In our profession you have to be collegial, scholarly, and mostly boring; but seriously, how cool would it be if people could review other person’s works in RBL like this guy’s review for the film Old Dogs? That’s mostly a rhetorical question. The correct answer is: awesome. Way more awesome.

I would never miss an issue

If “Old Dogs” were a person, I would stab it in the face.

Millions of years from now, after Western Civilization has fallen and the Earth has ruptured and cooled and been reborn and a new life form has taken over the planet, if any of them happen to stumble upon a working DVD player and a copy of “Old Dogs,” they will sum up the passing of our culture with two simple words:  ”Good riddance.”

If you truly hate your family and you’re all trapped together this weekend, and you reeeeeally want to punish them and show them just how little you value their joy, then by all means, pile into the car and rush out to find a theater playing “Old Dogs.” But if you have any self-respect at all, and if your time and your brain cells mean anything to you, then skip it.  It’s not ironically awful.  It’s not so bad it’s great.  It is a soul-crushing experience, depressing and sad, bad enough to make me retroactively wish away the careers of all involved. [read the whole thing HERE]

I can see my RBL review of Tilling’s first book now if I was allowed to write this way:

“I don’t want to ruin his book for you, but let me give you a little context: it’s horrible. If Tilling’s book was  a person I would punch it in the face…”

Tell me you wouldn’t want to read that review. Oh well, I guess that’s why we have our blogs.

“Dr.” Rexella Van Impe

Seriously, how the [expletive deleted] can they advertise this woman as a doctor every week? For meshiach sake the friggin’ announcer is a Dr. now. Why the sheol am I in grad school if I can declare myself a Dr. and make scads of money? Scotteriology may be changing in the near future starting with many requests for money based on my doctoral (sort of) credits! I would love to see Rexella’s PhD thesis… I can imagine it now “Oh Jack: Theories in BS and Even Worse Dispensationalism.”

Dr. Jack

If you had been wrong as many times as Jack you would look this crazy too!

Or maybe he’s just remembering the last time he walked into the room and Rexella was uncovered… yep, you would be intrigued too!

Did I say intrigued? I meant horrified…

Soo intrigued…

I mean: definitely horrified.

So moving on.

Finally, our last separated at birth couple:

Dr. J & Dr. K

I can’t tell you how hard it was to get these two to stop chest-bumping, high-fiving, and finishing each other’s sentences at their horn-hat party for literalists… and yet somehow get individual pictures.

Here is the photographic proof of two lost souls who found each other and fell in love with the  ideological mindset of the other soul they had been searching for. Can we even tell their religious positions apart?

There is only one question: How long until we have Dr. Jim’s Thinking Answers In Genesis?

… or alternatively titled, “How to Destroy Your Career in One Essay” by Holger Bech Nielsen and Masao Ninomiya who claim that the Large Hadron Collider is being jinxed from the future to save the world… that or God. You know: one or the other. Take your pick.

Nielsen and Ninomiya claim in their paper The Search for Effect of Influence from Future in Large Hadron Collider that “the hypothesized Higgs boson, which physicists hope to produce with the collider, might be so abhorrent to nature that its creation would ripple backward through time and stop the collider before it could make one, like a time traveller who goes back in time to kill his grandfather”.

They also conjecture whether God may have shut down the Collider to keep it from discovering the elusive Higg’s Boson, or “God particle”. Neilsen says, “It must be our prediction that all Higgs producing machines shall have bad luck. [God] rather hates Higgs particles, and attempts to avoid them.”

This reminds me of a Karl Marx quote:

Philosophy is to reality as masturbation is to sex

Except in this case we can insert “Nielsen and Ninomiya’s thesis” for philosophy, and “ridiculous crap” for everything else in the sentence.

I wonder how well their methodology would play out in the biblical studies discipline?

What affected the Chronicler’s theology? A counter theology was so abhorrent it rippled through time causing him to change the story.

Why JEDP? All theories of one author shall have bad luck. God attempts to avoid them.

How many authors are there in Isaiah? There is only one, but he traveled back in time from after the exile to during the exile, and finally, to before the exile. His writings from these three time-traveling episodes is what makes it appear as if there is more than one author for the book.

Somehow I imagine that the time-traveler or God card wouldn’t get me very far in many of my academic papers, or would be rewarded with a favorable grade.

And that’s why you always have a peer review your work before submission… just in case something like this makes sense to you during a late-night writing session.

Or you could have a blog. You know: one or the other. Take your pick.

News articles on the silliness: HERE and HERE

The hoped audience for this post is all of those out there in biblioblogdom whom are still unsure, or outright negative, towards the new affiliation between the SBL and Biblobloggers.

Last week I asked: with this year’s section “SBL National Film Premiere! Finding God in the City of Angels: Scriptural Communities and Dynamics in Los Angeles” (p 57 in your program guide) could any other section in the history of the SBL really not be appropriate? That’s a rhetorical question: the answer is no.

However, amongst the many other good arguments for such an affiliation, Daniel and Tonya, indirectly make the best statement for such an affiliation with their extensive list of bloggers presenting at SBL. I offer here a truncated version of their much fuller offering. Do be sure to check theirs out as well.

The amount of presenters, respondents, and panelists who count themselves amongst the biblioblogging community is very impressive. The breadth and depth of scholarship they are involved in is stunning. The number of professors and grad students involved is authoritative.

This is not a group of nobodies in the basement about whom no one in the field has heard of typing fringe theory articles about which no expert in the field agrees with.

These are active members in the SBL and the larger biblical studies community who also see the medium of the internet as a valuable way to disseminate their ideas in a more popular fashion.

Is there any University that is this well represented at SBL? Is there any entity such as “bibliobloggers” that has this many active participants at this year’s SBL? Looking over the list again the question in my mind is not: should there be an affiliation between the SBL and bibliobloggers? To ask that question is, at this point, irrelevant as the affiliation has been set up. In addition, an excellent chair and steering committee has been appointed.We should deal with the situation that is, not complain about the situation that isn’t.

The question going forward: how can so many active members of the SBL, who also have an active web presence,  make some sort of positive contribution to the field? Of course, there are many more important questions. Feel free to leave them in the comments as I am interested in what some of you have to say on the matter.

Bibliobloggers reading, responding, or sitting as panelists at this year’s SBL:

Saturday the 21st

African Biblical Hermeneutics – Celucien L. Joseph
Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity – Jeffery Garcia
Institute for Biblical Research – Peter Enns
Bible and Cultural Studies – Roland Boer
Bible and Visual Art – Chris Heard
Biblical Hebrew Poetry – Ros Clarke
Careers Outside the Classroom – Chris Spinks
Christianity in Egypt: Scripture, Tradition, and Reception – Christian Askeland
Contextual Biblical Interpretation – Joseph Kelly
Disability Studies and Healthcare in the Bible and Near East – Bryan Bibb
Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism - Jim Davila
Redescribing Early Christianity – James Crossley
Second Corinthians: Pauline Theology in the Making – Sean Winter
Biblical Greek Language and Linguistics – Steve Runge
Computer Assisted Research – Mike Heiser
Intertextuality in the New Testament Consultation – James McGrath
Levites and Priests in History and Tradition – Stephen Cook
Nag Hammadi and Gnosticism (Celebrating Pagel’s Gnostic Gospels) – April DeConick

Sunday the 22nd

Hebrew Scriptures and Cognate Literature – David Melvin
Johannine Literature – Ken Brown
Josephus – David Miller
Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew – Steve Runge
Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible – Daniel McClellan
Academic Teaching and Biblical Studies – Karyn Traphagen; Tim Bulkeley; G. Brooke Lester
Exile (Forced Migrations) in Biblical Literature – Stephen Cook
Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism – April DeConick
Second Corinthians: Pauline Theology in the Making – Ben Blackwell

Monday the 23rd

Aramaic Studies – Chip Hardy
Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah – Chris Brady
Construction of Christian Identities – J. Brian Tucker
Greco-Roman Religions – Phillip Harland
International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies- Phillip Marshall
Nag Hammadi and Gnostcism - Deidre Good
National Association of Professors of Hebrew – John Hobbins
Pauline Epistles – Jason Staples
Sacrifice, Cult, and Atonement – Andrew McGowan
Synoptic Gospels – AKM Adam
Things I Wish I Knew about Doing a PhD – Kevin Scull
Best Practices in Teaching Workshop – Karyn Traphagen
Book of Psalms -Art Boulet
Teaching Biblical Literature in an Undergraduate Liberal Arts Context - Bryan Bibb
Assyriology and the Bible – Alan Lenzi
Christian Theological Research Fellowship – AKM Adam
Computer Assisted Research – Robert Cargill; Mark Goodacre
Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism – David Larsen
New Testament Textual Criticism – Tommy Wasserman
Pseudepigrapha – Jim Davila

Tuesday the 24th

Bible Translation – John Anderson
Book of Acts – Kenneth Schenck
Construction of Christian Identities – Pat McCullough
Function of Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphal Writings in Early Judaism and Early Christianity – Stephen Carlson
Ideological Criticism - James Crossley “NT Wrong and the Bibliobloggers”
Intertextuality in the New Testament Consultation – Nijay Gupta
Matthew – Ben Witherington
Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible – Michael Langlois; Mike Heiser

On Tuesday, October 6, from 2:30-4:30 in Alumni Hall Prof Scot McKnight will present a paper entitled, “Gospel of the Kingdom” with discussion to follow. This event is hosted by Dr. Tom Hatina and his NT Exegesis Class (RELS 611). A coffee reception will follow.

Scot McKnight is the Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies at North Park University (Chicago, Illinois). Dr. McKnight obtained his Ph.D. at the University of Nottingham (1986). He is a member of the Society of Biblical Literature and the Society for New Testament Studies. He is the author of more than twenty books, including the award-winning The Jesus Creed: Loving God, Loving Others (Paraclete, 2004), which won the Christianity Today book of the year for Christian Living. Recent books include Embracing Grace: A Gospel for All of Us (Paraclete, 2005), The Story of the Christ (Baker, 2006), Praying with the Church (Paraclete, 2006), and The Real Mary: Why Evangelical Christians Can Embrace the Mother of Jesus (Paraclete, 2007). A recent book, A Community called Atonement (Abingdon, 2007), has been nominated for the Grawameyer Award. He broadened his Jesus Creed project in writing a daily devotional: 40 Days Living the Jesus Creed (Paraclete, 2008). His studies in conversion were expanded with his newest book, Finding Faith, Losing Faith (Baylor, 2008), a book he co-authored with his former student Hauna Ondrey. His most recent book is The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read the Bible (Zondervan, 2008).

Forthcoming books include a commentary on James (Eerdmans) and BodyTalk: Fasting in the Christian Tradition (W Publishing, 2008/2009).

Other books include Who Do My Opponents Say I am? (co-edited with Joseph Modica), Jesus and His Death (Baylor, 2005), A Light among the Gentiles (Fortress, 1992), A New Vision for Israel (Eerdmans, 1999), Turning to Jesus (Westminster John Knox, 2002), Galatians (Zondervan, 1993) and 1 Peter (Zondervan, 1996), Interpreting the Synoptic Gospels (Baker, 1988), and he is a co-editor with J.B. Green and I.H. Marshall of the award-winning The Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (IVP, 1992) as well as the co-editor, with J.D.G. Dunn, of The Historical Jesus in Current Study (Eisenbraun’s, 2005). He regularly contributes chapter length studies to dictionaries, encyclopedias, books and articles for magazines and online webzines. McKnight’s books have been translated into Chinese, Korean, and Russian.

You can check out McKnight’s  blog, Jesus Creed.

Dr. McKnight will also be speaking in chapel on October 6-7 at 12:00 pm

From Jim West’s article in the October issue of  Teaching the Bible

“When you prepare a report or a project, you draw on sources—perhaps an encyclopedia such as Britannica or Wikipedia… the tool scholars use to figure out what sources, or materials, biblical authors drew on.”

What the? Wikipedia? The tool scholars use?

All this time Jim’s ranting against Wikipedia has merely been a smokescreen to keep us from realizing where he was drawing his sources concerning archaeology, the Bible, and Zwingli. Surely such a shocking revelation may send him tumbling down the ranks of the Biblioblog Top 50.

Click The Smoking Gun to see the evidence yourself.

Most likely many of you are aware that the announcement of an affiliation between the Society of Biblical Literature and Biblioblogs was not greeted with open arms by all individuals. While the conversation between those that were yea, nay, and on the fence was occurring I did not really have an opinion to add to the conversation.

So in the proverbial “Day late and dollar short” fashion I am going to offer my two cents after the dust has settled and no one cares… except for that one dude that quit blogging: he cares too much.

My SBL program came in the mail and I opened its pages and among the sections: SBL New Testament Mysticism Project Seminar, Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Minorities in the Profession Committee, Adventist Society for Religious Studies, and others. You know: whatever, but definitely not my thing.

But two sections particularly caught my eye as relevant to the biblioblogging discussion: SBL Bible and American Popular Culture, and SBL Bible and Film Consultation.

It seems that the SBL has a prior interest in mediums other than the academy or commentaries in which biblical studies is represented. The internet and blogs can be reduced to medium and message in which some people trained in the discipline of biblical studies are disseminating ideas about biblical studies in the medium of blog posts.

To complain about a group of like minded individuals that may see this medium as a valuable tool for some sort of biblical studies gathering to discuss the use of that tool is as about as valid as me complaining about the section: SBL National Film Premiere! Finding God in the City of Angels: Scriptural Communities and Dynamics in Los Angeles (p 57). Do you know how I’m going to respond to this section?

I’m not going to go to it. There are some derogatory comments I want to make about it, but I’m going to leave it at: I’m not going. I’m becoming collegial and all!

Before complaining about the SBL biblioblogging affiliation might I suggest taking a full perusal through the SBL program guide. I think you’ll find that the SBL Biblioblogging section is more than a legitimate section among the many biblical studies conversations that are already happening at the convention; perhaps, more legitimate than some others.

I basically took September off and still managed to stay in the Top 12. I wonder how much continued output at my current rate will affect my numbers in October? Probably not good…

For the last couple of days I have been priveleged to sit and hear about the Dead Sea Scrolls from Hanan and Esther Eshel. While many brilliant observations were made by both Drs, the highlight for me was this humorous gem from Hanan at the free public lecture on Thursday evening talking about the Copper Scroll

There is a lot of interest in the Scrolls, so some of the people involved are going to be… weird. And it seems to me that all of the weird people are attracted to this scroll.

If you said to me, “Hanan of all the Scrolls if one of them was never to be found, which one would you choose?” I would give up the Copper Scroll.

Love it. Someone tell Cargill he has a new quote for his next savaging of Barfield. without any capital letters of course.

For his Wednesday lecture Dr. Hanan Eshel lectured on How Can We Learn Political History from the Dead Sea Scrolls? which covered material from his book The Dead Sea Scrolls and The Hasmonean State, of which I got a signed copy. Yay me. Eshels’s primary conclusion is that opposed to a group of scholars in Israel who are committed to the idea that the Hasmoneans were really good kings the DSS really back up historians such as Josephus that the Hasmoneans were not so good Jewish kings.

On Thursday Dr. Esther Eshel lectured on The Kuntillet Ajrud Inscriptions and her work on translating and interpreting these inscriptions. The important question from Kuntillet is the references to YHWH and his asherah. Asherah was a Semitic goddess and the consort of El so the argument from inscriptions such as this is that YHWH had a girlfriend that was worshiped as well. However, Dr. Eshel proposes that the inscriptions at Kuntillet do not allow this understanding as the verbs surrounding YHWH and asherah are all singular and asherah should be understood as a lowercase “a”. An understanding that would mean YHWH and his holy place, or dedicated thing. So maybe the pole but not the girl.

On Thursday evening Dr. Hanan Eshel lectured on The Archaeology of the Dead Sea Scrolls to a packed house at the TWU auditorium. While Dr. Eshel covered many basic events surrounding the discovery of the Scrolls his lecture was interspersed with so many personal stories, such as being a student of Yadin, that it was probably the most fascinating lecture I have heard on the discovery and archaeology of the Scrolls.

I have been invited to spend some time with the Eshels tomorrow during Shabbat and talk all things Dead Sea. This is exciting for me as Hanan Eshel is on the organizing committee for the Enoch seminar and is a wealth of information.

Shabbat Shalom indeed!

Which is a little different than “Right On Gnosticism”…

Which I suppose could even be construed differently depending on your emphasis. One could be like directions, “Right, on gnosticism.” The other like you’re cheering it on, “Right on, Gnosticism!”

Anyways, Chris Tilling in his bi-weekly post (or is it bi-monthly now?) directed his reader’s attention to the YouTube channel created by St John’s of Nottingham and their growing collection of fine videos.

Yesterday’s addition is interesting for two reasons. One, Bishop Wright talks of gnosticism ancient and modern and makes a couple of salient points. As someone who has to deal with modern gnostics on a consistent basis–and the worst kind: those untrained in any of the disciplines of philosophy or theology–I enjoyed this video.

Second, at the end of the video there is a brief advertisement for a project of which this video is a part. The production value is obviously high in this sample video, and the quality and value of this project as a whole looks to be top notch as well.

Enjoy: