Numbers
Deuteronomy
1-2 Samuel
1-2 Kings
Proverbs-Ecclesiastes
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Romans
Hebrews-James
Revelation

The volume on Romans by Charles Talbert is superb and well worth looking over and purchasing.

Terence Donaldson on Matthew

Here is a few quotes from an essay on Matthean Christology by Terence L. Donaldson, ‘The Vindicated Son: A Narrative Approach to Matthean Christology,’ in Contours of Christology in the New Testament, ed. Richard N. Longenecker (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 100-21.

‘The narrative of any one of the Gospels is not merely a convenient receptacle for that Gospel’s christology, something that might be discarded once the christological contents have been extracted from it. Rather, christology is narratively constituted.’ (p. 105).

‘Matthew, therefore, presents Jesus as one who in his experience recapitulates the story of Israel. Like Israel of old, Jesus has been called by God out of Egypt to a life of humble obedience; like Israel, this calling was put to the test in the wilderness. The hope of the story is that, unlike Israel, Jesus will remain faithful where Israel was disobedient.’ (p. 116).

‘At the end of the story the tension is fully resolved. Jesus’ apparent defeat turns out to be his victory. Precisely because he followed the path of humble obedience to the end, refusing to use the power at his disposal to extricate himself from the consequences of his obedience (e.g., 26:53-54), Jesus is vindicated in resurrection and endowed with “all authority in heaven and on earth” (28:18). Sovereignty is won through suffering. It is precisely his faithfulness as the humble, obedient Son that makes possible in the divine scheme of things, his exaltation as the royal, sovereign Son. And as Son, who shares a name with the Father and the Holy Spirit, he is the teacher and baptismal means of identity for a new people drawn not only from Israel but from all nations (28:19-20). (p. 120).

NT Theology I: Religious Experience

An interesting point made by L.T. Johnson and Ben Witherington is that the centre of unifying threat of the New Testament is not any one doctrine, but rather it is a shared and common experience amongst believers. Witherington writes:

What we are dealing with here is a group of people who had had profound religious experiences that they interpreted as encounters with the living Lord – that is, with Jesus the Christ. To be sure, some of their leaders, such as Paul or the author of Hebrews or the Beloved Disciple, could match wits with many of the great minds of their age. But it was their religious experiences with Christ that they had in common. And it was their communities of worship and fellowship, which came into being because of those experiences, that provided the matrix for reflection about the meaning of the Christ event.

Ben Witherington, ‘Jesus as the Alpha and Omega of New Testament Thought,’ in Contours of Christology in the New Testament, ed. Richard N. Longenecker (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 44-45.

New Blogs III

I've update blogroll to include some interesting new blogs:

Michael Barber and Singing in the Reign who's interests are as diverse as the Psalms and the Book of Revelation - but I have lots of time for anyone associated with the Saint Paul Centere for Biblical Theology and had the pleasure of meeting Scott Hahn at IBR.

Clifford B. Kvidahl Theological Musings with some interesting info on Ben Witherington and the ESV.

Andrew Rowell and First move thyself who teaches Christian education.

Denny Burke on biblical studies, theology and politics.

My JETS article on "Incorporated Righteousness" is now available in PDF, thanks to Sean du Toit for letting me know.

Martin Hengel - Earliest Christianity

In reading Hengel's useful book (a compilation of Acts and the History of Earliest Christianity and Property and Riches in the Early Church) I made several notes of key quotes and remarks:

‘For all his tendentious distortions, Luke’s contribution to the historical understanding of Paul is essentially greater than many scholars want to suppose today. Paul’s origins in Tarsus, his link with Jerusalem, the significance of Antioch and of Barnabas for the early Paul, the sequence of Paul’s letters, the length of his stay in his missionary centres and the chronology of his activity – all these and much else would be completely or largely unknown to us without Acts’.
Martin Hengel, Earliest Christianity (trans. John Bowden; London: SCM, 1986), 38-39.

'Luke is no less trustworthy than other historian of antiquity. People have done him a great injustice in comparing him too closely with the edifying, largely fictitious, romance-like writings in the style of the later acts of the apostles, which freely invent facts as they like and when they need them.’
Martin Hengel, Earliest Christianity (trans. John Bowden; London: SCM, 1986), 60.

‘His account remains within the limits of what was considered reliable by the standards of antiquity. That means that the author’s assurance in Luke 1.3 is more than mere convention; it contains a real theological and historical programme, though this cannot be measured by the standards of a modern critical historian.’
Martin Hengel, Earliest Christianity (trans. John Bowden; London: SCM, 1986), 61.

‘By depicting the Jewish Christians, including Paul, as essentially faithful to the law, Luke – against the historical situation of his time – is trying to say that the Christians are the true Israel and that the break with Judaism (i.e. with the community organized in the synagogue congregations of the Diaspora) was not caused by Christians, but by Jews (Acts 28.26ff.). The Christians had not left the synagogues of their own accord but had been driven out of them by force.’
Martin Hengel, Earliest Christianity (trans. John Bowden; London: SCM, 1986), 63-64.

‘The favourite slogan and label “early Catholicism” is less helpful for understanding Luke; it cannot really make any contribution to a historical and theological understanding of earliest Christianity. On the contrary, it fits all too well with today’s widespread desire for handy clichés. As far as Luke is concerned, both his enthusiastic conception of the spirit and his understanding of the ministry of the church, which at least outside of Jerusalem still did not have any hierarchical structure, fail to match the label … The auctor ad Theophilum is oriented more on the past period of Christian origins than on the arrival of the second century.'
Martin Hengel, Earliest Christianity (trans. John Bowden; London: SCM, 1986), 65.

Revelation 5 and Little Girls

My daughter Alexis has lost her first tooth and has also just finished memorizing Revelation 5 (whole chapter!). We have discussed the passage and what it means and I asked her if she understood it and she said, "Sort of" - which is probably alot closer than many learned scholars will ever be.

Read the NIV account here. Revelation 5 will probably be my text for my next Easter-time sermon.

Encountering God's Word

Down in the library I encountered a little gem of a book for undergrads called Encountering God's Word: Beginning Biblical Studies , edited by Phil Duce and Daniel Strange from IVP

· Beginning to study the Old Testament (Peter J. Williams)
· Beginning to study the New Testament (Alistair I. Wilson)
· Encountering biblical interpretation (Antony Billington)
· For the Bible tells me so? The roles of faith and evidence in believing the Bible (David Gibson)

Some of the authors will be known to others such Peter Williams of ETC and Dave Gibson of Beginning with Moses.

What was interesting was that I am just about to give a lecture on the parables and I was umming and ahhring over whether to use a Griemas diagram to outline the narrative structure of the parables. Would a structuralist approach be a bit too heavy for first year undergrads? My confidense was lifted when I realized that my predecessor (Alistair Wilson) who wrote the NT chapter recommended the griemas diagramatical approach as a way of analyzing passages in the Gospels - I then felt at ease (thanks Alistair!).

The book is a little gem for those starting serious biblical studies at either a seminary or a university. The volume is a good resource for both students and lecturers to use as an introduction to the rigours of scholarly debate and challenges to faith for biblical studies can pose.

I think I'll make my first year NT 101 class read the NT section before I set them into DeSilva's NT Intro.

The Temptations of Jesus Part II

In the temptation stories (Mark 1.12-13; Matthew 4.1-11/Luke 4.1-13) various examples and typologies emerge:

1. Jesus as the New Adam. That Jesus was with the wild beasts may recall Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden and their temptation. Also, it may recall a Jewish tradition that Adam and Eve were ministered to by Angels in the garden (Adam and Eve 4.1-2; b.Sanh. 59b).
2. Jesus as Faithful Israel. The three temptations recall elements of the Exodus story: wandering in the wilderness (Exod 16:35), hunger (Exod 16:2-8), testing God (Exod 17:1-3), and idolatry (Exodus 32).
3. Jesus as Elijah-like prophet. Elijah spent 40 days on Mt. Horeb (1 Kgs 19:8).
4. Jesus as the New Moses. Jesus was “fasting” like Moses did (Exod 24:18; 34:28). Jesus' sojourn in the wilderness for forty days and forty nights again comports iwht Moses on the mountain(Deut 9:9; Exod 34:28).

One final comment, a Christian interpolation in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs captures the thrust of Mark’s temptation story: “The devil will flee from you; wild beasts will be afraid of you, and the angels will stand by you” (T.Naph. 8:4; T.Benj. 5:2; cf. T.Iss. 7.7).

To my Southern Baptist Friends

After reading the posts from Jim West and the news about Wade Burleson and the Southern Baptist IMB , I felt it time to offer an alternative opinion on the issue. But let me preface my comments:

1. I have many Southern Baptist Convention friends and know fellow bloggers such as Jim Hamilton (Antiphon) and Alan Bandy (Cafe Apocalypsis) and this is not an attack on them.

2. My first theological mentor was a Southern Baptist, who died tragically in a car accident and I remember him fondly. He gave me a great gift - a love for God's sovereignty.

3. As a Baptist, I have much more in common with SBC Baptists than many other Baptist Groups of liberal persuasion.

4. I do like to clap my hands in worship, I have been known to raise my hands in prayer, my German probably sounds more like xenolalia than German, and I do own albums by Carmen - but I'm not charismatic (either in theology or personality).

5. On whether or not Burleson broke confidentiality through his blog is another matter. It was irresponsible or careless, but not necessarily grounds for expulsion. I am more concerned with the theological issue at hand concerning the bonds of Christian fellowship, the priority of the gospel, and the importance of the kingdom.

With that in mind I would like to voice my concern over what I observe to be a slide towards sectarianism in the SBC. I get the feeling that every year that the IMB meets their agenda is to exclude and disqualify another sub-group from mission in the SBC - egalitarians and now the charismatics. There are some groups in the SBC who are more excited about excluding others than proclaiming the gospel and extending the kingdom.

Now denominations are both a blessing and a bane. On the one hand they are a testimony to the continuing division of Christians which goes against Jesus' prayer in John 17. At the same time, denominations are formed because Christians believe that truth matters and we should order our worship, our church government, and our minitry according to our biblical and theological convictions. Denominations allow us to meet with other Christians who share common convictions.

But I am alarmed at the rate that some persons within the SBC want to purge their denomination of certain groups. Here's my response:

1. I am an evangelical which means that the basis of unity is the evangel - nothing more and nothing less - not women in ministry, not views of spiritual gifts, not one's doctrine of election, and not one's political preferences. Let me say that the difference between a Fundamentalist and an Evangelical is that a Fundamentalist is more excited about what he's against, whereas an Evangelical is more excited about what he's for - the gospel. So when I hear someone explain, preach, teach, pray, theologicize and practice the gospel then I know that I have found a brother or sister in Christ, and for that reason I know I will enjoy ministering beside them for the sake of Christ and his Kingdom.

2. There was a real diversity in the early church (alas, I learned long ago that not everyone was a red-head reformed Baptist), and the definition of a Christian in Rom 10,9-10 is quite broad. If you don't believe me go read Acts 6, 15 and Romans 14-15. We should expect that our churches will have a theological diversity as people arrive at theological convictions different to our own. I also believe that there are limits to the diversity that which we should tolerate so don't acuse me of being soft on doctrine.

3. Carl Henry got it right years ago when he said that Liberals minor on the majors and Fundamentalists major on the minors (re: doctrines). I think that there are 3 levels of doctrinal beliefs:

A. Essentials necessary for fellowship (e.g. Trinity, Biblical Authority, Resurrection, etc).
B. Major issues, but not necessarily divisive (e.g. church govt., baptism)
C. Adiaphora, matters of conviction (e.g. eschatology, alcohol).

I won't say that charismatic issues are insignificant - but it is clearly of second order importance in terms of faith and fellowship. In the case of Burleson we are not talking about the role of tongues in public worship - which could well be a theological distinctive for a denomination - but private prayer. If some guy wants to pray in tongues in private (like "untie-my-bowtie-who-stole-my-hondha") I don't have a problem. What a guy does on his knees at 11.00 p.m. is between him and his Lord.

4. Even worse, there is only one commandment about tongues in the NT and it is do not forbid it (1 Cor 14.39)! It sounds like Paul couldn't be an SBC missionary since he spoke in tongues (1 Cor 14.18).

5. I have a friend who is a Calvinist-Charismatic who teaches in a seminary in a predominantly Muslim country somewhere in the middle-east, and he has spoken in tongues in private prayer. I get the impression that the IMB would rather have no-one at all there training the pastors in the churches if it meant having a tongues-speaker. I retort that, the kingdom of God is bigger than the SBC. Evangelicalism is broader than the perspectivess that some in the SBC are advocating. I think everyone involved in the conflict needs to get a big dose of perspective - kingdom perspective. Let us not conspire to protect the doctrinal purity of our denomination, but let us endeavour, through toil and prayer, to extend the boundaries of the kingdom and to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ.

6. Here is a quote from my friend Jim West about charismatics:

The claim of the Charismatics that the grace of salvation is insufficient and requires the second grace of "baptism in the Holy Spirit" (as though that were an operation of God separate from salvation) is unscriptural. Indeed, it is anti-scriptural ... As I've mentioned before, I have no problem with Pentecostals. If a person wishes to be a Pentacostal or a Charismatic, they are more than free to do so. But persons who occupy Southern Baptist pulpits and lecterns and positions of authority on boards and committees should not be "Pentabaptilists". (Jim West).

I don't like the idea of a second blessing, it entails spiritual-have's and have-not's. But not all charismatics are like that - think of Wayne Grudem to name one. So in many ways Jim's remarks are unrepresentative of all charismatics and could perhaps be called a "staw man" argument (no offence Jim!). I hope Jim's fear of Pentabaptilists does not stem from a charismaphobia.

7. Let me offer up some words of warning with a paraphrase from Martin Niemoller:

First they came for the egalitarians
and I did not speak out
because I was not an egalitarian.
Then they came for the charismatics
and I did not speak out
because I was not a charismatic.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me

To be honest, I would rather work beside an Dispensational-Arminian-Egalitarian-Charismatic who loves the Lord and the Gospel than some of the doctrine-police who want to run bonafide Christians out of town over second-order theological issues. I still consider those guys who have a vendetta against charismatics as brothers in the Lord - but with brothers like them who the heck needs enemies!!!

8. To summarize, let me say this:

a. The gospel and only the gospel is basis for partnership in ministry.

b. Let us think beyond our own denominations and ask what will give the most glory to God and what will extend the kingdom of God.

c. Our greatest need is not to anathematize controversial figures (like Tom Wright) or to exclude those with different theological convictions (like egalitarians, charismatic); but our greatest need is for prayerful, spirit-led, gospel-announcing, Christ-centered, God-glorifying, justice-seeking, Bible-saturated Churches to get on with the business of the kingdom until the day when God is all in all.

And in the words of the great American philosopher, Forrest Gump, "that's all I have to say about that".

SDG

The Temptations of Jesus - Part I

I'm just finished work on an article on the "Temptation of Jesus" and I thought I would write a few posts on the topic. I would like to preface the posts with two observations:

First, go to the website of the Christian parody band Apologetix, and listen to the song "Devil Went Down to Jordan" sung to the tune of "Devil went Down to Georgia" - it will blow your mind. You might want buy the album.

Here are the lyrics:

The devil went down to the Jordan
He was lookin' for a show to steal
He was in a bind 'cause Jesus came to find
The people willing to make it real
And he came upon the Son of Man
Saw He had no vittles and was prayin' to God
Then the devil jumped upon the chance to tempt Him
Said "Boy, let me tell ya, it's hot!"
"I guess you didn't know it but I'm a vittle craver too
"And kid I'm scared this desert air might get the best of you
"Now you ain't been eatin' your vittles boy
"But, kid, your dinner is due
"So if you're really God's son, then turn these stones
To bread and I'll butter it for you."
The Lord said, "I am hungry, but that would be a sin
"Cause it ain't by bread man's gonna be fed
"But by the Word God's given him."
John the Baptist washed the Lord and there's where it all starts
Cause Jesus left the Jordan and the devil hit Him hard
And if He wins we get to walk on Heaven's streets of gold
But if He sins, the devil gets your soul
The devil took Him up in space and said, "Christ, start to throw
"Yourself off of this temple top as I'm watchin' from below
"Cause I'm sure You know that God will bring
“All His angels to assist
“And then men would believe that You're Him
“If they saw You did something like this"
When the devil finished, Jesus said
"Well, you're temptin' God, old son
And it's written down in that book right there
That thing shouldn't ever be done”
Shout from the mountain what God's done
The devil ain't a match for the rising Son
You can never tempt God, did you not know
Man, he doesn't live by bread alone
The devil finally said, "Jesus, if You'll just worship me
Then I’ll give you gold that glitters
All these crowns, and all You see"
Jesus said, "Devil, just turn on back
Cause I'm never gonna buy your scam
I love God too much, I'm gonna resist
I'd suggest you'd better scram!"
And we say
CHORUS

You can listen to the song HERE (on the left-hand side bar).

Second, while you're listening to that consider the following: John Milton's work Paradise Regained is not set at Calvary, but in Jesus' wilderness temptations as the point where the fall and curse of Adam is undone.

Who were the Hellenistes?

Who were the Hellenists (Acts 6.1; 9.29; 11.20)?

- Gentiles Christians
- Proselytes
- Gentile Christians and Jews who did not follow law
- Diaspora Jews
- More likely is the view of John Chrysostom that it designates Jews who speak Greek as their first language.

Can early Christianity be separated into layers?

- Palestinian Jewish Christianity
- Hellenistic Jewish Christian
- Gentile Christianity

Did Hellenistic and Gentile Christianity have a syncrestic christology and liturgy borrowed from mystery cults and pagan religions - probably not!

1. Such distinctions cannot be made within Judaism (cf. Hengel: all Judaism in the second-temple period is Hellenistic Judaism).
2. Differences between Hebrews/Hellenists was linguistic, cultural and perhaps acculturation to Greek living. But these differences are not absolute and do not mean that two groups were neatly separated theologically.
3. The terminology is used loosely and people who we might call Hellenistis, like Paul, are called Hebrews, 2 Cor. 11.22; Phil. 3.5.
4. The Hellenists, like Barnabas, were equally at home in Jerusalem.

There might have been differences on views of the law and on entrance of Gentiles into the church, but we cannot be sure about radical christological differences. There was a basic unity on the content of the gospel between Greek and Aramaic speaking Jewish-Christians. In 1 Cor 15.11, Paul assumes that the Corinthians could have heard the same Gospel from Peter or James. In Gal 1.6-9, Paul argues against a different gospel, but the different gospel is different to the one that both he and the Jerusalem pillars agreed on!

“Paul assumed that the Jerusalem Christians were Christians, that there was a unity and a consistency to the gospel both they and he preached (Rom. 15:27; Gal. 2:7-10).” Craig Hill, Hellenists and Hebrews: Reappraising Division within the Earliest Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg/Fortress, 1994), 174.

See further:

Craig Hill, Hellenists and Hebrews: Reappraising Division within the Earliest Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg/Fortress, 1994).

Craig C. Hill, "Hellenists, Hellenistic, and Hellenistic-Jewish Christianity", in DLNTD, 462-69.

Martin Hengel, Between Jesus and Paul (London: SCM, 1983) 1-30.

I. Howard Marshall, The Origins of NT Christology (Leicester: IVP, 1977) 35-41.

Todd Penner, In Praise of Christian Origins: Stephen and the Hellenists in Lukan Apologetic Historiography (New York: T&T Clark, 2004).

Ben Witherington, The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapdis, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 240-47.

Jeffrey Peterson, "The Extent of Christian Theological Diversity: Pauline Evidence", Restoration Quarterly 47 (2005): 1-14.

Jewish Christianity: A Definition

What exactly is Jewish Christianity? Who is a Jewish Christian? Which books in the NT can be regarded as being Jewish Christian? Should it (or they) be defined ethnically, based on praxis, or doctrinally?

James Carleton Paget is probably on the money when he (tentatively) opts for a praxis-based definition of "a Jewish Christian as someone who accepts the messianic status of Jesus (the bare minimum requires of someone wishing to be a Christian) but feels it necessary to keep, or perhaps adopt, practices associated with Judaism such as circumcision, in the case of males, the sabbath, the food laws, and other such related practices". (p.734).

Paget, J. Carleton. 2002. ‘Jewish Christianity.’ In Cambridge History of Ancient Judaism. 3 vols. Edited by W.D. Davies. Cambridge: CUP. 3:731-75.

In more recent times, some "Messianic Jews" dislike being called "Christians" since they wish to maintain that they are still Jews. Is this insistence misplaced?

Paul and the Law

Over at Biblia Theologica Ardel Caneday has posted 21 Theses on Paul and the Law which make for interesting reading!

A Citizen of Heaven and a Colonists of Jesus

In my sermon prep on Phil 3.20-21, I found useful the 10 point manifesto from Tod Bolsinger which I have reproduced below:

1. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation for all who believe.

2. The Gospel is a call not only to personal faith in Christ Jesus, but also to a deeply committed and shared life in community with other believers...this community being a Colony of Heaven on earth.

3. The Colony of Heaven is to be a living expression of the Word of God, particularly the Sermon on the Mount which we hold to be the "Ten Commandments" of the New Covenant, the Constitution of God's Holy Nation, according to the Gospel of Jesus.

4. The Colony is an alien community in America, a counter-culture, sojourning here as wedded to God and declaring our Independence from the ideals, ways and the value-set of the world system which surrounds us.

5. The Colony is an incendiary fellowship, kindled at the central fire of Jesus Christ, kicking out sufficient heat to warm one another and sufficient spark in the Holy Spirit to set our neighborhood ablaze in the holy Gospel.

6. The Colony is a unified family, a brotherhood of love, caring for it's own holistically, with truth, affection and discipline in the Gospel. When one suffers, we share in his pain; when another rejoices, we share in her joy.

7. The Colony is an army of love, a militia of New Creation, moving out to conquer our neighborhood with the weapons of word and deed in the Gospel, prepared to endure the sufferings and the losses which are inevitable in any war.

8. The Colony is a specialized task force, a Spiritual Marine Corps., working hard by division of labor to advance and accomplish our mission in the Gospel. Extraordinary effort and exceptional dedication are required of all, just as the Gospel demands.

9. The Colony breathes on the Gospel, but works by the Cross. Our Life is in God, but our life in this world is cruciform. We die daily and we are ready to die finally, that Life may be the issue... for "the blood of martyrs is seed," just as we see in the Gospel.
"He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."

10. We believe the whole earth shall be Colonized by Jesus Christ while He remains upon His seat of authority at the Father's right hand in Heaven. "He will not suffer the reproach upon His Name that He was not able to convert the world in righteousness."

New Blogs

Ardel Caneday has a blog called Biblia Theologica. Ardel has written some good stuff on Mark, Paul, Persevarance and Open Theism. He hasn't posted for a while, but he always has something intelligent to say when he does write. It links to some of his other sites as well.

Wright's new debating technique: Violence!

Can you name a use for this cartoon featuring Tom Wright kapowing Marc Borg and Dom Crossan? Let me get the ball rolling:


1. Tom Wright's blogger Icon
2. The new cover for the Fortress edition of The Resurrection of Jesus: John Dominic Crossan and N.T. Wright in Dialogue.
3. A diagram explainig Tom Wright's rebuttal strategy for SBL in 2006.


I got the cartoon from Justin Junkins at Pisteuo.

Hmm, I wonder if I could insert a picture of Wright giving Bultmann an uppercut to the chin? Or maybe Tom slapping Richard Dawkins in the face with a big piece of Barramundi!

Interpretation: I think this drawing is a projection of someone's internalised hero myth, where a primeval (yet strangely postmodern) champion arises to fight and win the religious battle against a perceived enemy. Well, we all like to have heroes don't we!

To quote Bertolt Brect (Galileo):
"Unhappy a land with no Hero"
"Unhappy a land that needs a hero"
I think that sums it up.

Otherwise, I shall now observe a NT Wright moratorium for the next month!

Religious News Service - Kevin O'Brien

I don't normally comment on politics, accept when they overlap with religion. However, the following quote from RNS did get my attention:

I can respect the fact that an image of Muhammad -- even a favorable or neutral image -- offends Muslim sensibilities because it smacks of idolatry. It makes sense on its own level. What doesn't make sense is some Muslims' reaction. It's all out of proportion to the offense. In fact, it's crazy. The question is whether it's crazy enough to begin reawakening Americans to the threat they briefly understood after a different gaggle of insulted Muslims turned the World Trade Center and a piece of the Pentagon to rubble, killing 3,000 innocents. Which brings us to our own little dust-up over President Bush allowing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on overseas calls with suspected terrorist connections. The president is trying to defeat people whose zeal to obliterate your civilization has been redoubled by a newspaper cartoon. Who really scares you more?

(Kevin O'Brien is deputy editorial director for The Plain Dealer of Cleveland.)

I live next to a Muslim family here in Dingwall, who are very friendly and amiable, and I get on well with them. I imagine that they, like most Muslims living in the West or in the East, simply want to live and enjoy a happy life and feel free to practice their religion in peace with people of other religions. But how is the West to respond to Islamic extremists, institutions and governments who believe that the West must either convert to Islam or be annihilated? I'm not afraid of an American President, however inept, who can launch 1000 ICBM nuclear warheads - but I am afraid of a extremist who wants only one nuclear device! Will it come to this, who nukes who first? Let us pray that it is not!!!

SPCK Cover of Fresh Perspectives: Painting or Prediction

I wonder, is the SPCK cover to Paul: Fresh Perspectives, really Saint Paul by George de La Tour, or is it in fact a portrait of what Wright will look like in about 20 years? The similarities are striking

Forensic Justification as Legal Fiction?

Another multiple choice question. Which of the following scholars deny that justification amounts to legal fiction?

a. F.C. Baur
b. James D. G. Dunn
c. N. T. Wright
d. G. E. Ladd
e. Richard B. Hays

See the answer in the comments section.

Test your knowledge of Apocryphal Literature

Here is a multiple choice question. II Esdras refers to which document:

a. Septuagint: OT Ezra + OT Nehemiah
b. Vulgate: Nehemiah
c. Douay Bible: Nehemiah
d. Russian Bible: Paraphrase of 2 Chron 35-36 + OT Ezra + OT Nehemiah 7-8 + tale of body guards.
e. Latin Apocaypse and NRSV: 5 Ezra + 4 Ezra + 6 Ezra

See the answer in the comments section

Paul, Works and Judaism

Besides the volume by Kent Yinger, Paul, Judaism, and Judgement According to Deeds (1999), have there been anyother recent volumes that deal with judgment, justification according to deeds? I swear I've seen one somewhere published within the last five years (after Yinger), but for the life of me I just cannot remember.

Anyone else have a better memory than mine?

Listen to the NT in Greek

Thanks to Jim Hamilton at Antiphon, I found these two sites where you can listen to the GK NT in full audio - a further way to immerse yourself in the world of the NT. I like the idea of having a sheila (i.e. female) read Romans since I would make a reasonable bet that Phoebe, as Paul's delegate , may well have read the epistle to the Roman house churches - a bit speculative, but heathily so.


Marilyn Phemister reading Westcott & Hort.

Greek and Latin Audio

1,2 Esdras Commentary

I am glad to announce a forthcoming commentary project by myself and Joel Willitts on 1,2 Esdras in the Brill LXX commentary series. Don't hold your breath, it's not due to be submitted until 2010! But the commentary is based on a single ms rather than using the LXX as a window into a Hebrew Vorlage.

New Blog: Pantodapos

A chap called Eric Sowell has a blog call Pantodapos. The subtitle reads: "Sundry thoughts, on biblical studies, theology, philosophy, greek, textual criticism, and literature. He connects to a website, Christonomy which looks like a cross between Theonomy and New Covenant Theology. I'm certainly no Theonomist, but I do like some of New Covenant Theology stuff, esp. on Baptism (not convinced that the decalogue has no abiding continuance), but NCT arguments for creedo-baptist sing and sting!

Will Jim West give me an "Amen" before Ben Myers starts yelling "Give us Barrabbas"?

Welcome aboard Eric and friends!

Books for Beginners

In a follow up to my good friend Ben Myer's Easier Things to Read before going to college or seminary, I include my own list (at least for NT studies):

Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament
Gordon Fee, New Testament Exegesis
William Mounce, Basics for Biblical Greek
Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity
Gerd Theissen & Annette Merz, The Historical Jesus
Craig L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels
Michael Gorman, Apostle of the Crucified Lord
I. Howard Marshall, et. al, Exploring the NT volume 2: Letters and Revelation Richard Bauckham, Theology of Revelation
G.B. Caird, New Testament Theology

Wright in Brisbane

To let any Brisbanites out there know (i.e. Ben Myers), Tom Wright will be making the trip up to the sunshine state of Queensland. I have the details from Kevin Bush:

Bishop Wright will be in Brisbane on Friday 31st March till Sunday 2nd April. He will be speaking on Jesus and Christian Mission in a Postmodern World. The final venue's have yet to be determined, but the service on Sunday will be at St John’s Cathedral.

Thus it seems that there really is intelligent life north of Hornsby :)

Thanks Kevin for letting me know.

The Problem with Pat

“I've been doing TV for years and years. And the problem is, I ad-lib.”


-- Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson, explaining in a Thursday (Feb. 2) interview on ABC's “Good Morning America” why he suggested the United States should assassinate President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and later implied Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was God's punishment for giving up the Gaza Strip. He was quoted by the Associated Press.

I could probably think of a few other problems Pat has!!!

Wright and Justification (Again)

I get the vibe that in contrast to Climax of the Covenant and What Saint Paul Reall Said? that Wright is finally getting a better balance on the forensic and covenantal aspects of justification. Consider the following statement:

"God has declared in advance that he has dealt with sin and death, and has summoned the world to the obedience of faith, with the corollary that all of those who believe find themselves declared in advance, as part of the apocalyptic unveiling of the ultimate future, to be within God's true family, whether they be Jew or Gentiles".

1. Wright here defines justification primarily in relation to sin/death, that is overturning the verdict (death) against sin through God's saving action in Christ.
2. Covenant membership, the part that Wright gets the most excited about, is here regarded as a "corollary" of justification instead of comprising its entire content.

I hope critics of Wright are paying attention!

Eating is Believing

Back to John for the moment. One of the best articles I've read on John 6:51, "I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world", is by Dave Gibson, "Eating Is Believing? On Midrash and the Mixing of Metaphors in John 6," Themelios 27.7 (2002): 5-15. It is well written and an excellent article to give to theological students who are perplexed about John and eucharistic theology. Even better the article is available on-line at Rob Bradshaw's site right here. If I remember correctly David is doing some postgrad studies down the road at Aberdeen?

Added Blogs: KATA IWANNHN & Rabbi Saul

John Barach is (or was) Pastor of Covenant Reformed Church in Alberta Canada. He's got some interesting stuff on his blog and he has just agreed to take up a role planting a church in Medford (southern Oregon). His blog is According to John.

I've also added to my side bar Tim Gallant's site Rabbi Saul which often has some interesting discussion.

Wright on Philippians 3:20

I'm preparing a sermon on Philippians 3 and I came across this interesting quote from Tom Wright:

At once many modern Christians misunderstand what he means. We naturally suppose he means "and so we're waiting until we can go and live I heaven where we belong." But that's not what he says, and it's certainly not what he means. If someone in Philippi said, "We are citizens of Rome," they certainly wouldn't mean "so we're looking forward to going to live there." Being a colony works the other way round. The last thing the emperors wanted was a whole lot of colonists coming back to Rome. The capital was already overcrowded and underemployed. No: the task of the Roman citizen in a place like Philippi was to bring Roman culture and rule to northern Greece, to expand Roman influence there.

But supposing things got difficult for the Roman colonists in Philippi. Supposing there was a local rebellion, or an attack by the 'barbarian' tribes to the north. How would they cope? Their best hope would be that the emperor himself, who after all was called "saviour," "rescuer," would come from Rome to Philippi to change their present somewhat defenceless situation, defeat their enemies, and establish them as firmly and gloriously as Rome itself. The emperor, of course, was the ruler of the whole world, so he had the power to make all this happen under his authority.

That is the picture Paul has in mind in verses 20 and 21. The church is at present a colony of heaven, with the responsibility (as we say in the Lord's Prayer) for bringing the life and rule of heaven to bear on earth. We are not, of course, very good at doing this; we often find ourselves weak and helpless, and our physical bodies themselves are growing old and tired, decaying and ready to die. But our hope is that the true saviour, the true Lord, King Jesus himself will come from heaven and change all that. He is going to transform the entire world so that it is full of his glory, full of the life and power of heaven. And, as part of that, he is going to transform our bodies so that they are like his glorious body, the body which was itself transformed after his cruel death so that it became wonderfully alive again with a life that death and decay could never touch again.

Knowing this will enable Christians to "stand firm in the Lord" (4:1); and now we can see more clearly what that means. It doesn't just mean remaining constant in faith. It means giving allegiance to Jesus, rather than to Caesar, as the true Lord. Paul has described the church, and its Lord, in such a way that the Philippians could hardly miss the allusion to Rome and Caesar. This is the greatest challenge of the letter: that the Christians in Philippi, whether or not they were themselves Roman citizens (some probably were, many probably weren't), would think out what it means to give their primary allegiance not to Rome but to heaven, not to Caesar but to Jesus — and to trust that Jesus would in due time bring the life and rule of heaven to bear on the whole world, themselves included

Tom Wright, Paul for Everyone: Philippians, 126-127.

Cited from Kata John

Current Readings: Allusion and Meaning in John 6`

At the moment I'm reading Susan Hylen, Allusion and Meaning in John 6 (BZNW 137; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2005). John 6 is a juicy little passages, one of the most controversial discourses in John, the manna, the Jewish scriptures, and esp. the "eat my flesh" thing. I've never quite been able to get into anthropophagi so I'll happily side with Zwingli on this one (did ya hear that Jim West!). I've always thought that Luther's consubstantiation sounds alot like transubstantiation by another name.

Susan (the sheila on the right) teaches NT Interpretation at Vanderbilt (so we can safely assume that she's not an evangelical). After running a marathon with the historical Jesus, going toe-to-toe in the ring for 8 rounds with Paul, and doing occasional sprint-work with the Gospel of Mark, I love to sit by the pool with John and relax. This should be a good read. Here's the blurb:

Many interpreters read John 6 as a contrast between Jesus and Judaism: Jesus repudiates Moses and manna and offers himself as an alternative. In contrast, this monograph argues that John 6 places elements of the Exodus story in a positive and constructive relationship to Jesus. This reading leads to an understanding of John as an interpreter of Exodus who, like other contemporary Jewish interpreters, sees current experiences in light of the Exodus story. This approach to John offers new possibilities for assessing the gospel's relationship to Jewish scripture, its dualism, and its metaphorical language.

F.C. Baur on Substitutionary Atonement

The idea of substitution implies two things, first, that the one who is to take the place of many others, and to be counted for them, is the same as they are; and secondly, that he possesses something which they have not; that, namely, the lack of which makes it necessary that he should represent them. If Christ has died for the sins of men, then he must have been without sin himself, in order that his death, which could not be a sacrifice on his own account, might avail as the penalty of the sins of others.

F.C. Baur, Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ: His Life and Works, His Epistles and Teachings: Two Volumes in One (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000), 2.155-56.

Acts 2 and Peter's Interpretation of Pentecost

In Acts 2.14-21, Peter presents an interpretation of the events at Pentecost (i.e. xenolalia). In reading over L.T. Johnson's Acts of the Apostles commentary (SP) he points out a parrallel with Plato Timaeus 72B, where it was the role of a prophet to interpret ecstatic utterances from an oracle. I looked up the reference and found it interesting.

And herein is a proof that God has given the art of divination not to the wisdom, but to the foolishness of man. No man, when in his wits, attains prophetic truth and inspiration; but when he receives the inspired word, either his intelligence is enthralled in sleep, or he is demented by some distemper or possession. And he who would understand what he remembers to have been said, whether in a dream or when he was awake, by the prophetic and inspired nature, or would determine by reason the meaning of the apparitions which he has seen, and what indications they afford to this man or that, of past, present or future good and evil, must first recover his wits. But, while he continues demented, he cannot judge of the visions which he sees or the words which he utters; the ancient saying is very true, that "only a man who has his wits can act or judge about himself and his own affairs." And for this reason it is customary to appoint interpreters to be judges of the true inspiration. Some persons call them prophets; they are quite unaware that they are only the expositors of dark sayings and visions, and are not to be called prophets at all, but only interpreters of prophecy.

In the eyes of Luke's Greco-Roman readers this may give Peter a prophetic like role and underscore his authority all the more (what I think is one of the purposes of Peter's first missionary speech in Acts). I wonder what Rick Strelan has to say about this in his book Strange Acts?

A Palindrome to Ponder

Michael Thompson had this little brain teaser for NT types over at the BSB website:

One of my students pointed me to this palindrome (it reads the same from either end) in Greek which encircles a local baptismal font (and many others in Christendom). How’s your Greek? (Hint: the second word is not found in the NT, but it does feature in the LXX):

ΝΙΨΟΝΑΝΟΜΗΜΑΤΑΜΗΜΟΝΑΝΟΨΙΝI

If you want the answer then click here.

Tom Wright to visit Australia

I've just found the brochure on NT Wright's home page, providing details of the Bishop of Durham's visit to Sydney. There are several sessions/events planned and they are organized by the Society for the Study of Early Christianity at Macquarie University. It will include a session on Paul with responses from Paul Barnett - now, that will be interesting. I would love to hear that one and see if the two can find any common ground.

For the love of Martha, will someone also try and get Tom up to Brisbane, if not for the surfing, sun, fishing, and golf then for the churches up there - the Brisbanites always seem to get overlooked as a destination for speakers as those arrogant southerns who organize the events (NSWers and VICers) find it hard to believe that there is intelligent life north of Hornsby and so fail to organize a Brisbane event in the speaker's itinerary!

The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ

I've always been a bit hesistant about jumping into the whole subject genitive reading of pistis christou - although I do think it makes good grammatical and theological sense in Eph 3.12 and Phil 3.9 at least. Despite my reservations, I have always believed that Jesus' obedience/faithfulness does have a big part in NT Theology/Christology. I thought about writing an article on the function of Jesus' faithfulness/obedience in NT theology, but I do not have to bother after coming across the following article:

Richard N.Longenecker, ‘The Foundational Conviction of New Testament Christology: The Obedience/Faithfulness/Sonship of Christ,’ in Jesus of Nazareth, Lord and Christ, eds. Joel B. Green and Max Turner (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994) 473-88.

Job Opportunity - Lecturer in Pastoral Theology

Over at jobs.ac.uk there is a position advertised for a lectuer in Pastoral Theology at the Highland Theological College. The details are as follows:

Lecturer
Pastoral Theology
Highland Theological College - HTC

The Highland Theological College (HTC) offers courses from Access level through to PhD level, from a Reformed and Evangelical perspective. HTC is situated in the beautiful Highlands of Scotland and is a Partner in UHI Millennium Institute (UHI) delivering university-level education in the Highlands and Islands, including Moray and Perthshire. UHI aims to become the University of the Highlands and Islands by 2007.

We are looking for a new academic staff member to begin in August 2006:

Lecturer in Pastoral Theology

The ideal candidate will have a PhD, some pastoral experience, some teaching experience, and will have published (or will publish by 2007) sufficient material to enable a contribution to the next Research Assessment Exercise.

The post will involve teaching undergraduates, supervision of postgraduates, research and writing, some administration, involvement in and commitment to UHI and participation in the wider work of the College, including conference week-ends and occasional evening classes.

Salary will depend on qualifications, experience and managerial responsibilities within the College. There is a pension scheme in place.

Application and CV to the College Principal:
Professor A.T.B. McGowan, HTC, High Street, Dingwall, IV15 9HA by Friday 31st March 2006

For further information, e-mail Fiona Smith, PA to the Principal:
fiona.smith@htc.uhi.ac.uk

Telephone: 01349-780208 Fax: 01349-780001

More on the Resurrection

Good news! I've been reading through Allison a bit more and I am glad to say that the evidense for the empty tomb appears to be marginally stronger than the argument that the empty tomb was fabricated - I can go to bed now!!!

I once had the pleasure of preaching 5 sermons on the resurrection during an Easter weekend last year - an enjoyable experience it was too - but sermons on what the resurrection means are hard to find. One of the best sermonette's I've ever read on the resurrection is from ship of fools and is called Easter ... Wright and Wrong. Do read it, esp. if you're anything like "Pastor Gospelman" or "Mr Smoothtongue".

The picture is The Supper at Emmaus Painted for Lord Chandos' house, Canons, by Joshua Price.

Bibliography on the Resurrection

I'm still working through Allison's book Resurrecting Jesus (I'm quite impressed by his breadth of research, either he has been looking at his for a while or else he has a research assistant worth his/her weight in gold).

I do remember seeing a cool bibliography on studies on the resurrection a few years ago and I was able to track it down. It is from Ex Auditu at North Park College. Although it is a bit dated now it is worth having a gander over.

You can also find a reasonable article on the resurrection at Wikipedia. It seems that William Lane Craig and NT Wright also have their own bio-articles at wikipedia.

The image is Christ with Doubting Thomas by Caravaggio Neues Palast, Potsdam

New Blog: Jason Hood and Gospel of Matthew

It appears that our friend Jason Hood (whom I affectionately call "Jase") now has his own blog. He's been posting comments around the bloggosphere for ages and it's about time he took the plunge and joined us all. Jase is a great guy, fun to be with, loves the Lord, and he even got me some Zero-coke from the US! Ya can't ask for much more than that (even better he has no immediate love for Bultmann as far as I can tell).

Jase is doing his Ph.D with us at HTC on Matthew. He's also into issues about stewardship, finance, poverty etc, all good stuff. You can expect some good reviews and news from him on anything to do with the Gospel of Matthew. What our mate Alan Bandy is to Revelation, I'm sure Jase can be to Matthew - a ninja-guru-jedi master-SAS trooper-fount of all knowledge-expert on Matthean scholarship and studies!

Things I'd like to see him cover include:

1. The meaning and application of the exception clauses on divorce,
2. The meaning of Mt. 5.18,
3. Was there a Matthean community?,
4. The significance of "Syria" in 4.24,
5. Did Luke use Matthew?,
6. What does he think of Alistair Wilson's book on judgement in Matthew (should be interesting since Alistair is his supervisor),
7. Give a summary of Matthew's interpretation of the OT,
8. Did the "M" source really exist or is it just Matthean redaction?
9. Analyse the restoration/exile motif in Matt 1-4.
10. Matthew's relation with Judaism and the Synagogue.
11. Give us some snippets from what he's work on with his PH.D thesis

This should keep him busy for several Buddhist life times!

Bravo mate. Welcome aboard Jase! The site is called Gospel of Matthew: Blogging on the New Testament (especially its first book) and other things.

New Books to Read

I just got my copies of N.T. Wright, Paul: Fresh Perspectives and Michael J. Gorman, Apostle of the Crucified Lord. Gorman's short sections on rhetoric and the theo-political nature of Paul's gospel are excellent little summaries of the topics for undergrads.

I've also photocopied Scot McKnight, "The Warning Passages of Hebrews: A Formal Analysis and Theological Conclusion,", TrinJ 13 (1992): 21-59 - as I hope my NT 101 class will write a paper on the warning passages in Hebrews next semester. I wasn't sure about Grudem's response in Still Sovereign, but re-reading both will be interesting.

Advice for Ph.D candidates

As one who has recently finished a Ph.D and started teaching here at the words of wisdom I have for young cands (many of these ideas were passed on to me by my supervisors and now I blog them for the sake of posterity).

• In choosing your topic, pick a specific area (e.g. Gospel of John) and then take a unique approach (e.g. narrative criticism).
• Know the difference in genre between a thesis, a book and a journal article.
• Try to write a thesis that goes some way in convincing those who disagree with you (don’t preach to the choir or peddle your assumptions) - examiners can smell that a mile away!!!
• Remember that you are not trying to end the debate or put in the last word. Your thesis is merely one voice in a continuing conversation. Your aim is to sit down at an imaginary seminar table and interject one cogent comment (i.e. your thesis) in the on-going discussion.
• To begin with, try get a grip on the history of NT research read Stephen Neil and N. T. Wright, The Interpretation of the New Testament, 1981-1986 (Oxford: OUP, 1988) or William Baird, The History of New Testament Research (3 vols.; Minneapolis: Fortress/Augsburg, 2002-2006). This will hopefully show you where you fit in, in the history of NT study. And for getting a good hold on first century Christianity see James D. G. Dunn, Unity and Diversity in the New Testament: An Inquiry into the Character of Earliest Christianity (2d ed.; London: SCM, 1990).
• Start learning German and, if possible, French too at the earliest possible moment. At doctorate level research writing this is compulsory (I still spend 15 mins a day working on my German).
• Become conversant with academic tools like TLG, Perseus, the ATLA database, various lexicons, library services, and key websites.
• Two of the best investments you will ever make are the program Nota Bene and Bible Works 6 - even if you have to harvest a kidney for them, try get hold of them. NB gives discounts to students.
• Focus on primary sources and know them like the back of your hand. Try wherever possible to work with them in their original languages.
• Be consistent in your bibliographic style (e.g. Chicago, Harvard) and abbreviations (SBLHB or DNTB). Pick one and stick to it. You don’t want to have to go through your thesis changing Mt. 10.1 to Matt 10:1 or ExpTim to ExpT.
• Write early and often - yes, you need to read yourself up, but sooner or later you've gotta start whacking that key board with coherent arguments.
• When you quote, cite or refute someone, make sure you correctly represent their views. Consider emailing scholars to make sure you have understood their position if need be (you might find a good examiner this way).
• Once you’ve finished a section make sure that you double-check your primary and secondary sources.
• When you write (or edit) a section ask yourself this question: how does this section strengthen, develop or further the central contention of my thesis? If not, get rid of it.
• Be disciplined! The only place where “success” comes before “work” is the dictionary. Don't end up as one of those unfinished PH.D's. Do what you have to do, before you do what you want to do. Say goodbye to the TV, the X-Box, your prized collection of Barbie Comics, and the Left-Behind series (in fact, bury the latter), and immerse yourself in the world of Jesus, Paul, Luke, Peter and John.
• On a more spiritual plane, don't forget that faith is more important than academic study and there are families that need you, churches that need servants, people who need prayer - so don't let your thesis became a mistress! People are more important than your exotic exegesis of John 1:1! Remember to read the Bible for your own edification rather than just using it academically.

Otherwise, I recommend the following reading:

Wayne C. booth, Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, The Craft of Research. 2d edition. 2003. Chapter 13-14.
Michel Desjardins, “Netting a Job in Religious Studies: Some Notes from the Field”. May 24, 2005.
Carl Trueman, “Interview with Professor Howard Marshall,” Themelios 26 (2002): 48-53.
Stanley E. Porter, "Is There a Secret to Supervising Doctoral Students?" .
SBL Forum

Historical Jesus Encyclopedia

Craig Evans is the editor of the Encyclopedia of the Historical Jesus to be published by Routledge around 2007/8. This will be a useful resource once it comes out.

Ehrman, Textual Criticism and Historical Jesus

Several criticisms have been raised against Bart Ehrman's book Misquoting Jesus. Another salvo comes from Mark Roberts over at his webpage which is worth perusing.

I've been chewing this over in my mind and I think there is a certain contradiction in Ehrman's scholarship. On the one hand, he argues that the transmission of the NT is allegedly fraught with endemic corruption and limitless textual variation. One cannot even speak of the Word of God because we do not have the words of God, we do not have access to the original autographs, and (I would add this point) therefore we do not have access to the events in the life of Jesus and the early church that the original autographs referred to. The problem is that Ehrman continues to write books on the historical Jesus and Paul, Peter and Mary which is only possible if the textual transmission process has some integrity, if the autographs are reconstructable, and if those autographs did contain a window into the life of Jesus and the early church. Ehrman is trying to tell us that the NT transmission process has no clothes (like the Emperor), but continues writing books about topics that depend on a reliable manuscript witness. He can't have it both ways!

Otherwise, Mark Goodacre recommends David Parker's book The Living Text of the Gospels (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997) for beginners. I prefer Bruce M. Metzger's volume, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005) as the best place to start. I've also found a useful summary of recent debates in Eckhard J. Schnabel, "Textual Criticism: Recent Developments," Scot McKnight & Grant R. Osborne, eds., The Face of New Testament Students (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House 2004), 59-75. Something else worth considering for beginners is Bart D. Ehrman & Michael William Holmes, eds., The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis: A Volume in Honor of B.M. Metzger (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2001). Otherwise I recommend people check out the list of textual-criticism resources at Bible Studies.

More on Christology

“It has always been a vital question in Christology to discover how far the impact made by the earthly life of Jesus and his own understanding of his person can sustain the weight of the Christological construction put upon them by the early church. We cannot, therefore, in this study ignore the questions of what Jesus said and did, and how far historical study can show the relation between the actual character of his ministry and the theological explanation of it by the early church.” (I. Howard Marshall, The origins of NT Christology [Leicester, IVP, 1977], p.13).

That is indeed the question!

The Mission of a Christian Scholar

I've been thinking about the question of what, as a Christian NT scholar, is my vocation, purpose, calling, mandate or mission? I came up with the following manifesto:

As a Christian scholar my goals are:

(1) To assist in the spiritual and theological formation of students and to enable them to articulate and live out a Christian worldview.

(2) To act as a mediator between the Academy and the Church, which involves making scholarship a tool for Christians and deciphering the complexities of modern debates for non-academics.

(3) To make contributions to the collective knowledge of biblical and theological research through continuous and disciplined efforts in research for the benefit of fellow scholars, theological students, and lay people.

(4) To equip Christians to discover a ‘faith seeking understanding’.

Essay Topics for Semester II

I am in the process of preparing the essay topics for next semester, and the following questions strike me as good topics for my undergrads:

Luke-Acts

What do we learn about Luke’s view of the Roman Empire from his portrayal of Roman officials?

“You don’t write a history of the church if you’re expecting the end of the world” – evaluate this statement in light of discussions about Luke’s eschatology.

Pauline Theology

According to Galatians 2:11-14, what happened at Antioch to cause Paul to react so strongly against Peter?

Evaluate arguments for and against Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles.

Evaluate N.T. Wright's view of justification.

Jesus and the Gospels

Identify the role of women in Jesus’ ministry?

Did the hypothetical document called ‘Q’ actually exist?

Note: If any of my students are reading this blog, these essay topics are not yet official and are subject to change and review prior to the commencement of the course.

Pagan Monotheism Conference

University of Exeter, Department of Classics and Ancient History

International conference: Pagan Monotheism in the Roman Empire,
Exeter, 17-20 July 2006

Keynote Speakers include M. Frede, G. Fowden, J. North, A.
Chaniotis, C. Markschies, L. Rutgers, and S. Mitchell.

Further details and a registration form can be found on the
website

Please contact P.E.R.van-Nuffelen@ex.ac.uk with any questions.

Conference on Justin Martyr

The Centre for the Study of Christian Origins (University of Edinburgh) will host an international conference on Justin Martyr 20-22 July.

Jeremias and Caird on the necessity of studying the Historical Jesus

"And those who believe that in the life and teaching of Jesus God has given a unique revelation of His character and purpose are committed by this belief, whether they like it or not, whether they admit it or not, to that quest. Without the Jesus of history the Christ of faith becomes a Docetic figure, a figment of pious imagination, who, like Alice’s Checshire cat, ultimately disappears from view."

G.B. Caird, New Testament Theology (ed. L.D. Hurst; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), p. 347

“We must continually return to the historical Jesus and his message. The sources demand it; the kerygma, which refers us back away from itself, also demands it. To put it in theological terms, the incarnation implies that the story of Jesus is not only a possible subject for historical research, study, and criticism, but demands all of these. We need to know who the Jesus of history was, as well as the content of his message.”

Joachim Jeremias, “The Search for the Historical Jesus,” in Jesus and the Message of the New Testament (ed. K.C. Hanson; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002), p. 8

Brief Reflections on Jesus Creed

Sometime ago I finished reading over Scot McKnight's The Jesus Creed and I thought I would reflect on it briefly.

First, I enjoyed the book as a joyful and uplifting departure from the rigours of academic study (after reading Bultmann's History of the Synoptic Tradition for an hour, Jesus Creed was quite refreshing).

Second, it is good to see a scholar trying to bridge the gap between academic study and devotional writing. There are some influential "Jesus" devotionals out there. Phil Yancey's book The Jesus I never Knew is a good read, though at times some of us in the academy may think of his historical judgements as somewhat naive. There will always be a danger for academics to retreat to their ivory tower and write massive tomes on subjects that are so specific, very few people in the pews would understand or even care. For all his failings, Bultmann's books (and in his lectures I'm told) would always carry the question: "So what? What does this mean for us?"

Third, there are some excellent vignettes in the book, esp. those of John Goldingay and Dietrich von Hildebrand.

Fourth, the book at times is conjectural on what it would be like for Joseph or Mary to be in their situation, etc. Some might think that his pushes the boundaries somewhat, but the speculation is reasonable and restrained.

Fifth, the chapter on "Jesus Creed as a Table" is a chapter I wish all communion/eucharist leaders would read.

Sixth, I would perhaps have liked a bit more of the Jesus of John's Gospel in there (although cameos appear); perhaps a christological devotional book on the Fourth Gospel can be a further writing project for Scot!

Seventh, the book is useful as a devotional for individuals, families, and groups and would probably do well also as a spiritual formation course text book.

Eighth, otherwise, the book compels, challenges and inspires us to make the Jesus Creed our creed, that is to live out the Jesus Creed by loving God and loving others!

My first book!

I am pleased to announce that my first book, Jesus and the Origins of the Gentile Mission, is to be published by T&T Clark/Continuum in the Library of New Testament Studies and part of their Historical Jesus monograph series. Many thanks go to Rick Strelan, Bob Webb, Scot McKnight, and Ben Myers (who is currently on proof reading duties). Here's a preview of the books contents:

1. Introduction
2. 'Restore the Kingdom to Israel': Jesus, the Gentiles, and the Restoration of Israel
3. 'No Crumbs for the Dogs': Negative Remarks about Gentiles and Restrictions of Jesus' Mission to Israel
4. 'A Kingdom for the Birds': Sayings About Gentiles
5. 'I Have not Found Such Faith in Israel': Narrative Material About Gentiles
6. A Light and a House for All Nations: The Rationale for the Salvation of the Gentiles
7. Conclusion

Stanley Porter on Textual Criticism and Acts

Over at Evangelical Textual Criticism, I have posted an entry entitled: Stanley Porter, the Book of Acts, and Textual Criticism. There Stanley Porter gives his thoughts on textual criticism and the Book of Acts.

Book Reviewed Unto Death

I don't know if there is a record for the highest number of book reviews done in a month (I can only assume that Tobias Nicklas holds the record), but I must be getting close. Within the last 30 days I've read and reviewed:

Larry Hurtado, The Lord Jesus Christ (ERT).
Jonathan Knight, Jesus: An Historical and Theological Introduction (RTR).
Carl B. Smith, No Longer Jews: The Search for Gnostic Origins (RTR).
Dale C. Allison, Resurrecting Jesus (JETS) - just started!

3.5 down and 3 to go!

At the moment I'd like to wrap my poor tiried brain around a Simpsons comic strip. Instead, I'm going to go refresh it with Jesus Creed.

EABS Historical Jesus Seminar

The historical Jesus research group of the European Association of Biblical Studies is meeting at Károly Gáspár Reformed University in Budapest on the 8th of August (the 6th to the 9th of August includes the annual EABS conference at Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Piliscsaba, near Budapest. The topic for the historical Jesus group is: Jesus Meets Christianity. The conference details are viewable here.

Hab. 2.4 in the DSS

Hab. 2.4 (along with Gen. 15.6) was one of Paul's favourite texts upon which to argue for righteousness by faith for Jews and Gentiles (see Rom. 1.17 and Gal. 3.11). There are interesting things happening in various texts of Hab. 2.4 including differences in the MT, Paul and variations in mss of the LXX. Another factor of interest is how Hab. 2.4 is treated in the commentary on Habakkuk in the DSS (1QpHab 8.1-4).

"Interpreted this concerns all those who observe the Law in the House of Judah, whom God will deliver from the House of Judgement because of their faith in the Teacher of Righteousness". (Vermes)

Two things come to mind:

- "Life" here seems to mean deliverance from judgement (from a historical event or from eschatological judgement?)
- "Faith" includes observance of the Law, but also faith/trust/loyalty directed towards the Teacher of Righteousness and his teachings.

Chrysostom on Christ and Mercy

I was gazing over at Ben Witherington's website (which is a good source for NT study gems and movie reviews) and found this quote from John Chrysostom, old golden mouth himself:

“Mercy is the highest art and the shield of those who practice it. It is the friend of God, standing always next to him and freely blessing whatever he wishes. It must not be despised by us. For in its purity it grants great liberty to those who respond to it in kind. It must be shown to those who have quarreled with us, as well as to those who have sinned against us, so great is its power. It breaks chains, dispels darkness, extinguishes fire, kills the worm and takes away the gnashing of teeth. By it the gates of heaven open with the greatest of ease. In short mercy is a queen which makes humans like God.”--- Chrysostom (Catena 13)

Bart Ehrman and William Lane Craig to debate on the resurrection

Now I know that Ben Myers thinks that apologetics is about as useful as a Reggae band an Klu Klux Klan Konvention. I am also more than aware that Jim West would not be bothered if Jesus’ bones were discovered tomorrow (afterall, who needs an empty tomb when you have kergyma!!!), but I must report on a topic that centers on the historicity of the resurrection. There is to be a forthcoming debate between William Lane Craig and Bart Ehrman on the resurrection.

March 28, 2006
Holy Cross College, Worcester, Massachusetts
Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?
Debate with Bart D. Ehrman
Contact Charles Anderton
canderton@holycross.edu
Debate Website

Craig is probably the most competent and capable Christian apologist of our day. He did one doctorate in Philosophy of Religion at Birmingham under John Hick and a second doctorate in Theology in Germany under Wolfhart Pannenberg. I’m seen his debates on video, the net and read several of his works – and he is one sharp cookie. He has this ability to take in a lot of information, process it, critique it, and fire off counter-responses with greater speed and accuracy than an MP5/10 SMG (Joe Cathy will know what I’m talking about!). He has already debated Dom Crossan and Gerd Lüdemann on the resurrection and they were interesting exchanges. I'm sure that Ehrman will make for a worthy opponent for Craig and he'll push Craig to the wall if he can. I wish I could be there this the debate – it would be a hoot.

One of my many highlights at SBL was meeting Bill Craig at Tom Weeden’s seminar on K. Bailey’s oral tradition theory. As a young Christian I found his scholarship very helpful and illuminating and it was a pleasure to meet him in person. His website is available here.

Latest JSHJ

The latest issue of Journal for the Study the Historical Jesus 4.1 (2006) is out and includes the following articles:

Paul Foster
"Educating Jesus: The Search for a Plausible Context"

Craig A. Evans
"Assessing Progress in the Third Quest for the Historical Jesus"

Michael F. Bird
"The Criterion of Greek Language and Context: A Response to Stanley E. Porter"

Stanley E. Porter
"The Criterion of Greek Language and its Context: A Further Response"

John S. Kloppenborg
"Holtzmann's Lie of Jesus according to the 'A' Source: Part 1"

Reviews Wanted!

Does anyone have access to early reviews on the following volumes:

John Nolland, Matthew (NIGTC). [I nearly purchased it at SBL].

Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonicalj-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology.

Nothing other than my own personal interest drives this request.

Jesus as God

I'm going to post a few pieces around the place on Jesus as God. I thought I'd begin with the famous quote from John Knox (not the 16th century reformer, but the 20th century NT scholar).

“I, for one, simply cannot imagine a sane human being, of any historical period or culture, entertaining the thoughts about himself which the Gospels, as they stand, often attribute to him.”

(John Knox, The Death of Christ [1959], p. 58; cited in I. Howard Marshall, The Origins of NT Christology, p. 43).

Rudolf Bultmann and Jesus Christ Superstar

I once preached a sermon called "Andrew Lloyd Weber, a Journalist and Three Guys called Jesus". I won't bother explaining the details, but it was an amusing introduction and it got the audience into the mood of asking "Who is Jesus?". The musical Jesus Christ Superstar is one my favourites. I cannot help but say that its opening song reminds me of Rudolf Bultmann. The song is called "Heaven on Their Minds".



My mind is clearer now.
At last all too well
I can see where we all soon will be.
If you strip away the myth from the man,
You will see where we all soon will be. Jesus!
You've started to believe
The things they say of you.
You really do believe
This talk of God is true.
And all the good you've done
Will soon get swept away.
You've begun to matter more
Than the things you say.

Listen Jesus I don't like what I see.
All I ask is that you listen to me.
And remember, I've been your right hand man all along.
You have set them all on fire.
They think they've found the new Messiah.
And they'll hurt you when they find they're wrong.

I remember when this whole thing began.
No talk of God then, we called you a man.
And believe me, my admiration for you hasn't died.
But every word you say today
Gets twisted 'round some other way.
And they'll hurt you if they think you've lied.
Nazareth, your famous son should have stayed a great unknown
Like his father carving wood He'd have made good.
Tables, chairs, and oaken chests would have suited Jesus best.
He'd have caused nobody harm; no one alarm.

Listen, Jesus, do you care for your race?
Don't you see we must keep in our place?
We are occupied; have you forgotten how put down we are?

I am frightened by the crowd.
For we are getting much too loud.
And they'll crush us if we go too far.
If they go too far....

Listen, Jesus, to the warning I give.
Please remember that I want us to live.
But it's sad to see our chances weakening with every hour.
All your followers are blind.
Too much heaven on their minds.
It was beautiful, but now it's sour.
Yes it's all gone sour.

Listen, Jesus, to the warning I give.
Please remember that I want us to live.
C'mon, c'mon
He won't listen to me ...
C'mon, c'mon
He won't listen to me ...

You've got alot of stuff here: Jesus never claimed to be the messiah, demythologizing, too much realized eschatology, a distorted oral tradition, a church more influenced by Hellenistic mystery cults than anything else. I can't help but think that if Tim Rice hadn't written the lyrics, Bultmann would have been a good fall back! I would love to teach a course on Jesus and Film one of these days - sounds like alot of fun. Now, I wonder what Myers and West will have to say on this topic?

Note I: before I embarked on a career in NT studies I always wanted to be a lyricist and write West End/Broadway musicals. Two things stopped me: first, the industry is very political and hard to break into; second, I cannot read or write music!

Note II: In the Australian production of Jesus Christ Superstar in the early 90s, the part of Jesus was played by John Farnham and Herod by Angry Anderson (this will only make sense to Australians). During the song by Herod/Anderson. There is a point where Herod/Anderson stops mid-song (not in the Script), throws his hands in his face in frustration, and opines that: "He think's he's God!". The audience, myself included being the vehemently anti-Christian 19 year old I was at the time, responded with an eruption of laughter - Jesus claimed to be God, what a silly man he must have been! Perhaps I shall blog on Jesus as God sometime soon.

Stranded on an Island and you had teach a NT course ...

Let's say, hypothetically, that you get stranded on a remote Island with natives that have strange and peculiar customs (e.g. New Zealand, Tasmania, Newfoundland, Isle of Lewis), you were able to convert the natives to Christianity, and they all wanted you to teach them seminary level NT subjects. You only have enough credit on your phone to SMS Amazon for one book order and you only have enough credit left on your credit card to buy 8 books (which is covenient since you have 8 courses to teach). Here's the subjects they want to learn about.

NT 101
Jesus and the Gospels
Luke-Acts
Gospel of John
Romans
Pauline Theology
Hebrews
Revelation

So, what eight books do you order?

Here's my list:

NT 101 - David DeSilva, An Introduction to the New Testament.
Jesus & the Gospels - Scot McKnight, et. al., Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels
Luke-Acts - I. Howard Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian.
Gospel of John - John Pryor, John: Evangelist of the Covenant People
Romans - Douglas Moo, Romans (NICNT)
Pauline Theology - James Dunn, Theology of the Apostle Paul
Hebrews - Craig Koester, Hebrews (AB)
Revelation - Greg Beale (NIGTC)

What is your pick?

News, Quotes and other Stuff

It is with great sadness that I report that John Piper has been diagnosed with prostate cancer. The full story is available at Christianity Today. Piper has a very influential ministry that focuses on the glory of God in the life of the believer.

Here is also a quote from Mark Allan Powell that many of us should take to heart lest our exegesis, our theologicizing and even our biblioblogging become too cerebral:

We cannot have a relationship with our christology - we can have a relationship with Jesus Christ.
Our soteriology cannot save us from our sins - our Saviour can.
Our ecclesiology does not make us one - the Lord of the Church does.
Our eschatology will not transform this flawed universe - Jesus the King of kings and Prince of Peace will do that.
And, no matter how much we love theology - it will never love us back.

Bauckham has a volume coming out on eyewitnesses to the Jesus tradition. This reminds me of a quote from John P. Meier, Marginal Jew, vol. 1, pp. 169-70:

All too often the oral tradition of the early Church is depicted as a game of “anything goes,” with charismatic prophets uttering anything or everything as the words of the Lord Jesus and storytellers creating accounts of miracles and exorcisms according to Jewish and pagan models. The evangelists would simply have crowned this wildly creative process by moulding the oral tradition according to their own redactional theology. One would get the impression that throughout the first Christian generation there were no eyewitnesses to act as a check on fertile imaginations, no original-disciples-now-become-leaders who might exercise some control over the developing traditions, and no striking deeds and sayings of Jesus that stuck willy-nilly in people’s memories.

A good journal worth checking out is Mishkan which has good articles on Jewish Christianity by scholars such as Craig A. Evans, Richard Bauckham and others. On the site is also an advertisement for Oskar Skarsaune's new volume We Have Found the Messiah! Jewish believers in Jesus in antiquity. I hope to get a copy myself.

Last night I was reading over Othello and came across one of my favourite quotes that reminds me of my wife:

"That my youth suffer'd. My story being done. She gave me for my pains a world of sighs".

Finally, I've attached a link to the latest issue of Novum Testamentum that has some good articles to read over.

What I'm reading - Origins of Gnosticism

My latest read is this volume by Carl B. Smith, No Longer Jews: The Search for Gnostic Origins (2004). There is a review at RBL by Philip Tite. The contention of Smith is:

“My contention in this book is that evidence regarding the religious intellectual milieu, geographical context, and chronological sequence of clearly gnostic teachers and documents point to an early second-century rise of the gnostic religion in the Jewish intellectual centers of North Africa. The crisis out of which Gnosticism arose was not that of the Jewish revolts of Judea; rather, it was the lesser-known revolt that originated in Cyrenaica and Egypt in 115-117 C.E. during the reign of the Roman emperor Trajan.” (p,4)

“It is entirely possible that Hellenistic Jews responding to the disappointment of the revolt, Jewish Christians uniquely impacted by the disaster, and/or Gentiles intimately acquainted with Judaism and seeking out to distance themselves from it, forged the gnostic system out of the intellectual and religious ruins of this event.” (p,4).

There is also a list of the salient aspects of Gnosticism from Birger Pearson (Gnosticism, Judaism, and Egytpian Christianity [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990], 7-9) on pages 11-12:

• Gnosis. It was gnosis rather than faith or law that were the requisites to salvation.
• Theology. There is a transcendent supreme God over the god or powers responsible for the world in which we live.
• Cosmology. The world was created by a lower god/power inferior to the supreme God and the world is a prison of human souls.
• Anthropology. Human beings are constituted by inner self, divine spark, that originated in the transcendent divine world and by means of gnosis can be released from the cosmic prison and return to its heavenly origin.
• Eschatology. The eventual salvation of the elect from the material world via gnosis.
• Social. Gnostics founded communities and were not wholly individualistic.
• Ritual. Gnosticis had their own religious ceremonies.
• Ethical. Asceticism and withdrawal from sex and procreation.
• Experimental. Joy in the salvation won by gnosis.
• Myth. Elaborate myths of cosmic creation.
• Parasitical. It borrows from other systems of belief.

For another good summary of gnosticism see Bart Ehrman, Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenium, pp. 74-75. Available on Amazon for a full search. Search under gnosticism on the . Amazon webpage

New Blogs

I have come across several a new blog Theology and Biblical Studies by Steven Harris.

There is also Vindicated by Kyle Potter currently studying at Regent Park College at Oxford.

There is also a good review of Wright’s new book “Paul: Fresh Perspectives” by David Field.

Resolutions

On the topic of New Years resolutions and goals for the year (see also Sean Winter) I always take great inspiration from reading Jonathan Edwards Resolutions which marks out his goals for life. It is something I read every year to keep me fresh in my pursuit of godliness and professional excellence for the cause of Jesus Christ.

Otherwise, my goals for the year include:

Professional

- Write two books, one on Jesus and one on Paul.
- Write three journal articles on the Historical Jesus and the parting of the ways, diversity in early Christianity, and the Marcan community.
- Write an essay on Mark and power in weakness for a volume.
- Read all of the books I purchased at SBL.
- Give earnest attention to the spiritual and academic development of my students.
- Present papers at ETS and SBL and attend Tyndale conference

Spiritual

- Not to go to bed without praying first
- Not to have breakfast without reading my Bible first
- To commit myself to the growth of Christians in the church in which I serve

Messianic Secret in Mark

Jonathan Knight in his recent book on Jesus makes a good point about the messianic secret in the Gospel of Mark (pp. 138-45). Knight writes:

"The secrecy of which Mark speaks is not the secrecy of someone who is replacing one concept of Messiahship with another. It is the secrecy of someone who believes that he possesses heavenly secrets, revealed to him at the baptism and (so Lk. 10.18 suggests) conceivably at other points in his ministry. The secrecy of the Jesus movement, I suggest, is the secrecy of an apocalyptic community. It is founded on the belief that the secrets of the end-time have been revealed to a privileged seer - Jesus himself - and that, in line with the conventions of the apocalyptic tradition, these must be kept preserved within the elect group until the time of their more general disclosure." (p. 142).

Oh no! My wife has her own blog!!

My dear wife Naomi has got her own blog (she's such a copy-cat). It is called: The Bird’s Nest. There you will get all the goss on yours truly, as well as comments on what is happening in our lives. So visit the site at your own risk. For those interested, here is a shot of the bodacious babe herself. She is highly qualified with a Ph.T (putting hubbie through!).

Peter William's Review of Ehrman Misquoting Jesus

Peter Williams at Evangelical Textual Criticism has a good review of Ehrman's book, Misquoting Jesus. I highly recommend it.