Update: French Theological website

Our old website (Theological French/Français théologique) has been corrupted so we recreated and imported all the information to our new website: http://theologicalfrench9587.wordpress.com. It is, however, under the same blog title : Theological French/Français théologique

No Male or Female?

No Male or Female? : A Conversation on St. Paul and Women took place recently ( April 7, 2008) at Duke University. The invited guests were two fine NT scholars, A.J. Levine (Vanderbilt University) and Ben Witherington (Asbury Theological Seminary). They had a good time discussing this important issue. Click here to listen
source: Socratic Club Two Views
By the way, here’s the controversial text:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave[a] nor free,(B) there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus

– Gal. 3:28

Ken Miller on the Scientific Process

Darron suggested that I should listen to Ken Miller’s talk on what so-called the “scientific process.” Miller is a christian and an evolutionary Biologist who rejects the Intelligent Design (ID )theory. Here’s what he had to say:

Graeco-Roman sources for NT Students

Mike posted a “reading list” on (or about) various Graeco-Roman literatures that he thinks will be useful for students of the NT, especially, those who want to be acquainted with the world and society which gave birth to our New Testament canon. Here’s the list:

1. Read Menahem Stern on Greek and Latin Authors and Jews and Judaism which is a great resource for what pagan authors thought of Jews.
2. Read lots of the articles out of Dictionary of New Testament Background edited by Evans and Porter.
3. Read Homer which was the “Bible” of Hellenism.
4. Read some histories like Herodotus, Suetonius, Tacitus.
5. Read at least one of the rhetorical handbooks by Quintillian or Aristotle.
6. When it comes to Paul read the Hellenistic Commentary on the New Testament by Borging, Berger, and Colpe (I imagine Helmut Koester’s Cities of Paul and Paul and His World would be also helpful).
7. Read or eat Loeb Classical Library volumes for breakfast.
8. Read or beg, borrow, or acquire as many volumes of New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity as you can legally acquire.
9. Read or at least peruse David deSilva’s Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity: Unlocking New Testament Culture.
10. Although I haven’t read it, The Greco-Roman World of the New Testament Era: Exploring the Background of Early Christianity by James S. Jeffery looks readable and informative.
11. Try read as much papyri (Greek magical or Oxyrhynchus) and archaeological stuff as you can find, esp. anything by Johnathan L. Reed and more recently John McRae’s book on archaeology looks good too.
12. Get your church, seminary, or university to send you on a study trip to Greece and Turkey .

The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple: Bauckahm and Lüdemann Forum

Today I begin my first reading of Bauckham’s “The Testimony of the Beloved Disciple” as part of a coming review as well as a projected conversation between Bauckahm and Lüdemann. According to Dr. West, the forum is scheduled for Sunday, April 13. (read it here Bauckham Colloquium Kicks off Sunday). Million thanks to Caitlin Mackenzie at Baker Academic for sending me a review copy.

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

At Big Science Academy we take our motto seriously: “No Intelligence Allowed.”
And this year, we are proud to report that in every subject but Science, students and faculty are free to challenge ideas, and seek truth wherever it may lead.

But Science is different. In Science, there is no room for dissent, for dissent is dangerous. That is why we at Big Science simply refuse to allow it. Like dancing, “dissent” can lead to other things.

As Class President Richard Dawkins put it so well: “Shut up!”

As you know…last year we had the misfortune of “presupposition of design” rearing its ugly head, with several students challenging Neo-Darwinian materialism, and arguing incessantly for the right to examine Intelligent Design.

They were all Expelled, of course – but still: it just goes to show where academic freedom can lead, if not shut down immediately!

Sincerely,

Charles Darwin
Principal, President, Admissions and Diversity Affairs Officer,
Big Science Academy “No Intelligence Allowed”

The movie is scheduled to be released next Friday, April 18.

Noll’s lecture on Race, Religion, and American Politics

Mark A. Noll, perhaps the most prominent Christian Historian in America, gave a series of lecture on “Race, Religion, and American Politics from Nat Turner to George W. Bush” at Princeton University. Click here to listen

Part 1: ``The Bible, Slavery, and the Irrepressible Conflict`
Pt 2 – The Churches, `Redemption,` and Jim Crow’
Pt 3 – `Civil Rights, the Republican Alliance, and the Endurance of Evil in the Land of the Free`

Thoughts on Luke-Acts: Conzelmann (Part II)

In his momentous work, The Theology of St. Luke, Hans Conzelmann endeavored to set Luke in context. Conzelmann was one of the earlier pioneers (around 1960) to come up with a Theology of Luke and Acts. To understand Conzelmann is to define what theology is and not, especially from Luke’s perspective. Theology is faith seeking understanding. It is the immediate positive response to God’s revelation (Anselm). The theology student is driven to seek understanding of his/her faith. That understanding is what constitutes theology. Bultmann, however, reminds us that the “kerygma” is evangelism. The kerygma has no theology about it, it is simply a response to God’s call, said Bultmann. Evangelism calls for a decision which is timeless. There’s an obvious split between a narrative and kerygma. Conzelmann draws theological conclusions from the narrative. That is what Luke had recorded for us. He could say that all theology of Acts is in the speeches (recorded, edited, and modified by Luke).

Conzelmann argues that we must analyze the context with Luke’s own historical position had emerged. That is the context of the development of the church. It is only in this setting “can we understand how on the one hand he (Luke) looks back to the “arche” of the Church as something unique and unrepeatable, which presupposes a certain distance in time, and how on the other hand he looks forward to the eschatological events” (13). Luke’s work represents “ the immediate position between the beginning of the new age in the ministry of Jesus, and the final events of the messianic realm.”So Luke draws a picture of the course of saving history (Heilsgeschichte) orchestrated by God in Jesus Messiah. Conzelmann understands salvation history as represented by Luke in three various stages respectively:

1.The period of Israel ( Luke 16:16)
2.The period of Jesus’ ministry (not of his ‘life’), characterized passages such as Luke 4.16ff., and Acts 10:38.
3.The period since the Ascension, on earth the period of the ecclesia pressa, during which the virtue of patience is required and it is possible, by virtue of looking back the period of Jesus, also to look forward to the Parousia (16-17).

It is in this context, Conzelmann proposed, that Luke wrote his two volume work. He also reminds us that “The Parousia itself does not represent a stage within the course of saving history, but the end of it. It corresponds to the other extreme, the Creation (17).

Luke’s eschatology

Conzelmann proposes that if one wishes to see the peculiar features of Luke’s conception concerning eschatology, one has to reckon (evidently) with discrepancies between “the ideas in his sources and his own ideas.” (95)

The Spirit in Luke

In the quotation from Joel in the story of Pentecost (Acts 2:17ff), the Spirit is thought as a sign of the End, in the source and also in Luke, but the interpretation is different in each case. In their original sense the last days have not yet been expanded into a longer epoch, which is what happens in Luke’s conception of the Spirit and of the Church, according to which the outpouring of the Spirit is no longer itself the start of the Eschaton, but the beginning of a longer epoch, the period of the Church.” Moreover, Conzelmann maintains that the Spirit Himself is no longer the eschatological gift, but the substitute in the meantime for the possession of ultimate salvation; He makes it possible for believers to exit in the coming life of the world and in persecution, and He gives the power for missionary endeavour and for endurance” (95-96).

In other words, the Spirit is not an indication of the end of time but that you are part of the church. That in itself carries ethical implication and responsibility. The Spirit is the substitute until the Parousia comes. He is the substitute for salvation for now. The Spirit dwells in the church – it is more of a cooperate dwelling than individual. Joel does not have the notion of the delay of the Parousia but Luke does.

Thoughts on Luke-Acts: Knox (Part I)

Thoughts on Parson & Tyson’s Cadbury, Knox, and Talbert: American Contributions to the Study of Acts by Mikeal Carl Parsons by Joseph B. Tyson, eds. The following are my observations:

•Collectors of Paul involved in pseudepigraphy by attributing Ephesus to Paul (59)
•In Luke, Luke used earliest sources for the life of Jesus. In Acts, he wrote speeches for his heroes including Paul (59)

Knox’s Contribution (60-61)
•Jerusalem is the place Christianity originated
•The twelve disciples in Jerusalem exercised a careful oversight authority over the church
•Paul received his authority from the twelve
• Luke stressed existing harmony between Paul and the Apostles
•External (only in Acts, mentioned Paul by his Jewish name: Saul) & Internal markers (61)

Circumstances surrounding Paul’s conversion conflict with the testimony on the letters (62)

•Did Paul go to Jerusalem after his conversion?
1.Paul said no
2.Acts said Yes
3.Knox said the story in Acts 9:1-2 is not incredible, but improbable (62)

Missionary Journeys
•Knox notes that it is a matter of interpretation—they did not appear at all because they id not occur in the letters of Paul (62). Knox understands Paul’s 3 visit reports to be “acquaintances,” “conference,” and “offerings”.
•Paul’s visit with the twelve apostles in Jerusalem occurred at the peak of Paul’s career rather than earlier (62)
•Acts is a secondary source, limited in detail. Paul’s letters are the primary sources.
•Acts as a source for Paul’s external sphere (63)

Some basic methodology
•Principle, basic methodology
•Practice, ways in which the methodology is used (65)

Chronology of Paul
•Focuses on the genre not historical background of Paul’s letters (67)
•Paul paid 3 trips to Jerusalem (Paul’s letters), rather than 5 trips ( Acts)
•Ludermann used the letters of Paul as control documents in his redaction and critical study of Acts (69)
•Paul was an independent apostle, the only one
•The church accepted his letters because of their use by heretics, especially Marcion (73)
•Acts is called “The Acts of All the Apostles” in the Muratonian canon (74)
•Date of Acts – 1st half of the 2nd century, allowed for external references in both documents. Iraneus made the first reference to Acts, Justin Martyr used Luke (74)

Marcion & Acts of the Apostles (70)
•Knox rejected the traditional view of the relation of Marcion to Luke and argued that Luke was written in reaction against marcionism (71)
•According to Knox, the purpose of Acts was to encounter marcionite theology – How?

1)by emphasizing the relationship between Christianity & Judaism (i.e. continuity)
2)Luke places Paul among the apostles in Acts
3)Luke wanted not to attack Marcion but to attack
4)Luke-Acts is an apologetic response to marcionism and attempts to retain both a Gospel and Paul from the marcionite (71)
5)According to Knox, the marcionite Gospel serves as model fro both Luke-Acts and the orthodox canon (71)
6)The Marcion’s version of Luke is a proto-Luke, an abbreviated one (73)

More on Acts by Knox
•He places Luke-Acts in their life setting, their historical situations, a reference to a Christian community in their place and their connection with the Scriptures (Luke’s audience; 76)
•Date – A.D. 150 , no early than CE 125
•Purpose of Acts – to counteract Marcionie Christianity
•Failure- Knox’s hypothesis does not distinguish between tradition and redaction in Acts

The Synoptic Problem: A Case for Markan Priority

In a recent post ( Some Notes on the Synoptic Gospels) on the Synoptic problem, we discussed various approaches and positions taken by NT specialists as an attempt to come with a solution to various literary similarity and differences between Matthew, Mark, and Luke. I have to acknowledge, frankly, Markan priority proponents seem to have a better case to believe that the Gospel of Mark was the first Gospel to be written. Then, Matthew and Luke copied from Mark and Q. On the other hand, in my skeptical imagination, it is difficult to maintain there was ever existed a source document namely called “Q.” The Q hypothesis is quite interesting to me! Oh well, here’s what Robert R. Osborne and Matthew C. Williams, have to say in support for a Markan priority.

Text-critical arguments clearly and consistently support Markan priority and Matthew posteriority. Markan priority must nevertheless be examined in any particular example because there may be sporadic instances of primary readings in Matthew. The conclusion that just as Nestle-text is accepted as the original text, Markan priority is accepted, with a few exceptions. The kinds of readings in Matthew in comparison to Mark are the kinds of readings one finds in Mark’s apparatus in comparison to Mark’s text. In other words, Markan scribes made the same types of changes to Mark’s Gospel as did Matthew, if he used Mark’s text as a source. On the other hand, assuming that Mark used Matthew’s text as a source. On the other hand, assuming that Mark used Matthew’s text as source, the same types of scribal changes were not found. Thus, it is more likely that Matthew used Mark’s text rather than vice versa. Is Matthew a scribe? Yes and no. His purported changes to Mark’s Gospel are scribe-like in their improvements here or there. Matthew and Luke, it must realized , were not mere scribes commissioned to produce an accurate copy of a particular MS.; they were historians combining and freely rewriting their authorities. Anyone who uses the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament and does not agree with Markan priority is inconsistent because the same text-critical arguments that were used to establish the present Nestle-Aland text also establish that Matthew has secondary readings and Mark original readings. Text-critical criterian “so consistently move in the direction of Markan priority that one is compelled either to adopt the Oxford Hypothesis or jettison text-critical procedures in use by all scholars today

– (“The Case for the Markan Priority View of Gospel Origins” in Three views on the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels, Robert L. Thomas, ed.)

I also want to interject the following observations made by the late Textual critic, Bruce Metzger, as to the criteria in studying scribal changes.

Criteria in Studying Scribal Changes:
1- Source variant
2- More difficult reading
3- Author’s style, typical style or vocabulary
4- Less refined expressions
5- Smoother texts are later readings
6- Harmonization/Assimilation
7- Orthodox readings