briack-a-brack 15/11/10 Bumper Edition

So much on the blogosphere in the last few days, this is almost another carnival. Sorry if i have missed a hat tip or three, but you know i've linked to your blog before and will do so again so let me off for a rush job in marking season please!

Biblical Studies

Mike Bird shares a couple of papers responding to NT Wright
Another couple of papers on Paul and Scripture
Mark Goodacre has a trio of papers on Mark's gospel
Daniel Kirk shares an insanely interesting post on ancient readers
Jim makes a hash of 1 Cor 7, I'd love to show why he's wrong, but not today
John Byron decides God doesn't hate divorce in Mal 2:16 after all
There is a new tool for the study of Paul's letters, it does look luscious!
Hurtado gives his list of important recent developments in NT/Chritsian origins and it is a doozy!
Duane thinks some more about snake omens and their possible relation to Gen 3

Theology

Byron Smith offers some help for all those struggling with converging global crises
Scott McKnight reflects on the difficulty we have getting the gospel clear
William Birch considers God's feminine side
Jason shares some radical Dorothy Day quotes
Bruce Hamil preaches on Luke 20:27-38
Ben Myers wants us to stop smiling
Richard Beck on complicity, which has long been an ethical topic i've wanted to research

Misc

Rich Walker contemplates the future of global english
Some wisdom from Eberhard Jungel on answering stupid questions
The mighty John Hobbins on which Bible translation to use

Language Aquisition Through Nursery Rhymes

Well today is Saturday and yesterday's blogging was all pretty text heavy, so here is the fruit of my searching for a Baa Baa Black Sheep video for my daughters this morning.  Interestingly the top search results were all Indian education videos, all different yet wierdly the same.  This one features a "cutie pie blah shee," whatever that is.



This one has a very wierd sheep smoking hard on a pipe and walking on two legs.  We have a lot of sheep in NZ but I've never seen one do that.



But this is probably the trippiest one.

Nursery Rhymes Baa Baa Black Sheep Songs with Lyrics - Click here for the most popular videos

The Germans, on the other hand, still promote their own nursery ryhmes, no Indian versions of this, this one might be useful for those learning German for theological or biblical study



And this one will give you a unique insight into American English, where you may not mention anything below the waist by its real name.

bick-a-brack 20/10/10

• The conversation about pastors and biblical languages continues and Jim suggests a good way to keep them up
• The Dead Sea Scrolls are going digital
• Milk is more interesting than you think
• Laussanne 2010 is bigger than the World Cup, at least in one sense

Should Pastors Know Biblical Languages?

A bit of debate on this subject has been caused by John Byron posing the question.  He is answered in the strong affirmative by both Jim and Scott.  Although Jim goes a bit overboard, and seems to think that everyone is capable of the sort of output he is (they're not, Jim is, in this sense at least, exceptional) he does have a point that most pastors are not as overworked as they claim to be, it is more a case of what things they give priority to in their time, if they don't see the ponit of biblical languages then they won't make time for them. 

Scott makes an even more valid point, that pastors with no language training often then try and use what little Greek or Hebrew knowledge they have to add a little magic authority to their sermons.  At this stage they are playing with smoke and mirrors, relying on the ignorance of their congregation to get away with what a first year language student could spot a mile off as dishonest and incompetent. 

I don't think we can expect every pastor to be proficient in biblical languages, I do think if everyone did at least an introductory course in Greek and in Hebrew they would at least be aware of how little they do know and of how different and alien the biblical languages are.  If you have never tried to translate something yourself, you will struggle to comprehend the complexity of the translation process in producing English translations and you will not handle them accordingly.  It is a crying shame that more and more seminaries do not have compulsory language courses, the church will rue this trend in decades to come.

To make a positive reccomendation, I wonder if there is a growing need for some sort of provision for pastors to either start or continue their language study as professional development?  We send pastors away to do leadership and counseling courses, why not biblical exegesis and language courses? 

Brueggemann on the Hebrew Text of Scripture

I think i've come across this quote or one like it a few times before, but just found it again and thought it well worth sharing.

The text, in its very utterance, in its ways of putting things together, is completely unfamiliar to us.  The utterance of the primitive God of scripture is an utterance that is in unfamiliar mode.  Let me say what I mean.

Hebrew, even for those who know it much better than I do, is endlessly imprecise and unclear.  It lacks the connecting words; it denotes rather than connnotes; it points and opens and suggests, but it does not conclude or define.  This means it is a wondrous vehicle for what is suggested but hidden, what is filled with imprecision and inference and inuendo, a vehicle for contradiction, hyperbole, incongruity, disputation.  Now the reason this may be important is that in a society of technological control and precision, we are seduced into thinking that if we know the codes, we can pin down all meaning, get all mysteries right and have our own way, without surprise, without deception, without amazement . . . without anything that signals mystery or risk.

from Walter Brueggemann, Deep Memory, Exuberant Hope, 2000, p3

Koine Greek Anyone?

If you are thinking/dreaming of learning NT Greek one day, have a read of this list of things you need to know and take note of Daryl's very pertinent commentary.

Today!

Today I have printed off my thesis for submission and spiral bound it, I feel giddy.
Today I also entered the illustrious ranks of the Biblioblog top 50 at no.33, making me even giddier.
(and yes Jim you are still #1, but Jesus is #1 in my heart)

Not only that but don't miss

• The way language affects thought
• The need to actually know the Bible
• The August Biblical Studies Carnival
• Hurtado on historically conditioned scripture
• A priceless Gordon Fee quote on Revelation
• A deeper than you think rant on contemporary (sic) worship

For the love of language

I am thinking of becoming a linguist...
yes i know it is not something you can become, you have to be "gifted"...
but, despite never showing much promise with language, my biggest educational regret is not having stuck at the different languages I had the oportunity to learn. and of course there will be many mistakes and misunderstandings caused by such an endevour, like this one, recounted by George,

On a lighter note, discussing the danger inherent in learning another language, Ed Loving shared an unfortunate episode where a man was recounting that his wife could not bear children:

His first attempt to share this information was, “My wife is inconceivable.” Noting that this was not received well, he tried again: “She is impregnable…” Still facing a great language barrier, he finally tried, “She is unbearable!”

I also don't expect i will ever catch up with those who started when their brains were fresher and more maleable... but if there is one thing I am getting better at with old age, it is turning regrets into motivation for action. As they sing in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang: "from the ashes of disaster grow the roses of success!"

Quote of the day

on using Greek and Hebrew in your preaching...
"Wear your knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew language like you wear your underwear - it is needed for support, but it is embarassing if you display it publically."

Thanks to Paul Windsor writing from Pakistan

Why All Theology is Contextual and Why It Matters

For the last forty years there has been an increasing shift in the academic study of theology towards an understanding of theology as contextual. This is both a good thing and a scary thing and its something everybody needs to get a handle on and understand. I am currently reading a book called Models of Contextual Theology by Stephen Bevans (Orbis, 2005) which I found for a bargain price on Trademe (the NZ version of EBay). I thought I would share my reading/thinking with you on the blog and I would appreciate your thoughts, whether you can see the relevance and importance of thinking contextually, and how the insights of thinking about faith contextually affects your own thinking. What follows here is not so much from the book as a prelude to the book from me. After this I intend to deal with the book chapter by chapter...

What is contextual theology?

Contextual theology is an insight coming from the post-modern era that essentially recognises that depending on who, where, and when you are things can look very different than if you were someone, somewhere, sometime else. This obvious when we apply it to something like fashion. In the 80's fluro socks and 'power ties' were the height of fashion. Wearing clothes like that now would be a shortcut to ridicule. Old music videos that were once the height of cool are now the epitome of kitch. Now that is fine for something obviously changeable and subjective like styles of clothing or dance moves but surely that cannot apply to issues of truth? Surely if God is real then theology should be like maths. 2+2=4, how can who, where, when you are change that? Well Theology, like maths, is language dependant, the language you use enables you to express concepts but also limits you in the concepts which you can express. Not only that, but your language is embedded in your culture which creates further potential but also limits the concepts you can express. Now I expect that 2+2=4 in any language, but once you try and explain concepts like 'pi' or the 'square root of the hypotenuse' then you are relying on concepts and language that has been especially created around those concepts. If you do not know those concepts then maths is meaningless. For theology the situation is more extreme because all theological language is analogy.

Why is all theological language analogy?

If I say "there is a rock" and point somewhere, and you know what the word rock means, then you can look at what I am pointing at and see if there is a rock there or not. But what happens when we say something like "God is a/my/our rock"? When I say that you do not think of the same thing that you think of when I say "there is a rock." Instead you think analogically: perhaps that God is big, unmovable, reliable. That is certainly what I tend to think of when I read such language in the Bible. But what if I come from a tribe in a rain forest where the only rocks are small and good for throwing at monkeys? To say "God is my rock" has a very different meaning, the analogy does not work. Now suppose I am from a culture that has lots of big dependable rocks but no concept of a supreme being called God. If you say "God is my rock" I merely think you have a rock, whose name is "God." The difference between talking about rocks and talking about God is that you can take someone who has never seen a rock to a rock and say "there is a rock." But when you are talking about God you are always reliant on comparing God to something else because you cannot actually point to God. Now while those example were a little extreme to make the point what happens everytime Christianity is brought to a new culture and/or language the analogies we use potentially take on a different meaning. So theology must be done in a way that is aware of the way culture/language changes things.
Here is a more likely example: I am used to talking about God as 'Father,' because I came from a stable and happy family home this is a positive image for me. But what is my context was different? what if I had had an abusive father? Would that still be an apropriate analogy if the word 'father' only meant hurt and betrayal and abuse? It surely wouldn't. Either the word would need to be filled with a new meaning or a new analogy found. But regardless of positive or negative experiences of 'father' how does a 21st century western experience of 'father' differ from a 1st cetury middle eastern one? Are the analogies the same or are there subtle differences? How do we decide if those differences are important or not? And how do you decide if the analogy needs to be replaced or if you can just modify it a little?

Why is Islam like Maths?

Now Islam gets around this problem the same way that Maths does. Rather than try to translate concepts from one culture to another, if you want to comprehend those concepts you simply need to learn the language. So to become Muslim you really need to become, at least in part, Arab. The scripture must be learnt in Arabic. The prayers must be said in Arabic. and your lifestyle and world view must become, in part at least, Arabic. (This is of course a broad generalisation) If you want to learn Maths you simply cannot avoid learning the language of Maths. But Christianity is different because it carries in its very DNA the drive to jump culture and context rather than transplant the same culture/language everywhere. In the Bible the same God is worshipped, encountered, and described in various Hebrew (tribal, monarchial, and exilic) and Greek (Judean, missionary, persecution) Contexts. To do theology you do not have to be a Hebrew or a Greek, you only have to be yourself. But to do it well you do need to be aware how who, when and where you are can affect what you read and think and know. And when you do that you are doing contextual theology, theology that is aware of its own context.

Let me know what you think :)