The good folks at Hendrickson Academic have recently sent me a copy of Heresies and How to Avoid Them: Why it Matters what Christians Believe (amazon.com). No, they haven't found me in any heresy — so they say — they sent me the book because they thought I'd be interested in it and just might blog about it. Thankfully, the book is interesting and I will blog about it to some degree. But first, I need to point out the cover art because it is so cool. It's Augustine battling a demonic-looking heretic with a Bible and what appears to be a light saber!

Now that is cool. How can you not want to read a book with cover art like that?!

One thing I really like about this book is that it began as a series of sermons. These aren't intricate theological definitions of heresy; they are intended to be heard and understood by the person in the pew who may not have a strong background in dogma and heresy. You know, someone who would think "Arianism" has more to do with Hitler than heresy in the fourth century. Ben Quash writes in the book's prologue:

Appreciative inquisitiveness was the premise for devoting a term-full of sermons in Peterhouse Chapel, Cambridge (where the editors of this volume serve as Anglican priests) to great heresies, and the majority of essays in this volume were first delivered as sermons in that series — intended not to be excessively encumbered with scholarly apparatus, but to be informed and accessible accounts of how these ancient debates still have much to say to Christians today as they try to make sense of their faith in thought, word and deed. The huge interest in the sermons took us by surprise, and the idea was hatched of making them available to a wider audience by publishing them in a book. (Quash and Ward, 8)

Here's the back-cover blurb, which is different than the publisher blurb you'll find at Hendrickson's site or on Amazon. I think the back-cover blurb is better than those other blurbs.

What don't Christians believe?
Is Jesus really divine?
Is Jesus really human?
Can God suffer?
Can people be saved by their own efforts?

The early Church puzzled over these questions, ruling in some believes and ruling out others. Heresies and How to Avoid Them (amazon.com) explains the principal ancient heresies and shows why contemporary Christians still need to know about them. These famous detours in Christian believing seemed plausible and attractive to many people in the past, and most can still be found in modern-day guises. By learning what it is that Christians don't believe — and why — believers today can gain a deeper, truer understanding of their faith.

Topics Include
Adoptionism—did Jesus become the Son of God at his baptism?
Docetism—was Jesus really human or did he just appear to be so?
Nestorianism—was Christ one Person or a hybrid with a divine dimension and a human dimension?
Arianism—was Christ divine and eternal or was there a time when he did not exist?
Marcionism—is the God of the New Testament the same as the God of the Old?
Theopaschitism—is it possible for God to suffer in His divine nature?
Pelagianism—can people save themselves by their own efforts?
‘The Free Spirit’—are there two kinds of Church membership, one for the elite and one for the rest?
Donatism—do Christian ministers need to be faultless for their ministrations to be effective?

From what I can tell (I've read the intro and the first two essays) the essays strive to define and place the heresy in proper historical context, discussing the milieu in which the heresy came about. Each essay begins with a paragraph-long definition of the heresy in plain language, followed by major scriptures that provide foundation for the orthodox position. The essays provide the setting and discuss the heresy, and then also discuss the theological implications of the heresy. Good stuff. As I read the first two essays, I thought that Heresies and How to Avoid Them (amazon.com) might even make good fodder for book-study groups in local churches. There are sections in the back with a few recommendations for further reading and a brief glossary. There's an index as well.

I say: check it out. I may blog further on the book as I read it, I may not. We'll see what happens.

This time, however, the point is illustrated by looking at multiple translations of Hermas, Mandates 12.6.2. These are chronological, in order of original publication. Note the emphasized text. I think Ehrman is the most readable. Recall that Holmes is ostensibly an update and revision of Lightfoot/Harmer.

Lightfoot/Harmer: Believe, therefore, on God, ye who by reason of your sins have despaired of your life, and are adding to your sins, and weighing down your life; for if ye turn unto the Lord with your whole heart, and work righteousness the remaining days of your life, and serve Him rightly according to His will, He will give healing to your former sins, and ye shall have power to master the works of the devil. But of the threatening of the devil fear not at all; for he is unstrung, like the sinews of a dead man.
Lightfoot, J. B., & Harmer, J. R. (1891). The Apostolic Fathers. Includes index. (439). London: Macmillan and Co.

Lake: Believe, therefore, in God, though you have renounced your life through your sins, and have added to your sins, and have made your life heavy, that if you ‘turn to the Lord with all your heart, and do righteousness’ for the rest of the days of your life, and serve him in uprightness, according to his will, he will heal your former sins, and you shall have power to master the works of the devil. But do not fear the threat of the devil at all, for he is powerless as the sinews of a dead man.
Lake, K. (1912-13). The Apostolic fathers. The Loeb classical library (2:137). London; New York: Heinemann; Macmillan.

Holmes: So believe in God, you who because of your sins have despaired of your life, and are adding to your sins, and are making your life hard, because if you turn to the Lord with all your heart, and practice righteousness the rest of the days of your life, and serve him rightly according to his will, he will heal your previous sins, and you will have power to conquer the devil’s works. But do not fear the devil’s threats at all, for he is as powerless as a dead man’s sinews.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (417). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Ehrman: You have despaired of your life because of your sins, and increased your sins, and overburdened your life—you should trust in God. For if you turn to the Lord with your whole heart and do righteousness the rest of your days, serving him properly according to his will, he will heal your former sins. And you will be empowered to rule over the works of the devil. But do not fear the devil's threat at all, for he is as weak as a tendon on a corpse.
Ehrman, Bart D. (2003). The Apostolic Fathers. Loeb Classical Library (2:303). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

The picture that Ehrman provides — "he is as weak as a tendon on a corpse" — is much better than the others that revert to the KJV-ish "sinew" to make the image. The use of "corpse" instead of "dead man" also contributes positively to the picture.

This excerpt from Hermas also reminds me of a bit of a pet peeve of mine. Have you ever been in a Bible study where folks end up dwelling on "Satan" as if he is an omnipotent and omnipresent deity wreaking havoc in all areas of everyone's life simultaneously? It's easy to think so; but I much rather think that many of the things in life that folks like to ascribe to "Satan" are really the result of our struggle against sin. I really don't think the prince of darkness has much personal interest in me; he can surely focus his non-omniscience and non-omnipresence elsewhere to much greater effect. Instead of focusing on attribution of things to "Satan" (whom I am much more comfy just calling "the enemy"), we should instead focus our efforts on believing and serving the one true God.

That's why I like this last portion of Hermas Mandates so much. I think it properly refocuses me on what is important: living in obedience to God, not cowering in fear to the one he has vanquished. I'm not saying that Hermas is canonical (despite its presence in Codex Sinaiticus) and I'm not saying that we should let it unduly influence our doctrines of Satan and demonology. I am saying, though, that the underlying notion and perspective found here is generally healthy and helpful.

The enemy has no power, he is as weak as a tendon on a corpse.

Consider how the Mandates end. Here is Hermas, Mandates 12.6.3-5 (Holmes' translation):

(3) Listen to me, therefore, and fear him who is able to do everything, to save and to destroy, and keep these commandments, and you will live to God.” (4) I said to him, “Sir, now I am strengthened in all the Lord’s commandments, because you are with me. I know that you will crush all the power of the devil, and we will rule over him and prevail over all his works. And I hope, sir, that I am now able to keep these commandments which you have commanded, as the Lord enables me.” (5) “You will keep them,” he said, “if your heart is pure toward the Lord; indeed, all who cleanse their hearts of the vain desires of this world will keep them, and will live to God.”
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (417). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

I came across a mention of The Dangerous Book for Boys (amazon.com) somewhere, thought I don't quite recall where. If the Lord chooses to bless us with a son,* then you can rest assured I'll be getting a copy of it. Here's the description:

The bestselling book for every boy from eight to eighty, covering essential boyhood skills such as building tree houses, learning how to fish, finding true north, and even answering the age old question of what the big deal with girls is.

In this digital age there is still a place for knots, skimming stones and stories of incredible courage. This book recaptures Sunday afternoons, stimulates curiosity, and makes for great father-son activities. The brothers Conn and Hal have put together a wonderful collection of all things that make being young or young at heart fun—building go-carts and electromagnets, identifying insects and spiders, and flying the world's best paper airplanes.

The link is to the US edition (amazon.com), which was just released. The UK edition was apparently a big-time best seller last year.

* For those wondering, Amy is about a week overdue; we're hoping and praying the baby comes quickly! We don't know the sex of the baby either, so my musing here may be fulfilled very, very soon. Of course if it's a girl, then point me to the requisite book(s) about tea parties, dollhouses, and all that other jazz!

Time for a rant.

A narrowly-focused email digest that I receive (which shall remain nameless, though it isn't B-Greek) had -- as it frequently does -- mention of a seminar/course/workshop having loosely to do with the email group's primary topic. After long and tedious explanation of the course/workshop, the final paragraph noted (emphasis is mine):

These workshop (sic) have something to offer everybody. They are not strictly designed for computer types. The only prerequisites are an open mind and the desire to learn.

It sounds so nice, so pleasing, so enlightened and so innocuous. But it makes me chafe everytime I read it or something similar. One shouldn't have to list "an open mind" as a prerequiste, as if disagreeing or holding an alternate view is a sign of a closed mind. It isn't. Someone can hold an opposite opinion or position and it isn't a sign of a closed mind. And, someone may hold the same opinion and that isn't necessarily a sign of an open mind.

It's all meaningless blather and has nothing to do with anything. These sorts of "prerequisites" are useless, throwaway, make-the-author-feel-enlightened statements. If the seminar/workshop is interesting, then go, by all means. But attendence has nothing at all to do with an open mind or a closed mind. (Is my mind then closed when I'm done with the workshop?)

And -- here's a news flash for the description writer -- if someone is interested enough to do the travel and pony up the dinero to actually go to such a workshop (this one ranges from 749-2500 Euro ... and the course is in the Netherlands!) well ... that's a pretty good indication of a desire to learn (or the degree to which one is being compelled to learn).

So, my advice: be wary of anything that lists "an open mind" as a prerequisite.

OK, I'm done ranting now.

This week RBL reviews New Testament Manuscripts: Their Texts and Their World (amazon.com), an unpurchasably-priced collection of essays from Brill ($181.00!). The review is here. It all sounds interesting, but why is it so blasted expensive?! I realize Brill's primary market for these sorts of things are libraries, but why not have some sort of option whereby regular joes can purchase such things as well?

Anyway, from what I can tell from the review, I'd guess that if it sounds interesting to you then you'd also enjoy looking at Larry Hurtado's recent and much more reasonably priced book, The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (amazon.com). One of the essays in the mondo expensivo Brill book is by Hurtado on the Staurogram. Hurtado revises and updates that work in his book on The Earliest Christian Artifacts (amazon.com) (cf. p. 135, footnote 1 where Hurtado notes that he "draws heavily upon" the essay in the Brill book).

Tony Chartrand-Burke, on his Apocryphicity blog, posts a 10-page how-to for manuscript collating called Collating for Dummies. It even takes on the page layout of that well-known series. (h/t Jim Davila). It's a good read, though I'd hoped he'd give a little more info on the physical process of collation and comparison. But it's only 10 pages, and the bibliography looks to have some promising sources to follow up on.

Tony gives some props to Bruce Metzger as a resource for decoding ligatures and abbreviations in Greek. Metzger's book on paleography, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Paleography (amazon.com) is good and the recommended introduction. But you may require more information on abbreviations and ligatures in Greek MSS. If so, I'd recommend Abbreviations in Greek: Inscriptions, Papyri, Manuscripts and Early Printed Books (amazon.com). I've blogged about this book previously (here and here). It contains four monographs (some short, some long, some with extensive catalogues and other such material) having to do with abbreviations in Greek. These monographs are:

• "Abbreviations in Greek Inscriptions" by M. Avi-Yonah
• "Abbreviations and Symbols in Greek Papyri" by F. G. Kenyon
• "Abbreviations in Greek Manuscripts" by T. W. Allen
• "Abbreviations in Early Greek Printed Books" by G. F. Ostermann and A. E. Giegengack.

If you're only interested in ligatures/abbreviations, skip Metzger (amazon.com) and get Oikonomides (amazon.com). You'll save $40 overall (based on Amazon prices current as of original composition of this article) and get more information specific to your interest.

Excellent news from Michael Bird (Euangelion).

A series of essays on the Apostolic Fathers that originally appeared in the Expository Times has been collected and is being published by Continuum under their T&T Clark imprint. The book is titled The Writings of the Apostolic Fathers (amazon.com), edited by Paul Foster (who wrote several of the articles, along with other folks like Michael Holmes and Charles Hill). Each article in the series is an overview of one of the works with the corpus popularly known as the "Apostolic Fathers".

This is excellent. I have no journal access and have snagged articles in the series when I've been in libraries, or when the SBL has a free month of access (usually in December) to a select group of journals as a promo for Sage Journals. These promos typically include Expository Times. To have the whole collection, with introduction, edited in one volume is awesome news! It's on my Amazon wishlist and I hope to get it at some point in the future.

I'd recommend The Writings of the Apostolic Fathers (amazon.com) though I've not read all of the essays. The essays I have read have been top-notch. If you're teaching a class on the Apostolic Fathers, it may even serve as a great introductory text.

At the start of his discussion of "Similarly Spelled but Identically Pronounced Variants":

The contribution of commentaries on the following text-critical discussion is minimal, since commentators as a rule follow the text of the GNT [UBS4] or NA [NA27] without further ado. Where they do take up a variation unit for discussion, they normally accept the verdict of the editors and the explanation supplied by Metzger's commentary, which they express in their own words. (Caragounis, Development of Greek and the New Testament (amazon.com), 518)

And he's right, but his comparison is wrong. In the setting of a commentary, unless it is focused on being a textual commentary, it would be questionable to devote pages and pages to each text-critical complication. It is right to mention them, but one need not work them out in painstaking detail unless that is the raison d'etre for the commentary. In the setting of an article on a variant, however (which is what Caragounis has done) one would be irresponsible to not work things out in significant detail, as Caragounis does in the next section of his book (the one dealing with variants at 1Co 13.3, pp. 547-564). And even in the current section (pp. 517-546) Caragounis usually only presents enough information to show that the variants are spelled the same, they sound the same, and the evidence is split.

But overall, he's right. When *most* commentators bring up a variant, they typically defer to Metzger and move on.