General


fragmentsoftruth-poster-4764daea9cfce7b93e08a35aa6f47d0c
My colleague Craig Evans has helped create a great documentary that I got to see about a month ago. If you are free Tuesday, it will definitely be worth your time. Here’s the summary:

The Christian faith is based on the New Testament—but can we really trust the Bible? Skeptics say no, arguing that the Gospel manuscripts have been doctored to push a theological agenda. In this new Faithlife original film, Dr. Craig Evans (@DrCraigAEvans) takes this claim head on, traveling the globe to track down the most ancient New Testament manuscripts. Along the way, he highlights groundbreaking new evidence, demonstrating that the case for the reliability of the New Testament manuscripts is stronger than ever.

Fragments of Truth is showing in cinemas on Tuesday, April 24 only.

https://www.fathomevents.com/events/fragments-of-truth

Advertisements

For those who will be in Boston on Friday, Nov. 17th, for the first day of the SBL conference, please consider attending the IBR Pauline Theology Research Group, organized by Nijay Gupta and me (John Goodrich). This is the group’s second year in existence, and we have another great session planned. Please see the details below. Hope to see you there!

11/17/2017
3:30 PM to 5:30 PM
Room: Arlington (Third Level) – Boston Marriott Copley Place (MCP)

Theme: Research Group – Pauline Theology
Often scholars examine Paul’s theology in terms of his “soteriology,” that is, the themes and constructs that comprise and influence his theology of salvation. This session takes interest in better understanding Paul’s soteriology with focused attention on Paul’s “sin” language (especially hamartia and its cognates, but also key synonyms). Sometimes Paul appears to present sin and disobedience as self-conscious transgression; at other times it is personified and treated as an enslaving power. Is there a model or perspective that can account for these? And what does this tell us about the Christological, Theological, and Pneumatological “remedies” to the problem of sin as Paul conceives of them? For further information, contact Nijay Gupta (ngupta@georgefox.edu) or John Goodrich (john.goodrich@moody.edu). See also https://www.ibr-bbr.org/ (Click on Research Groups).

John Goodrich, Moody Bible Institute, Presiding
Nijay K. Gupta, Presiding
John Goodrich, Moody Bible Institute, Introduction (5 min)
Martinus de Boer, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Panelist (25 min)
Andrew Das, Elmhurst College, Panelist (25 min)
Break (5 min)
Nijay K. Gupta, Introduction (5 min)
Bruce Longenecker, Baylor University, Panelist (25 min)
Panel Discussion
Discussion (20 min)
Open Discussion
Discussion (10 min)

Call for Papers
National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion
Annual Meeting
Gardner-Webb University
Boiling Springs, NC
May 21 – 23, 2018

The National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion (NABPR) invites paper proposals in any area pertaining to scholarship in Religion.  In an effort to develop innovative conversations among scholars, papers which create integration between traditional disciplines or broaden the margins of disciplinary conversations are encouraged.   Although many NABPR members work primarily in the traditional disciplines of Biblical Studies, Church History, Theology, etc., proposals are encouraged from any field, including Ministry Studies.

Paper or panel proposals on any aspect of pedagogy related to the teaching of Religion are encouraged.

Proposals must be received by January 15, 2018.  Send a 300-word abstract to:

Doug Weaver
Department of Religion
Baylor University
One Bear Place # 97284
Waco, TX 76798-7284
Doug_Weaver@baylor.edu

  • Papers will be scheduled into a 30 minute time period, including discussion.
  • Proposals will be accepted or denied by March 1, 2018.
  • Graduate Students are encouraged to submit proposals.
  • The price of registration for Graduate Students is waived for the Annual Meeting.

Membership Requirement

Authors of accepted proposals must be members of NABPR in good standing by May 1. Authors must pay dues for the current year and be registered for the Annual meeting. Accepted Papers which have not met these criteria will be removed from the program. Inquires about dues and membership status should be directed to Joyce Swoveland: joyce_swoveland@baylor.edu

This year’s HBU Theology Conference takes up the issue of canon on March 2-4. Our plenary speakers are James Charlesworth (Princeton Theological Seminary) and Lee McDonald (formerly of Acadia Divinity College). Both are well-known for the contributions on this topic. We also have a great line-up of speakers on Friday who will speak on canonical criticism, various figures in church history and their views of canon, textual problems relevant to the question of canon, among other topics. There will be something for everyone.

You can find more information about the conference and registrar at www.hbu.edu/theologyconference.

The conference is jointly hosted with Lanier Theological Library (http://www.laniertheologicallibrary.org/). If you haven’t been to the chapel and library before, you certainly want to attend Saturday night’s double lecture. You can register for the Saturday lecture at laniertheologicallibrary.org/events.

The conference is also partly sponsored by Faithlife, makers of Logos Bible Software. They will have a display booth at the conference where you can preview and purchase Logos or upgrade your present version.

 

Sometimes it is popularly asserted that the Emperor and/or the bishops at Nicaea invented the idea that Jesus is God incarnate. Of course, that has been clearly refuted in scholarship, but conspiracy stories are so much fun and more interesting to pass along. I (Ben) am heading to give a lecture at Huntington University in a couple of weeks on Justin Martyr, Paul and the issue of circumcision, so I have been rereading the Dialogue with Trypho and was reminded of this gem on Christology:

Chapter 48 [1]“We have now heard your opinion on these matters,” interrupted Trypho. “Resume your discourse where you left off, and bring it to an end, for it seems to be entirely absurd and utterly impossible of proof. Your statement that this Christ existed as God before all ages, and then that He consented to be born and become man, yet that He is not of human origin, appears to be not only paradoxical, but preposterous.” [2] “I am aware,” I replied, “that my assertion must seem paradoxical, especially to you Jews, who were never in the least interested in knowing or doing the things of God, but only the things of your teachers, as God Himself testifies [cf. Isa 29.3]. However, Trypho, the fact that this Man is the Christ of God, is not to be denied, even if I were unable to prove that He, being God, pre-existed as the Son of the Creator of the universe and became Man through a virgin.

No nuanced reading or sophisticated hermeneutic to get the main idea here. Of course, the ontology of Nicaea is still wanting, but this is about as clear as an economic description of theology as you can get, and this is about 175 years before Nicaea. Irenaeus has equally clear statements about Jesus as God, dating to just a few years after Justin’s work.

I was asked to write a review of the NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible with a focus on Romans. My first Bible that I really read was the NIV Study Bible that was around in the early 90’s. It was a great aid to my faith and personal growth. I’ve not engaged a study Bible in years, so this was an interesting exercise.

This Bible follows the same format of most study Bibles, including general introductions, call out boxes, and footnotes. As with the title of the study Bible, the information helps explain the text but with a focus on the cultural background. Those materials include geographic details, social practices (Jewish, Greek, and Roman), rhetorical practices, and engagement with other texts such as the OT and Second Temple literature.

The general introductions were informative and the footnotes included a good bit of quick information. The notes are not not merely background information, but provide a helpful explanation of how the paragraph holds together: e.g., 1:18-22, which mentions Wisdom of Solomon, and 3.10-18, which notes the unifying factor of the quotes, not just sin but body parts (feet, eyes, and especially mouth).

These are the main call-out pages that give the a focused attention on topics: Rome Homosexual Activity in Antiquity, Adam in Jewish Tradition, Flesh and Spirit, Pure and Unclean Foods, and the Erastus Inscription. I found discussion of Homosexual Activity in Antiquity. It gives discussion of Greek and Roman practices and context. In particular, it focuses on older men with boys as well as the use of prostitutes and slaves. It explains the demographic basis about baby girls being more often discarded in ancient cultures, which leads to the focus on boys. Ultimately it describes the practices without prescriptive interpretations.

There are elements that are missing. There’s surprisingly little about justification here in Romans (or Galatians). There are only footnotes which by implication gloss justification with “acquittal”. That’s not a minor issue in the letter. While I’ve seen or heard most of the information here since this letter is a focus of mine, but I can say that there were elements that I wouldn’t have focused on but should have or hadn’t thought of. So, I’m a fan.

Thanks to Nijay Gupta for his favorable review of Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination (Fortress, 2016):

This is a timely book, offering thoughtful and thought-provoking reflection and debate on how Pauline scholars use the language of apocalyptic and apply it to the Apostle’s letters. I do not doubt that this volume will enjoy a long life of use, especially the early chapters that treat the critical matters of definition and methodology. Students of Paul will benefit greatly from this colloquium on Paul’s apocalyptic thought in context. (Horizons in Biblical Theology 38 [2016]: 242-44)

Next Page »