I've recently devoured George K. Barr's Scalometry and the Pauline Epistles (JSNTSup 261), and found it interesting and thought-provoking.

If you've read it or if you've read/are familiar with is articles on the same topic, I'd like to pick your brain. I'm wondering what you think of it and if you're aware of any critical reviews. I checked RBL but didn't find any.

What do you think of his work? His conclusions? His methodology? Feel free to contact me via email if you have thoughts or pointers to interaction with his work.

Update: ricoblog reader Jan Krans (the author of the NA27 review cited in the previous blog post) responds with a pointer to a review article in the Journal of Greco Roman Christianity and Judaism. Jan also notes:

FWIW: the book lost much of its potential to me when I noticed that Barr regards for instance 1 Tim 3:1-16 as a later insertion (pp. 89.91), in order to detect the same 'scalometric' pattern as in the other Pauline epistles.

I can understand that to a degree (ditto for throwing out portions of Titus 1 for the same reason). But is this a reason to throw out Barr's work? He detected an anomaly and posited a solution. He could've also posited a solution like "Therefore 1 Timothy and Titus are not Pauline since they don't fit typical Pauline scale patterns" -- aligning with much of current scholarship that, properly or not, considers the Pastoral Epistles pseudepigraphs. If he'd have done that would his results be more palatable?

In other words, is it proper to throw out the whole of his work if one disagrees with one aspect of the conclusion? What about his argument applied to the other 10 Paulines?

Also, FWIW, I find Barr's proposal to consider 1Ti 3.1-16, Titus 1.7-9 and perhaps Titus 1.12-16 as non-Pauline somewhat intriguing. It removes the major ecclesiological portions from the letters and in so doing removes the "chronologically inapproriate eccelsiology" argument (aka the "Ignatian ecclesiology" argument) from those who would discredit Paul as author. We of course don't have good text-critical evidence for such a position, but it is an interesting thought nonetheless. At least to me.

Lastly, Barr's interaction with Anthony Kenny's work (Appendix C, "Scale Sensitivity", pp. 148-154) shows some promise and direction for future work in the realm of stylometry that takes Barr's scalometry into account.

I notice that TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism has a review of the NA27 edition, with apparatus, that is contained in the Stuttgart Electronic Study Bible (SESB). If you're a user of the NA27 in SESB, then you want to read this article. Do it now.

Here's the abstract of the review article, which is a 26 page PDF.

Abstract: The Stuttgart Elecronic Study Bible is a groundbreaking electronic publication. It contains the most widely used scholarly biblical texts, BHS and NA, as well as their critical apparatuses. In this extensive review article, Krans focuses on NA²⁷, especially its critical apparatus, though he frequently draws BHS and its apparatus into the discussion as well. He asks this question: What are the possibilities, surprises, limitations, and future prospects of the implementation of NA²⁷ in SESB 1.0?

Looking for other things related to Sahidic Coptic, I stumbled across this.

Someone typed up Metzger's list and PDF-ified it. If you're working with the Sahidic Coptic NT at all, chances are you'll find this word list (with brief glosses) useful.

Citation: Metzger, Bruce M. List of Words Occurring Frequently in the Coptic New Testament (Sahidic Dialect). Leiden: E.J. Brill. 1961.

Over on PaleoJudaica, Jim Davila notes that there will be a Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit in Seattle, over at the Pacific Science Center.

I'm really looking forward to it. Actually, one Saturday while the scrolls are in town (not sure which one, though), my employer (Logos Bible Software) is taking the whole company to see the show! So after I've seen what's there I'll be sure to report back.

Here's the exhibit web site, if you're interested: Discovering the Dead Sea Scrolls. They have some background on featured scrolls. They sound mostly fragmentary, though some interesting passages are represented. There are also some lectures associated with the scroll exhibit, though I don't know that I'll be getting down to Seattle for those.

[This is part of a running series on the Didache. See the introductory post for more information — RWB]

Phrasing/Translation

Αἱ δὲ νηστεῖαι ὑμῶν μὴ ἔστωσαν μετὰ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν.
Do not have your fasts with the hypocrites.

νηστεύουσι γὰρ δευτέρᾳ σαββάτων καὶ πέμπτῃ·
For they fast on the second day after the sabbath [Mondays], and the fifth [Thursdays].
   ὑμεῖς δὲ νηστεύσατε τετράδα καὶ παρασκευήν.
   But you are to fast on the fourth day [Wednesdays] and the day of preparation [Fridays].

μηδὲ προσεύχεσθε ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταί,
Neither are you to pray as the hypocrites,
   ἀλλ ̓ ὡς ἐκέλευσεν ὁ κύριος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ αὐτοῦ,
   but as the Lord commanded in his gospel,
   οὕτω προσεύχεσθε·
   pray in this way:
      Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ,
      Our Father who is in Heaven,
      ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου,
      Let your name be holy,
      ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου,
      May your kingdom come,
      γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου
      Let your will be done
         ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς·
         as in heaven so on earth;
      τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸ ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον,
      our daily bread, give us daily,
      καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὴν ὀφειλὴν ἡμῶν,
      and forgive us our debts,
         ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφίεμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν,
         as we forgive those indebted to us,
      καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν,
      and do not lead us into temptation,
      ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ·
      but rescue us from the evil one,
         ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας.
         because yours is the power and the glory for the ages.

τρὶς τῆς ἡμέρας οὕτω προσεύχεσθε.
Pray in this way three times daily.

Notes

This short chapter provides information on when to fast. The Christian is to differentiate fasting practice from the "hypocrites" by fasting on different days.

Additionally, the prayer of the Christian is to differ from the prayers of the hypocrites. No information on the prayer of the hypocrites is given, but a sample prayer is given to the baptismal candidate. It is the Lord's Prayer in the form we find it in Matthew (Mt 6.9-13) with one or two small differences ("in the heaven" Did 8.2 vs. "in the heavens" Mt 6.9).

The Christian is to pray this way three times daily. So, in the past few chapters, we've got a bit of insight into the life the baptismal candidate was expected to live. He was to fast for a few days before the baptism. He was to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays. And he was to pray the Lord's prayer three times daily.

Looking in this light, we begin to see that the Didache had information on how one who claims Christ should live. The practices described by the Didache are very practially oriented. Now, I don't want to get into legalism and works-based salvation, but sometimes it is good to be reminded -- as the Didache reminds us -- that our confession of Christ is to have visible effect in our lives. The Didache, then, recommended ways for Christians in the early church to evidence their confession.

Next: I'll probably have a short digression comparing the Didache's form of the Lord's Prayer to that found in Matthew and Luke. Or not. Maybe I'll just dive into Didache 9.

As I gather data to form/bolster/destroy opinions and hypotheses for the paper I'll present at the SBL in November, I'm continually reminded of a few different things.

First, one we all know (or should know): Correlation does not prove causation. This is patently obvious if you stop to think about it. In terms of style and authorship studies in the Greek New Testament, this may be reflected with thoughts like "Because things are similar it doesn't mean they have the same source." Thus some commentators have posited that even though Colossians and Ephesians are similar, they're different enough that they likely don't have the same source, or that one is an edited version of the other.*

Second, one we all easily forget (shame on me too): Lack of correlation does not prove disunion. That is, if I've shown that two things are not correlated as highly as other things all I've really done is show that they're different in some way. The reasons for difference, at least as regards authorship of NT epistles, cannot automatically be assumed to evidence itself in different authorship.  P.N. Harrison,** in my opinion, fell prey to this one because his work only verified that the degree of infrequent words in the Pastorals was higher than in other Paulines.*** He posited (but I don't think he proved) that differences in vocab meant different authorship. Since he, to his mind, proved a difference in vocabulary the difference in authorship came with the package. But he didn't, really. He only proved that the Pastorals, as a group, have a higher percentage of infrequent words ("Pastoral hapaxes", in Harrison-speak). The lack of correlation (infrequent words) does not automatically lead to disunion (different authors for the Pastorals).

Because of all of this, I feel a bit doomed. I'm gathering data on how words are modified in the Pauline epistles and doing a bunch of statistical mumbo-jumbo (that I actually understand, mind you!) to see how things correlate and compare.

But no matter what, at the end of the day, all that can absolutely be said is that particular feature usage between epistles is similar or different. Exploring the reasons for similarity and difference is, of course, where the rubber meets the road. That is the art of scholarship/academia. And that's where I end up needing to remember the above two provisos.

And then, after all of that, I remember that the Biblical Greek Language and Linguistics session I'm presenting in allows 10 minutes for presentation, with an informal half-hour follow-up for Q&A. And I'll barely be able to get through the stats in 10 minutes, let alone think about what statistical similarites and differences I find might mean.

* For the record, I think that's a horrible argument, which is why my blithe statement of the argument is biased and, likely, inaccurate. But why couldn't Paul have cribbed his own work? Chances are he kept copies of his letters ...

** Harrison, P.N. The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1921.

*** Actually, Harrison's work had other methodological problems, but I'll grant that the Pastorals have more infrequently-occuring words than other books in the NT corpus where the NT itself provides the word frequency measure. See O'Donnell's Corpus Linguistics and the Greek of the New Testament for further discussion on Harrison's methodology.

Stephen C. Carlson (Hypotyposeis) has posted Biblical Studies Carnival IX.

It is a stellar example of typical Carlsonian excellence. Do check it out!

And thanks, Stephen, for linking to the recent Didache posts (here and here, series intro here). And he even hit my post on Sisyphean Tasks in Biblical Studies.

[This is part of a running series on the Didache. See the introductory post for more information — RWB]

Phrasing/Translation

Περὶ δὲ τοῦ βαπτίσματος,
Concerning baptism,
   οὕτω βαπτίσατε·
   baptise in this way:
      ταῦτα πάντα προειπόντες,
      Having first reviewed all of these things,
      βαπτίσατε
      Baptise
         εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς
         in the Name of the Father
            καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ
            and of the Son
            καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος
            and of the Holy Spirit
         ἐν ὕδατι ζῶντι.
         in running water.

ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἔχῃς ὕδωρ ζῶν,
If you do not have access to running water,
   εἰς ἄλλο ὕδωρ βάπτισον·
   Baptise in other water.
εἰ δ ̓ οὐ δύνασαι ἐν ψυχρῷ,
If cold water is not available,
   ἐν θερμῷ.
   then [baptise] in warm [water].

ἐὰν δὲ ἀμφότερα μὴ ἔχῃς,
If you have neither,
   ἔκχεον εἰς τὴν κεφαλὴν τρὶς ὕδωρ
   pour water onto the head three times
      εἰς ὄνομα πατρὸς
      in the Name of the Father
         καὶ υἱοῦ
         and of the Son
         καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος.
         and of the Holy Spirit.

πρὸ δὲ τοῦ βαπτίσματος
And before the baptism
   προνηστευσάτω ὁ βαπτίζων
   the baptiser should fast beforehand,
   καὶ ὁ βαπτιζόμενος
   and the one being baptised,
   καὶ εἴ τινες ἄλλοι δύνανται·
   and any others who are able.
κελεύεις δὲ νηστεῦσαι τὸν βαπτιζόμενον
Call upon the one being baptised to fast
   πρὸ μιᾶς ἢ δύο.
   beforehand one or two days.

Notes

Chapter 6 was a transition from teaching on the way of life and the way of death, underscoring the importance to the reader/baptismal candidate of adhering to the way of life. The baptismal candidate was to do everything, or, do as much as possible.

Now the Didachist moves into specific instruction on baptism. I find the intro to the topic interesting. He doesn't move straight into the nuts and bolts of the process of baptism, he first ensures that the baptismal candidate has reviewed "all these things". This refers to the content of chapters 1-6. After that, the Didachist moves on to the formula for baptism. And it is pretty clear: Baptise in the name of the Trinity. This has implications for development of the doctrine of the Trinity depending on where you place the Didache chronologically. Here the basic formula agrees with Mt 28.19.

Also interesting to me is the discussion of what type of water to baptise in. The basic thought is for the baptizer to use the best he's got, but to not put off the baptism because he doesn't have the best water. The way in which the Didachist deals with mode of baptism is refreshing in light of some of the debates on the subject these days (immersion vs. sprinkling). Baptise where you can, when you can, in the best way you can -- but baptise.

The other interesting aspect involves fasting. Both the one baptising and the one being baptised are to fast. Others are to fast too, if they can. This underscores the seriousness of the act of baptism. It represents a breaking with the old ways (the way of death) and an assent to pursue the way of life. It should not be undertaken flippantly or unthinkingly. One should enter into it with seriousness, knowing that keeping on the way of life (bearing as much of the "Lord's yoke" as possible, as Did 6.2 puts it) will involve much diligence, effort and sacrifice.

Next up: Didache 8