I'm going through some articles I've frittered away in hopes of using them in the paper I'm working on for the session.

However, they're just not going to really fit. I'm going to keep them in the bibliography and may even allude to them, but I won't be able to discuss them.

So, since they are (as far as I'm concerned) relevant to the discussion, I thought I'd post citations and links here. That way folks could start to poke through them and they might even prod some discussion during the panel session.

Here they are:

• Carter, Joe. Notes on Blogging: The 5/150 Principle. No pages. Cited September 8, 2005. Online: http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/001584.html.
• Mazzocchi, Stefano. Data First vs. Structure First. No pages. Cited July 29, 2005. Online: http://www.betaversion.org/~stefano/linotype/news/93/.
• Sifry, Dave. State of the Blogosphere, August 2005, Part 3: Tags. No pages. Cited August 6, 2005. Online: http://www.technorati.com/weblog/2005/08/37.html.
• Tauber, James K. The World Wide Web as an Academic Forum: A Case Study of the Hellenistic Greek Linguistics Pages. No pages. Cited August 11, 2005. Online: http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw95/education4/tauber/.

Of particular interest to me are the articles by Mazzocchi and Carter. I still may fit Mazzocchi in somehow, but not to the degree I'd like.

I don't blog about economics often,* but now is the time.

Steve Antler, whose blog is Econopundit, has an interesting idea on a new approach toward oil and our national energy policy.

Check it out.

Also check out this post Antler links to that discusses what oil shale is, and how it might be processable. Speculation? Sure. But we can dream, can't we?

Hey, I'm not an expert on any of these issues (economics, oil development) and I am certainly not advocating tax increases ... but it bears some thought, no? And Antler's method for stabilizing US oil import prices and providing some funds for domestic exploration is alluring, to say the least.

Note to potential commenters: I'm not ruling out or advocating against renewable energy resources (solar, hydrogen, wind, wave, whatever). I say bring 'em all on. But we're stuck with oil for the forseeable future, so we've got to do something.

* BA, Economics, Northwestern College, Class of '93.

The Fall 2005 Catalog from Baylor University Press includes a new title from Scot McKnight, Jesus and His Death. His primary blog is Jesus Creed, though there appears to be a blog for this book too. Here's the book blurb from the publisher:

Recent scholarship on the historical Jesus has rightly focused upon how Jesus understood his own mission. But no scholarly effort to understand the mission of Jesus can rest content without exploring the historical possibility that Jesus envisioned his own death. In this careful and far-reaching study, Scot McKnight contends that Jesus did in fact anticipate his own death, that Jesus understood his death as an atoning sacrifice, and that his death as an atoning sacrifice stood at the heart of Jesus' own mission to protect his own followers from the judgment of God.

As with a few other Baylor University Press titles,** I was granted a sneak peek at this new book from McKnight (Amazon lists the release date as Sept. 30). Page proofs arrived in August; I set the goal of finishing it before September ended, and ... it looks like I've just barely made it.

The subtitle of McKnight's tome says it all: "Historiography, the Historical Jesus, and Atonement Theory". That really does sum it up. After setting the scene in the first chapter, McKnight delves into things like:

• What did Jesus know about his death?
• When did he know it?
• How did his understanding of his death develop?

This leads into the primary discussion of the book: What can be concluded regarding the concept of atonement based on the conclusions we can make regarding Jesus' statements and actions?

Not being one who has followed synoptic studies that much, I did feel like I was stepping into the middle of a conversation, especially at the beginning of the book. McKnight interacts with other material published in this area to a large degree. But, to McKnight's credit, he does a good job of orienting the reader with the necessary background material, authors and their material (the footnotes are excellent in this regard, ignore them at your peril!).

That said, realize that this is not a casual read, though I found McKnight more readable than, say, N.T. Wright. Chances are you'll want to have a Bible available to look stuff up as you work through major sections. The work is worth it; the section working through the Last Supper was highly illuminating, at least for me.

All in all: worth the read. If you have interest in Historical Jesus studies, synoptic studies, and stuff like that -- you should probably read this book.

** Other Baylor Press titles I've written about: Stephen C. Carlson's The Gospel Hoax: Morton Smith's Invention of 'Secret Mark' and Bruce W. Longenecker's Rhetoric at the Boundaries.

Ed Cook (Ralph the Sacred River) got the ball rolling with a post asking about what sorts of topics might be discussed at the CARG Biblioblogger session at SBL.

Jim West (Biblical Theology) followed it up with a post of his own. For the record, Jim, if your 80 minutes on Zwingli includes a life-size, full-scale, History-Channel-style re-enactment of Zwingli, complete with armor, falling on the field of battle (followed by requisite moment of silence), I'd be up for it.

Since I've already got 20 minutes all to my lonesome (I plan on 15 minutes for presentation, five for questions relating to the presentation so as to not take away from panel time), I'm just along for the ride -- ready to add my two cents for whatever comes up.

But I'll happily suggest a few areas that would be of interest, at least to me:

• Role of Biblioblogdom in the realm of "Open (source) studies" (whatever those are).
• How has biblioblogging had an effect (positive or negative) on scholarship?
• How can the biblioblogosphere contribute to the starting, development and completion of academic projects?
• Are there projects (e.g. in-progress commentary series, translation projects like NETS, Digital Nestle-Aland Prototype, Compehensive Aramaic Lexicon, etc.) that could become a bit more transparent via blogging the trials, successes and status of the project? And would such transparency be productive or merely a distraction for project members?
• How can biblioblogging help authors (aspiring or otherwise) in their work on new manuscripts? Or, better, is there a role for biblioblogging in the development of material for publication (articles, monographs, dictionary entries, essays, whatever)?

Ok, that's about all I've got. Besides, I've already got 20 minutes of time, and I'm already running long.

Not much time to blog, but I did want to make a few notes:

First, Biblioblogs.com interviews Stephen C. Carlson. Read the interview. It's quick and good — good questions, good answers. Especially the one about which biblioblogs Stephen finds most interesting.*

Second, if you're into Greek and syntax, you've got to see this. If you're wondering why I'm not blogging much, that's one of the things taking up my time.

Third, worry not Hebrew syntax dudes (and dudettes). Check this out.

Fourth, if you've read ricoblog for awhile, you may recall some of my episodes in the realm of plumbing. Well ... more plumbing. Had a leak in a pipe in my front yard. Well beyond my skill, so I had to call in the plumbing ninja. I went with Favinger Plumbing in Bellingham, though Sullivan Plumbing seemed nice/capable, they were too busy (a not altogether bad sign). But kudos to Sullivan's for great customer service -- they directed me to Favinger knowing that I probably couldn't wait for them to get a plumbing ninja available. Plumber dude from Favinger did the trick quickly, professionally and with a smile on his face. All systems are go!

* And thanks for the mention, Stephen! Looks like I'll have to get busy and start back in with more interesting questions. I'm brewin' a few, hopefully I'll get one of 'em posted in the next week or so.

Well, not likely — I trust J.B. Lightfoot on this one.

Still, I just noted the following text that was recently uploaded to Project Gutenberg:

The Ignatian Epistles Entirely Spurious: A Reply to The Right Rev. Dr. Lightfoot, Bishop of Durham, by W.D. Killen

Here's an excerpt from the Preface:

This little volume is respectfully submitted to the candid consideration of all who take an interest in theological inquiries, under the impression that it will throw some additional light on a subject which has long created much discussion.  ... I [Killen] freely acknowledge the eminent services which Dr. Lightfoot has rendered to the Christian Church by his labours as a Commentator on Scripture, and it is therefore all the more important that the serious errors of a writer so distinguished should not be permitted to pass unchallenged.  All who love the faith once delivered to the saints, may be expected to regard with deference the letters of a martyr who lived on the borders of the apostolic age; but these Ignatian Epistles betray indications of a very different original, for they reveal a spirit of which no enlightened Christian can approve, and promulgate principles which would sanction the boldest assumptions of ecclesiastical despotism.  In a work published by me many years ago, I have pointed out the marks of their imposture; and I have since seen no cause to change my views.  Regarding all these letters as forgeries from beginning to end, I have endeavoured, in the following pages, to expose the fallacy of the arguments by which Dr. Lightfoot has attempted their vindication.

Sounds like Mr. Killen had a problem with Ignatian ecclesiology to me. Haven't read this, don't know if I will — but it will be interesting to see how convincing Killen's argument really is. From the preface, I'd guess he's going to argue that the state of church structure/order indicated by Ignatius' stuff is a later tyranny imposed by the Catholic church in order to justify a highly ordered (read: Pope & Bishops & Cardinals, oh my!) church structure from an early date. Again, I don't know that, but that's what I'd guess at this point.

Lightfoot was a big-time stud (and his arguments make sense); I think I'll go with him over this other guy.

Cruising the Logos Bible Software newsgroups this morning (news://news.logos.com) I noticed that a user posted a link to a review of a museum exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The exhibit (reviewed by the New York Times) is called Prague: The Crown of Bohemia: 1347-1437.

Diarmaid MacCullough's book The Reformation: A History (listed at Amazon for only $13.98, which is an incredible price for a hardcover book of this nature. I'd highly recommend purchasing if you have any interest in the history of the Reformation!) traces some of the history of Bohemia, so historical names, places and events mentioned in the review are familar to me.

The NYT review is great (though some portions are a bit much) and makes me wish I was there so I could go. Please check it out, and make sure to hit the slideshow for a few images — the badge from the Order of the Dragon is really cool!

Update (2005-09-27): Bob Pritchett, spending some time on holiday on the east coast, just called me to rub it in. He was in New York, wondering what to do for the day, so he decided to take the family to see the exhibit. He said it was pretty cool. But he didn't even get me any gift shop swag as thanks for pointing him there ...

Hi Folks.

You've no doubt noticed that I haven't been blogging much lately. The blogging dearth will continue, I think, until the ETS and AAR/SBL conferences.

That's not to say I won't blog, but I won't be blogging as frequently as I have in the past few months.

I've got a lot of stuff on my plate for the conferences (both for Logos [check it out!] and for myself) so I'll be keeping busy.

By the way, if you read ricoblog, and you'll be at either (or both) of the conferences, feel free to drop by the Logos booth and look for me. Or if you'd like to schedule a meeting, let me know. I'd love talking with you further about any common interests we may have.