# Sunday, July 09, 2006

 ... in which "my good friend Roberto" will explain the major points (or at least some of the major points) of where he differs with my take on the authorship of the Pastoral Epistles.

Roberto can be a little blunt, so I thought I should warn you of what's coming.

Update: Roberto just emailed what he wants me to post. I'll have it up on Monday. He makes his point, that's for sure. Hope y'all enjoy it.

[Reminder: Opposite Day is tomorrow, July 10, 2006. Join us and have some fun.]

Post Author: rico
Sunday, July 09, 2006 7:43:32 AM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
# Friday, July 07, 2006

Today was Logos Chili Day, but unfortunately I caught a bit of the flu or something, so I took off just before the festivities started.

But I did bring in my chili, which I made on the morning of July 4. And it turns out I came in second place! Now if I'd only been there to vote for my own chili ... maybe Eli wouldn't have won. But I'm sure his chili (called "Chilisaurus Rex") was yummy.

For Logos cook-offs, each entrant makes a sign. Mine is below, followed by the recipe.

Here's the recipe I based the Pork chile Verde on: http://pork.allrecipes.com/az/ChilVrdII.asp.

I did the following:

Ingredients:

  • 2.5 lbs pork ribs, country style, no bones.
  • 2 28oz cans Tomatillos
  • 11 Jalapeno peppers (note: control heat by amount of Jalapenos)
  • 1 bunch cilantro
  • 1 massive walla walla sweet onion
  • 3 tbsp garlic (or however much you want)
  • Spices: Salt, Chili Powder, Red Pepper, "mexican seasoning", Ground Mexican oregano. Don't be bashful with these.

Process:

  1. Cube ribs. Trim off major fat chunks but be sure to leave some fat there.
  2. Pulverize Tomatillos and Cilantro in food processor (or blender, or whatever).
  3. Pulverize Jalapenos (including seeds!) similarly.
  4. Chop Onion (I used a food processor for this too).
  5. Brown cubed pork in Dutch Oven. Do this with the spices (don't be shy!). I browned the pork in corn oil.
  6. When brown, remove pork. Reserve 2 tbsp drippin's in pot, pour balance of drippin's in container with pork. Don't lose that juice, that's flavor!
  7. Saute chopped onion & garlic in Dutch oven (in reserved drippin's).
  8. Add pulverized jalapenos after a few minutes
  9. Add Tomatillo/cilantro mixture after a few minutes
  10. Add the cubed/browned pork after a few more minutes
  11. Simmer for half an hour
  12. Remove from heat, let sit in refrigerator for 3-4 days. Like Eli, I cooked on the morning of July 4 and let it sit in the fridge until I brought it in.
  13. Heat in crock pot on high for 2.5 hours.
  14. Turn heat down to low. It's ready to go!

Of course, you could probably just eat it at step 12; though I'd probably simmer 45 minutes to an hour if I was eating it the same day.

Enjoy!

Post Author: rico
Friday, July 07, 2006 8:06:34 PM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
# Thursday, July 06, 2006

I was digitising some images earlier tonight for a slideshow thinige that'll run during the wedding reception. Here are some of my faves of my former self.


My second birthday. Wasn't I a cutie?


I was convinced I would get cooties from
putting my arm around my cousin. Can't you
tell from my expression? But the pic made
the grown-ups happy. And I remained
blissfully cootie free.


Look at those pipes! I was a wonder to behold,
wasn't I?


Must've been a cold day at the beach.


I'm in the brown coat waving. The guy in the
red is my older brother, Chuck. I have no idea where
this photo was taken.

Post Author: rico
Thursday, July 06, 2006 10:02:28 PM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]

You should probably check out Steven Harris' (Theology and Biblical Studies) recent post, On finishing my studies. Some quotes:

"Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of studying theology is the questions that we begin to ask. Questions are the means by which we open up doors to exciting and challenging new adventures, but they are often also the means by which that which is familiar and comfortable can quickly unravel and fall apart."

...

"Theology was not, I quickly discovered, a matter of simply assembling proof-texts, baking them with my own presuppositions, and then voila! - producing doctrines by the dozen. Early on I learned that the most important lesson that I think anyone can ever learn in studying theology is to understand the mystery of God. For every question you answer as a theologian, you raise twenty more. We can never apprehend God or exhaust the depths of his being, we can only truly know him in wonder and in reverent awe."

It's a good post. Read it. Of course, I don't agree with everything he writes, but it will cause you to think — and that's good. So go check it out.

Post Author: rico
Thursday, July 06, 2006 9:46:42 PM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
# Wednesday, July 05, 2006

One of my favorite non-biblioblogs, Marginal Revolution, has an occasional feature called "Opposite Day". On Opposite Day, the primary bloggers Tyler and Alex don their alter egos "Tyrone" and "Axel" and play devil's advocate, arguing opposite what they normally would.

I'm wondering if this could be a productive thing in the realm of biblioblogdom. I've thought for awhile about "opposite blogging" on my PastoralEpistles.com blog, using it to think through some issues from a perspective opposite of my normal views.

Just think of the possibilities:

  • A Mark Goodacre alter ego blogging about Q
  • A Jim West alter ego blogging about the archaeological reliability of the Hebrew Bible
  • [insert your own opposite here]

Anyway, just a thought. Perhaps in the near future biblioblogs.com could attempt to orchestrate a biblioblogdom-wide "Opposite Day" where folks opposite-blog on the issue of their choice?

Update: Loren Rosson (The Busybody) comments here and responds favorably on his own blog. Jim West (Dr. Jim West) offers support and commits to a post. Thanks, gents! With that response, I'll take the lead and declare "Opposite Day" to be Monday, July 10, 2006. That'll give us all a little time to think over the weekend and write something up for Monday's blog readin'.

If you'd like to participate, you certainly may. Just send me a link to your blog and "Opposite Day" entry and I'll list them in a post on Monday. I'd recommend the following for posts:

  • Introduce your question/topic. It can be anything, really, as long as you're arguing opposite what you normally would. Arguing against known positions is always enlightening (for reader and writer) but don't feel bound to that.
  • Introduce your alter ego. I think this is important, we'll need to make sure that no future google searches stumble upon these entries leading folks to think you yourself are actually supporting something completely opposite of what you normally would. I think Tyler Cowen's example of always introducing "my good friend Tyrone" as the author, then blockquoting as if he's copied the text in from an email, is a good model.
  • Make your (alter ego's) point. You can be short or long, doesn't matter. You might be surprised how well your alter ego can argue.

So let me know via email [text geek at g mail dot com is the address] or comments here if you'll participate!

Post Author: rico
Wednesday, July 05, 2006 4:34:43 PM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]

Mark Goodacre, Loren Rosson and Pete Phillips [update: and Michael Barber] have provided answers to Francis Ward's questions. So here's my quick stab (note emphasis on "quick"):

1. How long have you been blogging?

My blog, ricoblog, has been active since August 2004.

2. What got you started?

I'd blogged internal to the company I work for (Logos Bible Software) for about 10 months previous to that. It seemed that ricoblog was the logical next step. I'd read some Biblical Studies blogs regularly (Stephen C. Carlson's Hypotyposeis, Mark Goodacre's NT Gateway Weblog, and Jim Davila's PaleoJudaica) and began to interact.

3. Do you have a history of diary/journal/log writing beforehand?

Not really. I just write; I wouldn't classify my writing as a journal or diary. I think through issues when I write, so many times my writing is complete meandering (yes, I can see y'all's eyes rolling here) instead of a tightly formulated statement I'd be willing to fight for.

4. How in your own mind do you negotiate the boundary between private and public? E.g. are there things that you would not put on your blog that you would put in a journal?

Since I don't write a journal I can't really answer this question. But yes, there are things I don't blog. For example, I try to stay completely removed from things political. I'd hate for someone to disregard the blog because they don't agree with my politics. The converse of this is true as well, I wouldn't want someone to read what I write just because we have a similar political perspective.

5. How do you decide? What criteria do you use for inclusion/exclusion?

There are no criteria. When I feel like posting, I post.

6. How much time, on average, do you spend blogging each day or week?

This goes in spurts, distilling an average wouldn't be meaningful. For example, right now my blogging is rather light because life is busy planning a wedding and a honeymoon (yee-haw!). I'm guessing blogging may perk up again as the 2006 SBL Meeting approaches.

7. How many other people do you actively engage with — e.g. are part of your blog community?

I interact with a subset of the blogs listed on biblioblogs.com. I at least skim them all. My interaction has become less and less as there have become more and more biblioblogs. There's just no way to keep up with them.

8. Who is your readership — literally; as far as you know?

I think my highest percentage of hits come from folks looking for recipes for balsamic vinaigrette. Outside of that, readers are those interested in Biblical Studies, perhaps doing graduate-level work or those teaching at colleges, seminaries or other graduate level institutions. And Logos Bible Sofware users are readers as well.

9. and metaphorically? Do you imagine someone to whom you write/with whom you engage?

Not really. I'd like to think folks who share similar interests with me and who can interact. I also like to ask general questions when I know readers know more about something than I do, for instance, which version(s) of Irenaeus to purchase.

10. What counts as successful blogging?

Because I primarily blog to think through issues (large or small), successful blogging is that which helps in the process of grappling with an issue—be it exegetical or otherwise.

11. What does blogging offer as a method of theological reflection?

I don't do much "theological reflection" blogging. Some theological reflection is inevitable with the kinds of issues I write about (say, examining the structure of a passage and working through how that might inform exegesis) but I wouldn't say it is a method. From my perspective, it is a side effect, and a minor one at that.

12. What potential do you see for blogging as a method of theological reflection?

For someone who "does theology", blogging would be a great way for them to share their working through theological issues or statements.

13. Do you know of examples of theological education programmes where students are required to keep a learning journal and blog as a form of journal?

I've heard of such things anecdotally, but have no actual examples.

14. Blogging and gender: do you think gender makes any difference to any of the above questions?

I think people are different and therefore will blog differently. Gender is one way to qualify those differences. I could likely pick any other either/or criteria (blue eyes vs. brown eyes?) and make assumptions as to how it may or may not affect blogging. But focusing on one aspect denies the importance of the whole package.

Post Author: rico
Wednesday, July 05, 2006 3:23:46 PM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
# Saturday, July 01, 2006

So head on over to Daily Hebrew and check out BSC:VII. H.H. Hardy has done a great job. Heck, ricoblog is even mentioned, so it's gotta be good!

Post Author: rico
Saturday, July 01, 2006 1:32:56 PM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
# Thursday, June 29, 2006

Apparently they do. I stumbled across it searching around for other things today.

Even better, because I'm really not interested in most of the stuff on there, is their weekly etymology post (on Wednesdays) by Anatoly Liberman.

[non sequitur]

That reminds me, while we're on the subject of etymology, earlier today a colleague happened upon Ac 16.35-38 and noted that the word the ESV translates "police" might come from something originally meaning "guys with sticks". Of course I reminded him that this makes perfect sense because our English word "police" is really just a compound of "pole" and "ice" that hearkens back to the time when ice chunks were a valuable commodity. These "pole-icers" would use their poles to chunk the ice for sale. Because the ice was so valuable, they also started chasing away ice bandits with their poles ... effectively "policing" the area and securing the ice from ne'er-do-wells. We see the heritage today in the clubs that most policemen carry.

(Yes, that is sarcasm, not a bit of it meant to be serious. Please laugh along with me. Next we'll discuss the etymologies of "butterfly" and "cupboard" ... )

Post Author: rico
Thursday, June 29, 2006 1:49:01 PM (Pacific Daylight Time, UTC-07:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]