Tuesday, June 30, 2009

On the National Review Online web site, Ryan Sayre Patrico reviews what sounds to be an excellent book, Rémi Brague’s The Legend of the Middle Ages: Philosophical Explorations of Medieval Christianity, Judaism and Islam (amazon.com).

Why do I think it sounds good? Here’s a quote from the review:

Brague is humble about his ability to dispel these myths, and while he admits that “any fast-talking media star can do a thousand times more in one minute to perpetuate falsity than we library rats can do in ten lifetimes to unmask it,” he nonetheless does his “utmost to destroy” these legends — or, as he puts it, these “teeming vermin.” Brague’s weapon of choice in destroying these legends is his close examination of medieval philosophical discourse: He expertly illustrates that, contrary to popular belief, “medieval thought does not escape the phenomena typical of thought in general.” Brague’s main task, then, is to show that “people never stopped thinking, that in fact medieval people did a lot of thinking, and that many highly refined concepts were shaped during those years.”

Here’s the description from Amazon.com (amazon.com):

Modern interpreters have variously cast the Middle Ages as a benighted past from which the West had to evolve and, more recently, as the model for a potential future of intercultural dialogue and tolerance. The Legend of the Middle Ages cuts through such oversimplifications to reconstruct a complicated and philosophically rich period that remains deeply relevant to the contemporary world.

Featuring a penetrating interview and sixteen essays—only three of which have previously appeared in English—this volume explores key intersections of medieval religion and philosophy. With characteristic erudition and insight, Rémi Brague focuses less on individual Christian, Jewish, and Muslim thinkers than on their relationships with one another. Their disparate philosophical worlds, Brague shows, were grounded in different models of revelation that engendered divergent interpretations of the ancient Greek sources they held in common. So, despite striking similarities in their solutions for the philosophical problems they all faced, intellectuals in each theological tradition often viewed the others’ ideas with skepticism, if not disdain.

Such divisions, Brague contends, debunk notions that the medieval Mediterranean world was a European or Islamic cultural center in which different groups of people harmoniously mingled. His clear-eyed and revelatory portrayal of this misunderstood age brings to life not only its philosophical and theological nuances, but also its true lessons for our own time.

Sounds like it might be a fun read.

Post Author: rico
Tuesday, June 30, 2009 6:20:48 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
 Friday, June 19, 2009

Here we go. Mike at ΕΝ ΕΦΕΣΩ tagged me in Josh McManaway’s A Meme: Funniest Things in Ancient Literature.

I don’t have a wide reservoir of non-NT ancient literature to draw upon. A few come to mind, though.

Hebrew Bible

First thing that comes to mind is 1Ki 18.26-27, particularly v. 27. I don’t know Hebrew, but here’s the English (from the ESV):

26 And they took the bull that was given them, and they prepared it and called upon the name of Baal from morning until noon, saying, “O Baal, answer us!” But there was no voice, and no one answered. And they limped around the altar that they had made. 27 And at noon Elijah mocked them, saying, “Cry aloud, for he is a god. Either he is musing, or he is relieving himself, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.” (1Ki 18.26-27, ESV)

So, Baal doesn’t answer his prophets when they cry to him. Elijah helpfully points out some options to the prophets of Baal, including (my paraphrase), “hey, guys, maybe Baal is (to put it as my 2-year-old daughter would) going ‘poo poo’, and that’s why he can’t hear you!” The bit about being asleep is funny too.

Martyrdom of Polycarp

I laughed out loud the first time I read MPoly 9.2:

Therefore, when he was brought before him, the proconsul asked if he were Polycarp. And when he confessed that he was, the proconsul tried to persuade him to recant, saying, “Have respect for your age,” and other such things as they are accustomed to say: “Swear by the Genius of Caesar; repent; say, ‘Away with the atheists!’ ” So Polycarp solemnly looked at the whole crowd of lawless heathen who were in the stadium, motioned toward them with his hand, and then (groaning as he looked up to heaven) said, “Away with the atheists!” (MPoly 9.2, Holmes)

So the proconsul wants Polycarp to renounce his Christianity by saying, “Away with the atheists"!” (Christians, who refused to worship pagan gods, were considered to be atheists). Polycarp — the wise old codger — instead takes the same words and, by his actions, condemns the whole crowd with them. Gesturing to the pagans and rabble-rousers in the crowd, he says “Away with the atheists!” but obviously is referring to the whole crowd, not making renunciation of his faith. Polycarp, at least 86 years old, is “sticking it to the man”.

That’s it for me. I won’t be tagging anyone else for further participation in this meme, but if you’re looking for an excuse and have a good one to post … consider yourself tagged.

Post Author: rico
Friday, June 19, 2009 6:54:51 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [5]
 Thursday, June 18, 2009

If for any reason you’re bored and have nothing better to do, the Logos Bible Software blog is running a video interview with me in their “People Behind the Product” series.


[Click for video if the player doesn't show up]

If you're wondering about the kayak I mentioned, you can check out my photos and documentation. The before and after pictures are below:

Before (the boards on the right side of the truck)

After

Post Author: rico
Thursday, June 18, 2009 6:01:38 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [4]
 Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Outside of having started a jaunt through the New Testament in Greek (beginning with the Paulines), here’s what I’ve been reading:

Steve Mason, Josephus, Judea and Christian Origins: Methods and Categories (amazon.com). Right now I’m in chapter five, which is probably one of the more important essays in the book. It’s on understanding Ιουδιαοι as “Judeans” instead of “Jews”, at least for that particular era. He’s almost convinced me, and I’m rather conservative when it comes to these sorts of things.

Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, St. Paul’s Ephesus: Texts and Archaeology (amazon.com). Several ancient texts concerning Ephesus in one way or another conveniently pulled together in one volume in English translation, as well as some commentary/discussion and writing on archaeology. I figured I needed to get a bit more well versed on the history of Ephesus. Not so long ago I pored over Paul Trebilco’s The Early Christians in Ephesus from Paul to Ignatius (amazon.com), which I highly recommend, followed by Peter Lampe’s From Paul to Valentinus: Christians at Rome in the First Two Centuries (amazon.com) which I also recommend if you want some understanding of Christianity in Rome. Books like these reinforce how weak I am in my understanding of the setting in which Paul’s epistles were written and lived. Hopefully I’m improving.

Steve Runge, Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament: A Practical Introduction to Discourse Features for Teaching and Exegesis. Steve is a good friend and co-worker, so I’ve been lucky enough to read through pre-release drafts of his stuff. His work has helped me understand conjunctions sooooooooo much better it isn’t even funny. If you have Logos Bible Software, you should probably consider this book. If you have Steve’s previous work, The Lexham Discourse Greek New Testament, then his discourse grammar is a no-brainer.

I’m also reading some articles from Filologia Neotestamentaria, but won’t list them here.

Post Author: rico
Wednesday, June 17, 2009 8:03:08 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]
 Monday, June 15, 2009

Recently I noticed that Re 20.4 appears to be the verse in the Greek NT with the most words (that is the longest verse, though I’ve not verified that with a count of letters in the verse). So I figured I’d do a word count of every verse in the Greek NT to verify it. These counts are based on the NA27. “Word” is defined as a space-delimited token (with punctuation stripped), so a crasis (e.g. καγω) is counted as one word.

58 Words: Re 20:4
52 Words: Mk 16:8;* Re 3:12
50 Words: Re 5:13; Re 9:20
48 Words: Re 17:8
47 Words: Lk 6:42; Jn 8:44
46 Words: Jn 20:25
45 Words: Re 6:8
44 Words: Re 11:18; Re 12:10
43 Words: Re 14:18; Re 19:20
42 Words: Jn 18:36; Jn 18:37; Ac 21:11; 1 Jn 2:27
41 Words: Lk 10:21; Re 4:8
40 Words: Mt 2:13; Mt 18:8; Ac 28:17
----------------------
* Mk 16.8 here includes the shorter ending of Mark, accounting for the length of the verse.

Why does Revelation appear to have so many long verses? Was Stephanus getting near the end of his carriage ride and pushing to get to the end? (yes, that’s a joke).

I should note that a length of 15 words (again, according to NA27) appears to be by far the most popular count (over 500 times).

Post Author: rico
Monday, June 15, 2009 11:15:59 AM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
 Sunday, June 14, 2009

[NB: Since I haven’t posted much recently, I thought I’d cross-post this post from PastoralEpistles.com here as well. —RB]

Our pastor has commenced working through Second Timothy (one of the reasons for my recent jaunt through Second Timothy) and today’s text was 2Ti 1.9-10 (he’d discussed the larger section, 2Ti 1.8-12, last week). But I really don’t see the rationale for splitting this out from the larger unit because it is all one sentence (in the Greek) with components building one upon the other to the crescendo of v. 12. Below is my translation of these verses:

And so do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, or of me his prisoner, but suffer together with me for the gospel according to the power of God, who saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works but according to his own purpose and grace, which has been granted to us in Christ Jesus from times eternal, and now has been revealed through the appearance of our Savior Christ Jesus, who indeed abolished death and brought to light life and immortality through the gospel into which I was appointed herald and apostle and teacher. For this reason I also suffer these things, but I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed and I am convinced that he is quite capable to guard my deposit until that day. (2Ti 1.8-12)

On my reading, Paul’s first bit about not being ashamed of the testimony or being ashamed of Paul is an attention-getter that is then immediately trumped. This isn’t about Timothy being ashamed, it is about Paul’s exhortation to Timothy to “suffer together” with him for the gospel. In the underlying Greek, the portion after this initial “but” corrects. Timothy is not to be ashamed of Paul’s suffering (or the gospel for that matter), he is instead to join with Paul in his suffering for the gospel.

From here, Paul gives further information on how Timothy can in his right mind sign up for such suffering: the power of God is what will enable him.

As if that’s not enough, Paul then describes what God has already done: he’s saved them (the start of v. 9). In addition to that, he has called them with a “holy calling”.

But what is the holy calling? Paul explains that too. The holy calling is not one given because they are worthy based on the merit of their own works, they are worthy because God has called them to it. God has his own purpose and his grace will enable him to meet that purpose to which he has called Timothy (and Paul).

But Paul isn’t done; he next has to get in some explanation of how this grace works to enable for the holy calling. The grace has been in place since the foundation of time, only recently revealed in Jesus Christ.

And again, Paul isn’t done.

Note how Paul doesn’t just refer to “Jesus Christ”, but to “our Savior Jesus Christ”. This as well is for a reason, it is so Paul can remind Timothy once again of what Christ did. He abolished death (by his grace saving from eternal death) and brought life. He is the life-bringer. And this was done “through the gospel” (remember that thing Paul initially exhorted Timothy to not be ashamed of?). (this is the end of v. 10)

Still, Paul has more.

This gospel, the accounting of how our Savior provided for our deliverance, is what Paul has been called to proclaim. He is a “herald” (a proclaimer), an apostle and a teacher of the gospel. He proclaims it, he advocates it, he practices it and he teaches it.

Paul continues, “For this reason …”. This is Paul’s justification of his suffering. Paul doesn’t hide his suffering, he embraces it. And he wants Timothy to embrace it too. Again, as when the section started, there is a contrastive “but”: “I also suffer these things, but I am not ashamed …”. This as the same contrast as the beginning of the section, between suffering and being ashamed of the suffering. Paul offers himself as an example to Timothy: “I’m embracing the suffering, you should too.” (an aside: recall 2Ti 1.7, immediately previous to this whole section, where Paul reminds Timothy that “God has not given us a spirit of cowardice, but of power and love and self-discipline”.)

Paul then gives reason for his embracing of the suffering he finds himself in: He knows that the one who saved him will bring him through it until “that day” (which is, in my opinion, an eschatological reference).

The whole section progresses, each clause or phrase expanding some portion of the previous one, making Paul’s case. And it ends up right where it started, advocating the embrace of suffering for the gospel over against being ashamed of the gospel.

From here, Paul will begin to contrast the gospel against the false teaching prevalent in Ephesus, holding up the standard of the gospel. But before then, Paul needs to make the reader aware that there is a choice between the hard way (holding to the gospel and undergoing the suffering which will come) and the easy way (letting go of the gospel and not challenging the false teachers). Paul makes Timothy aware of this choice, encouraging his embrace of the gospel and related suffering, before getting into the ramifications of it.

Also interesting (at least to me) is that throughout this section, Paul is exhorting Timothy to join together with him in this suffering for the gospel; he is not exhorting Timothy to take his place in this suffering. So many times Second Timothy is read as “Paul’s last will and testament” but, at least here, we see that Paul has no hint of wanting to let go of the reins. Timothy is joining together with Paul, he isn’t taking Paul’s place.

Post Author: rico
Sunday, June 14, 2009 12:58:41 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]
 Sunday, May 24, 2009

The NA27 apparatus lists the following contents for P99 (dated as “ca. 400”, currently held in the Chester Beatty Library). I’ve given the references in an English-based system (though I still use “.” for a chapter/verse separator, instead of “:”, because I’m lazy and don’t like to hit the shift key unless I really have to), translated from the German system in the printed NA27 apparatus appendix.

Ro 1.1; 2Co 1.3-6; 1.6-17; 1.20-24; 2.1-9; 2.9-5.13; 5.13-6.3; 6.3-8.13; 8.14-22; 9.2-11.8; 11.9-23; 11.26-13.11; Gal 1.4-11; 1.18-6.15; 1.14-2.4; 2.5-3.19; 3.19-4.9; Eph 1.4-2.21; 1.22(?); 3.8-6.24

I have two questions, actually.

First, what’s up with Galatians? Why the large range covering most of the book (1.18-6.15) followed by subranges amounting to 1.14-4.9? Is this content duplicated in the papyrus? I’ve searched online for other contents listings of P99 only to see the same exact list duplicated in numerous locations. I’m confused as to what the duplication might be indicating—or if it is a typo of some sort (it feels like a book name is missing, but Galatians and Ephesians are in canonical order, so it can’t be that … I don’t think).

Second, what’s up with Ephesians? Why is “1.22(?)” appended? Is it that it occurs out of order after 2.21?

Just trying to get a handle on what’s listed in this particular entry and why. P99 is not in Comfort & Barrett (too late for them, apparently) so I can’t check there; it is also not in Tischendorf because, well, Tischendorf is just far too early. Other ranges in the NA27 appendix do not have overlapping ranges (well, not up through P99 nor through the uncials). Poking through the site for the Chester Beatty Library was a dead end as well (though I’d love to be proved wrong).

If you have any help for me, I’m all ears.

Post Author: rico
Sunday, May 24, 2009 1:25:22 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [5]
 Sunday, May 10, 2009

If you’ve been following my series on Translating Second Timothy over at PastoralEpistles.com, you know that I’ve made it through the epistle. (In less than three months, not bad, huh?)

I’ve gathered all of the posts into one PDF file. Grab it if you’re interested. If you have further interest in the material (specifically in distributing it or publishing it in some way) please contact me for further information.

I’m very interested in any feedback you may have. Feel free to email me at rick at pastoral epistles dot com with any comments, encouragement, criticism or flat-out disagreement.

Post Author: rico
Sunday, May 10, 2009 7:15:14 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) 

#     |  Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]