I am currently reviewing a new collection of essays which puts me in mind of two canon sessions I attended at SBL. As I mentioned before San Diego, that the sessions were separate seemed a recipe for parties of the debate not just talking past one another, but talking to themselves. Unfortunately this seems to have occurred to some extent. In one session S. Chapman argued for a core canon extending to the biblical period. In the other, several panelists upheld a “consensus” moratorium on canon terminology.

But as one editor of the new volume writes (in context, he is addressing four typical strategies for banning talk of canon):

Nach der dritten Strategie ist „Kanon“ ein „anachronistischer“ Begriff, weil er in den biblischen Texten selbst nicht auftauche. Dieses neben den genannten Strategien ebenfalls in mehreren Beiträgen von Hubert Frankemölle ständig wiederholte Argument ist wenig überzeugend, eigentlich sogar unwissenschaftlich, weil es den Status von „Kanon“ als Reflexionsbegriff ignoriert. Mit dem gleichen Argument müsste man den anachronistischen Begriff „Theologie“ mit Bezug auf das Neue Testament streichen; denn weder kommt dieser Terminus im Neuen Testament vor, noch wird er heute in der gleichen Weise gebraucht wie etwa in der profanen oder christlichen Antike. Die auch bei Frankemölle zu Recht weiterhin verwendete gewohnte exegetische Fachterminologie hat ebenfalls keinen Anhalt in den zu untersuchenden Texten; aber das ist auch wissenschaftlich überhaupt kein Problem. Mit der unverzichtbaren Differenzierung von vox und res und der Einsicht in die Wandelbarkeit von Begriffen entspannt sich die Situation und verlieren auch die Vorbehalte gegenüber einer Reihe gängiger exegetischer Begriffe ihren Grund. Im Übrigen ist jede Bibelauslegung notwendigerweise „anachronistisch“, wenn sie relevant sein will.

And a little later Steins suggests:

Unausgesprochen scheint mir den genannten Vorbehalts-Strategien die Sorge zugrunde zu liegen, dass die Exegese sich unter der Hand von einer primär historischen in eine dogmatische Disziplin wandeln könnte, also Weichenstellungen des späten 18. Jahrhunderts revidiert werden könnten. Diese „Weichenstellung“ bedarf jedoch ihrerseits der Kritik, denn sie hat verhindert, im 19. Jahrhundert den Kanon als historisches Phänomen in die Exegese zu integrieren. Der Kanon ist gewissermaßen als Phänomen der Verfremdung der Bibeltexte aus der kritischen Bibelwissenschaft ausgeklammert worden. Dass in der gegenwärtigen Diskussionslage ein anderer Umgang mit dem Kanon in exegetischer Perspektive möglich ist, sehe ich als großen Fortschritt an; die Gefahr des Dogmatismus besteht immer, ist aber kein Argument.

Those quotes come from 115 and 116, respectively, of G. Steins, “Kanon und Anamnese,” in Ballhorn and Steins, eds., Der Bibelkanon in der Bibelauslegung: Beispielexegesen und Methodenreflexionen (Kohlhammer, 2007). I’ll post more on the collection under review in due course.

Tags: Deutsch, Canon

Back from SBL this week, tucking back into research and writing.

I didn't attend the session on Richard Bauckham's book since we'd already taken a close look here at St Andrews. If you haven't yet seen the post-SBL thread (noted by Goodacre, Davila, etc) by some San Diego panelists and many others, then I recommend you take a look at: What is to be done?

The contempt is just dripping sometimes, which guarantees that the thread will be delicious to most interested parties regardless of their persuasion.

Tags: St Andrews

Early tomorrow I depart for home (hooray! it's been too long!), and I'm leaving the blog behind until I get back from SBL. So with an eye to SBL already, I offer a few top picks after a glance through the program guide. It's massive, so I'm sure to have missed something. The first things that stand out to me fall into four groups:

1. Giants of the Recent Past
2. Psalms
3. Theological Exegesis
4. Canon

Giants of the Recent Past

The Brevard Childs session has collected quite a list of participants:

Christopher Seitz, Wycliffe College, University of Toronto, Presiding
Gary Anderson, University of Notre Dame, Panelist
Erhard Gerstenberger, Philipps Universität-Marburg, Panelist
Richard Hays, Duke University, Panelist
Alan Cooper, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Panelist
Kavin Rowe, Duke University, Panelist
Mark Elliott, University of St. Andrews-Scotland, Panelist
Ephraim Radner, Wycliffe College, University of Toronto, Panelist

That's 11/18/2007, 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM, Room: 30 E - CC.

And a session for James Barr was more recently put together, with the following panelists:

Samuel Balentine, Union Theological Seminary and Presbyterian School of Christian Education, Presiding
William Abraham, Southern Methodist University, Panelist
Joseph Blenkinsopp, University of Notre Dame, Panelist
Douglas Knight, Vanderbilt University, Panelist
Archie Lee, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Panelist
Mervyn Richardson, Leiden University-The Netherlands, Panelist

Meets 11/19/2007, 1:00 PM to 3:30 PM, Room: Manchester A - GH.

Psalms

In addition to my own session (and see a new translation of Psalm 102 on this site), I noticed two sessions in particular.

S19-83, Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity, in a joint session between Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity and Book of Psalms, meets 11/19/2007, 1:00 PM to 3:30 PM, Room: 28 D - CC. The Theme is Psalms in Judaism and Christianity: Studies in the History of Interpretation of the Psalter, and the schedule is:

Esther Menn, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, Presiding
Medieval Jewish Psalms Interpretation
Adele Berlin, University of Maryland College Park, Panelist (30 min)
Alan Cooper, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Panelist (30 min)
Moshe Bernstein, Yeshiva University, Respondent (10 min)
Heidelberg Psalms Project
Manfred Oeming, Panelist (20 min)
Andreas Wagner, University of Heidelberg, Panelist (20 min)
Joachim Vette, Panelist (20 min)
Discussion (20 min)

A second joint session of the same groups, S19-126, also on Psalms in Early Judaism and Christianity, meets 11/19/2007, 4:00 PM to 6:30 PM, Room: 23 B - CC. Participants:

Rolf Jacobson, Luther Seminary, Presiding
Scott R. A. Starbuck, Whitworth University
Afterlives of Royal Psalm Lyrics (30 min)
Tze-Ming Quek, University of Cambridge
"I will Give Authority over the Nations": Psalm 2:8-9 in Revelatiom 2:26c-27 (30 min)
Scot Becker, University of Aberdeen
The Magnificat among the Biblical Inset Psalms (30 min)
Aaron Canty, Saint Xavier University
The Nuptial Imagery of Christ and the Church in Augustine's "Enarrationes in Psalmos" (30 min)
Janet A. Timbie, Catholic University of America
Psalm Recitation in the White Monastery (30 min)

Theological Exegesis

In this category session S17-28, Theological Interpretation and the Canon of Scripture, could go into two of my categories. Hopefully the separation from Sanders and McDonald (see below) will not truncate dialog between the groups. This session meets 11/17/2007, 9:00 AM to 11:30 AM, Room: Manchester F - GH. The agenda is:

Edith Humphrey, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Presiding
Stephen B. Chapman, Duke University
The Canon Debate: What It Is and Why It Matters (20 min)
Thomas Holsinger-Friesen, Spring Arbor University, Respondent (10 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Daniel J. Treier, Wheaton College
A Looser "Canon"?: Relating William Abraham’s Canon and Criterion in Christian Theology to Biblical Interpretation (20 min)
William Abraham, Southern Methodist University, Respondent (10 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Richard Paul Thompson, Northwest Nazarene University
Scripture, Community, and Conversation: Rethinking Theological Interpretation Canonically (20 min)
Jacqueline Lapsley, Princeton Theological Seminary, Respondent (10 min)
Discussion (15 min)

Papers were to be posted at http://fc.asburyseminary.edu/~theological_interpretation/index.html — but I can't get the link to work.

S17-82, on Christ in/and the Old Testament, is notable. It meets 11/17/2007, 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM, Room: Cunningham - GH. The lineup is:

Christopher Seitz, University of St. Andrews-Scotland, Presiding (10 min)
Kathryn Greene-Mccreight, St John's Episcopal Church, Panelist (10 min)
Robert Wall, Seattle Pacific University, Panelist (10 min)
John Goldingay, Fuller Theological Seminary, Panelist (10 min)
Christopher Wright, Langham Partnership International, Panelist (10 min)
Murray Rae, University of Otago, Panelist (10 min)
Discussion (45 min)

S17-130, on Reading the Book of Genesis Theologically as Christian Scripture, meets 11/17/2007, 4:00 PM to 6:30 PM, Room: 28 C - CC. Lineup:

Bill Arnold, Asbury Theological Seminary, Presiding
J. Richard Middleton, Roberts Wesleyan College
The Significance of the Call of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3) for a Canonical Reading of Scripture (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)
R. R. Reno, Creighton University
Satan, Temptation, and the Fall (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Jeffrey L. Morrow, University of Dayton
Genesis 1-3 in a Liturgical Context: The Role of Liturgy in Christian Theological Interpretation of Scripture (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)

S19-138 is a book review session of Christopher R. Seitz, Prophecy and Hermeneutics: Toward a New Introduction to the Prophets (Baker Academic, 2007), meeting 11/19/2007, 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM, Room: Santa Rosa - MM. Reviewers and respondent are:

Gary Anderson, University of Notre Dame, Presiding
Martti Nissinen, University of Helsinki, Panelist
David Petersen, Emory University, Panelist
Marvin Sweeney, Claremont School of Theology, Panelist
Christopher Seitz, University of St. Andrews-Scotland, Respondent

Finally, S20-04, under Christian Theology and the Bible, considers New Proposals in Christian Theology and Bible. It meets 11/20/2007, 9:00 AM to 11:30 AM, Room: Randle A - GH, and features:

Stephen Fowl, Loyola College in Maryland , Presiding (10 min)
Mark Elliott, University of St. Andrews-Scotland
Theological Insights on and from Leviticus 1-7 (30 min)
Gregory W. Lee, Duke University
Calvin and the New Perspective: Covenant as Ground for a Nuanced View of the Law (30 min)
Break (10 min)
Clayton Libolt, River Terrace Church
A Conversation with Nicholas Wolterstorff's Divine Discourse (30 min)
George C. Heider, Valparaiso University
Atonement and the Gospels (30 min)

I also just noticed an early session, S16-55, The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical and Theological Studies, which meets 11/16/2007, 12:30 PM to 5:30 PM, Room: 28 A - CC. On tap are:

Michael Bird, Highland Theological College
The Faith of Jesus Christ: Problems and Prospects (15 min)
Stanley Porter, McMaster Divinity College
Lexical and Semantic Reflections on Pistis (30 min)
Douglas Campbell, Duke University
The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ in Romans and Galatians (30 min)
Preston Sprinkle, Aberdeen University
Pistis Christou as an Eschatological Event (30 min)
Break (15 min)
Ardel Caneday, Northwestern College, St. Paul
The Faithfulness of Jesus as a Theme of Pauline Theology (30 min)
Francis Watson, University of Aberdeen - Scotland
The Faith of Jesus Christ (30 min)
R. Barry Matlock, University of Sheffield
The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ in Romans and Galatians (30 min)
Mark Elliott, University of St. Andrews-Scotland
The Faith of Jesus Christ in the Church Fathers (30 min)
Benjamin Myers, University of Queensland
The Faithfulness of Christ in the Theology of Karl Barth (30 min)

Canon

The last of these three sessions is the one I'm most looking forward to, though as I say I hope the physical separation from the first session under Theological Exegesis, above, doesn't mean the groups wind up talking to themselves.

S17-25, Rethinking the Concept and Categories of 'Bible' in Antiquity, meets 11/17/2007, 9:00 AM to 11:30 AM, Room: Salon 5 - MM. Participants:

James E. Bowley, Millsaps College, Presiding
K. L. Noll, Brandon University
Rethinking Literary Function in the Emerging Hebrew Canon (25 min)
Francis Borchardt, University of Helsinki
Concepts of Scripture in 1 Maccabees (25 min)
Ian W. Scott, Tyndale Seminary
Is the Bible always Scripture?: The "Low" View of the Pentateuch in the Letter of Aristeas (25 min)
Sara Parks, McGill University and Aaron Ricker, McGill University
Harry Potter Canon Discourse and the Biblical Canons (25 min)
Robert A. Kraft, University of Pennsylvania
Finding Adequate Terminology for "Pre-canonical" Literatures (25 min)
James E. Bowley, Millsaps College
Terminating Terminology (25 min)

S17-119, Orality, Textuality, and the Formation of the Hebrew Bible, meets 11/17/2007, 4:00 PM to 6:30 PM, Room: Del Mar A - GH, to discuss the theme Rethinking Business as Usual in Light of Orality and Textuality. On tap:

Susan Niditch, Amherst College, Presiding
Joachim Schaper, University of Aberdeen
The Textualisation of Israelite Religion in the Context of the "Orality and Literacy" Debate (30 min)
Frank Polak, Tel Aviv University
The Voiced Text in the Hebrew Bible: From Epic Song to Biblical Narrative and Midrashic Exegesis (30 min)
William M. Schniedewind, University of California-Los Angeles
Rethinking Inner-biblical Exegesis and Biblical Criticism in Light of Orality & Textuality (30 min)
Werner H. Kelber, Rice University
Implications of the Oral-Scribal Approach to Tanach Studies (30 min)
Discussion (30 min)

And finally, S19-16, Function of Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphal Writings in Early Judaism and Early Christianity (through 3rd to 4th centuries CE), meets 11/19/2007, 9:00 AM to 11:30 AM, Room: Manchester H - GH, on the theme Theoretical Issues. The schedule is:

Lee Martin McDonald, Acadia Divinity College, Presiding
James A. Sanders, Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center
Non-Masoretic Literature in Early Judaism and its Function in the New Testament (20 min)
Craig Evans, Acadia Divinity College, Respondent (5 min)
Discussion (5 min)
James H. Charlesworth, Princeton Theological Seminary
The Book of the People from the People of the Book (20 min)
Discussion (5 min)
Lee Martin McDonald, Acadia Divinity College
What Do We Mean by "Canon"?: A Look at Some Ancient and Modern Questions (20 min)
Loren Johns, Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminary, Respondent (5 min)
Discussion (5 min)
Ken M. Penner, Acadia Divinity College
Citation Formulae as Indices to Canonicity in Early Jewish and Early Christian Literature (20 min)
Jonathan Soyars, Princeton Theological Seminary, Respondent (5 min)
Discussion (5 min)
Sarah L. Schwarz, Haverford College
Pseudepigrapha Among the Pagans?: Exploring the Boundaries of Audience (20 min)
Discussion (5 min)

If you're going to be there, look for me and say hello.

Tags: Childs, Psalms, Theological Exegesis, Canon

This story starts back in Paris, if the truth be known. You can look back at that and other photo essays to set the current one in context.

After the second prenatal scan, today, we feel a bit better about going public. We both found ourselves relieved when we saw the heartbeat flicker, and then astounded when the technician adjusted the ultrasound probe to reveal all four chambers of the little heart, pumping away.

Six of thirty photos in this essay are of the person we refer to as "Little E." The rest testify to the delightfully mild fall we've had in Fife this year, and to the fortune we've had in relocating to a new flat (with room for a tiny nursery, of course). There are a few belly shots, too, mostly at SJD's request.

I should let the essay speak for itself. Those who want to know the gender will have to read to the end.

Update (6 Nov): Thanks especially to the many medical professionals among my relatives for not correcting my Latin. I'm obliged to leave the link as it was, having circulated it already to friends and family. In that case, let the term word be German.

Tags: Personal

As has been mentioned, Richard Bauckham retired from his post as Bishop Wardlaw Professor of New Testament this last Wednesday. I wanted to comment it sooner, but it took me a while to upload the photo of him fielding questions on his last day in the Biblical Studies seminar—a seminar he founded at St Andrews sometime after his arrival here 15 years ago. It's been a privilege to learn from him.

Jim Davila posted his speech as head of school, and supervisee Mariam Kamell comments here.

The book we've been discussing for the last four sessions is Bauckham's Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. If you feel you're missing out, you can have a look at the blog series Chris Tilling ran on the book, or on the same site an interview about it with Bauckham. I hear the book is about to go on tour: first at Gordon-Conwell, then at both ETS and SBL in San Diego. Details for the SBL panel review of the book are as follows:

S17-79 :: Synoptic Gospels

11/17/2007. 1:00 PM to 3:30 PM :: Room: San Diego C - MM

Theme: Panel Review of Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006)

Jeffrey Peterson, Austin Graduate School of Theology, Texas, Presiding
John Kloppenborg, University of Toronto, Panelist (20 min)
Adela Yarbro Collins, Yale University, Panelist (20 min)
James Crossley, University of Sheffield, Panelist (20 min)
Richard Bauckham, University of St. Andrews-Scotland, Respondent (25 min)

Tags: St Andrews

John Hobbins of Ancient Hebrew Poetry has recently performed a deep crawl of blogs related to the Bible. His attempts to map them have garnered some attention (Iyov wonders, "what am I?") and if the attempt is open to challenge, I can at least note with gratitude my own inclusion.

Yesterday John cataloged a few bloggers indebted to Childs in a post preliminary to the final mapping, which he later followed up with a charge to let canonical exegesis take a wider view. One worry of his may be that conversation in this camp (if it is even proper to speak of such a thing) is insular. He writes, "It bothers me when Bible blogdom becomes a monologue among like-minded Christians." John does a good job taking his own advice, however, and omits to name names:

Scholar-bloggers fall into two categories. Those that keep a blogroll and interact with a community of other bloggers, and those that don't. Those that don't abuse the genre. Here is a list of the worst offenders: [omitted by a thoughtful editor].

The complaint leveled at canonical exegesis links to B. Sommer's review of Michael Fishbane's Haftarot commentary to reinforce the point that canonical reading should learn from Jewish as well as Christian history of reception.

I confess that I try to keep something of a low profile as a blogger, not for fear of conflict, but because as an impoverished grad student time is about the only commodity I have to my name. Having had a Childs-related (because research-related) online presence for not quite three years, it was with bemusement, but not envy, that I noted Phil's success in launching a vigorous debate about Childsean hermeneutics just this September. I have followed the discussion there as best I can, but have confined myself mostly to posting links in my sidebar/blogroll. In Phil's own words, "I've been having online dialogues of the most colossal proportions. So involved, in fact, that I have no time or energy to write anything substantial today." Which is a major reason I've had to keep my distance.

Nevertheless, John's post managed to draw me out this morning. I have commented on it already (with a PS), and I repeat my remarks here as well, in part so I can link them up:

Hi John,

I have been very reluctant to get drawn into the debates that have recently surfaced online even though, as you note in the sidebar, there has been some "astoundingly thoughtful comment." That's because (a) I'm working against several deadlines at the moment, (b) I've been working on the particular problem of Childs' reception too long probably, so little seems fresh on the Q to me, and (c) I have some doubts about blogs as a medium for advancing the state of the Q here when so much energy has been expended on it in more traditional media over the last 2.5 decades. Also, though the reasons why I was drawn to my PhD topic are complex and rightly point to an appreciation of Childs' work on my part, this is not uncritical. I find myself wondering about how to get out from under this first project in the next.

Nevertheless, you have drawn me. I'm still facing immanent deadlines, so I'll have to get to it.

James makes a good point, and so do you, John, in response. It has often been claimed that Childs frequently changes his mind (so Barr above all, but by no means exclusively), and typically I think this perception has been overstated. On this precise point, it is unquestionably true that Childs had to rethink some of his initial work on what he calls "the mystery of Israel" (see chapter 4 of my forthcoming dissertation). Fishbane is a great figure to bring up at this juncture.

Rolf Rendtorff, as a self-professed Christian canonical reader, is another. He fell out with Childs over precisely this issue (see his review of BTONT in JBTh 9). I don't know if you've seen his Leviticus commentary yet, but it represents a career-long effort to give the Jewish reception of the Hebrew Bible its due. For Rendtorff this is an imperative for Christians reading the OT.

On the other hand, though Childs moved from talk of midrash (Jewish in his view) to allegory (the traditional Christian reading strategy—I know that can sound over simple, but its how he sees it), he still strove to be a student of the Jewish tradition. When I interviewed him in Cambridge I pushed him exactly here. Why no midrash anymore? His answer came out as advice to a student—you'll never master the material; trust me, I've tried. Also, Jewish readers themselves don't agree on these things.

To my mind the best further reading here is Childs' 1999 essay "The Almost Forgotten Genesis Commentary of Benno Jacob." Not only does it tell the the story of Jacob's Genesis commentary, it also alludes to Jacob's Exodus commentary, which Childs used heavily in his own commentary of 1974. The astonishing thing is that Childs, when in Jerusalem [in 1963], secured a copy of the then almost unknown manuscript and brought it back to Yale. He was making serious use of it decades before it was printed (first in English translation [1992], and only very recently in its German original [1997]). There is a deep commitment to Jewish readings which really never leaves, even though he gains clarity over the years on what an explicitly Christian reading of the tradition entails.

Personally I haven't sorted out where I stand on these issues. At the seminar paper I gave on the topic last week there seemed to be quite a bit of sympathy for Rendtorff's position over against Childs'. Still, the latter is (in a sense) the lectio difficilior. Should a Jewish and Christian scholar really come to different results on that basis? (If no, why not?) I agree with your general point, however. It would be ironic indeed if Childs became a warrant for "canonical readers," what ever that may mean, to neglect Jewish reception in preference for Christian. Fortunately, some of the best theological readers today (who follow Childs at times and do not follow Childs) avoid this: Walter Moberly, Markus Bockmuehl, etc.

Incidentally, I also agree with your comment on Cook's blog about the neglected works. The only real Wirkung the NT Intro got seems to have been among Roman Catholic scholars in Germany. And James Kugel explicitly mentioned the sensus literalis essay in his respectful comments at the small Childs session at SBL Vienna this summer, but who has worked with it seriously?

I'm quite happy for any discussion of this to continue on John's page, where it originates, but I did want to put my answer in a broader context as well.

I might add, too, that my focus on Childs of late is born of at least three things: his recent passing, my work locating his, and an increasing reluctance to speak too far beyond my competence. I do think the scope of Occasional Publications will broaden once I dig into the next project.

Tags: Childs, Theological Exegesis, Midrash