Biblical Studies Carnival September 2011 Episode II: The Biblioblogs Strike Back

I posted an early edition of the carnival halfway through the month. Now, on to the sequel! As a sci-fi fan, I figure I have to make this a trilogy, and so here’s what you need to do in order to ensure that the full extent of the vision of this carnival comes to fruition. First, spread the word about this second episode. Second,  please leave a link to any posts that you would like included in the third and final installment in the comment section of this post. Third, I want your input about the final installment: should it feature only highlights from this month, or only blog posts since today, or should it include everything that has been in the first two carnivals and more? Unless you make your opinion known by leaving a comment here, I may have to hold the final installment hostage until I get a sufficient response.

Let’s start with a bit of vulgarity and sex, to really get this second part of the carnival rolling!

Pseudo-Aristotle discussed the use of swear words in Bible translations.

BW16, who has been commenting on a variety of blogs lately, started a blog of his/her own as an “objective queer Bible scholar”. BW16 was delighted to have crossed a line (in BW3′s view, at least).

Chad Holtz discussed homosexuality as God’s gift to the church. And in response to Ben Witherington revisiting an earlier exchange on homosexualityRemnants of Giants offered an interpretation of the David and Goliath story as a disagreement between two homosexual men. Whether or not Uriah knew about thatJames Pate asks whether he knew about David and Bathsheba, while Deirdre Good’s mention of gays and lesbians saving marriage surely didn’t have David, Goliath, Jonathan and Bathsheba in mind.

Allan Bevere was willing to take off his pants to demonstrate the problem of arguing from silence.

Steve Thorngate asked about hiding a copy of Playboy inside a Bible.

Randall Rauser discussed the relationship between all the racy contents of the Bible and the fact that many treat it as a children’s book.

Chris Heard asked what is important in the Old Testament. Brian LePort asked which view of the Synoptic Problem you find most persuasive, as well as soliciting opinions about Gospel harmonization. John Hobbins discussed why they teach Biblical studies at Harvard and Yale.

Stephen Cook shared a fabulous aerial panoramic video of the Holy Land.

John Hobbins suggested that an anthropologically-informed approach to the Bible must include language-learning.

Scott Bailey discussed whether Jubilees does a better job of introducing God than Genesis does, as part of an ongoing series. Steve Wiggins discussed the origins of demons. James Tucker discussed memory and the Septuagint.

Mark Stevens spent a week with Douglas Moo. Mason, Koinonia and Credo House mentioned a debate between Bart Ehrman and Daniel Wallace. Alan Bandy reflected on Christian faith and Biblical scholarship. Bob dusted off Venuti’s volume on translation.

Guy Stroumsa reviewed Philip Harland’s book.

Mike Kok offered the second installment on the development and presuppositions of form criticism, and a post about alternatives, before wrapping up the series. Using computers for source criticism got a lot of attention this month. Charles Pope talked suspiciously about the hermeneutics of suspicion.

John Hobbins discussed the uniqueness of Biblical literature. Claude Mariottini blogged about Solomon becoming king.

James Pate began Sternberg’s Poetics of Biblical Narrative, including his suggestion to emend scholars rather than texts. He also discussed Cohen on Gentiles and Judaism.

Jim West shared photos from the Damascus Gate restoration project, which Leen Ritmeyer also blogged about, as did Helek Tov. The wall will apparently preserve its idiosyncrasies.

Stephen ProtheroRod of Alexandria and Deirdre Good discussed Michelle Bachmann’s view of submission. Claude Mariottini focused more on Rick Perry. Bill Heroman explained why Mary should have stayed at home. Nijay Gupta also “submitted” (groan) a review of a book on that topic. J. K. Gayle got pissed off. Betty Bayer blogged about a return to sacred texts of feminism.

Matthew Malcolm reviewed The Corinthian Question.

Chaplain Mike blogged about the NT Haustafeln.

Bill Mounce discussed a passage on individual interpretation of Scripture – and in the process, explained and illustrated why interpretation faces uncertainties. Peter Leithart discussed Biblicism.

Tom Verenna asked whether the author(s) of the Book of Job believed in God. Mike Wilson responded.

Jeff Carter took up my shadow Bible challenge and blogged about Nahum, with the theme “Kill ‘em and let God sort ‘em out.” John Anderson continued blogging about God Behaving Badly.

Parchment and Pen reviewed just about every one of the desperate attempts to try to make the reference to Abiathar in Mark 2:26 seem like something other than a mistake. Daniel Kirk suggested that if God isn’t ashamed of an all-too-human Bible, we shouldn’t be either.

Dorothy King discussed early images of the crucifixion. Christian Piatt encountered Jesus’ Doppelganger.

Larry Hurtado blogged about nomina sacra in ancient graffiti. Tim Henderson discussed σωτηρ as one late developing exampleRod discussed Hurtado’s view on faith and historical criticism.

Diglotting blogged about kyrios in the Gospel of Mark. Nick Norelli reviewed James D. G. Dunn’s book Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? Jonathan Robinson asked whether Paul was a Trinitarian. Craig Benno asked about the pre-existence of Christ in Colossians.

Bob Cornwall featured Bruce Epperly’s book on Philippians twice.

Fredrik Mulder discussed N. T. Wright’s critique of Eduard Schillebeeckx.

Richard Anderson discussed a very early date for Luke.

Christopher Skinner continued blogging about the world as a character in the Gospel of John, reaching the end of the series.

John Byron critically evaluated Brant Pitre’s methodology in considering the Jewish roots of the Lord’s Supper. Rachel Marszalek also had some thoughts on the Eucharist.

Mark Noll continued looking at the historical relationship between the Bible and Science at BioLogosInside Higher Ed had a piece on the situation of legitimate biological science at Calvin College and the risks faced by those who take a stand for it against the forces of ignorance. James Kidder presented scientific evidence regarding human origins. Scott Bailey discussed methodological naturalism. And John Byron responded by asking who gets to question the Bible. Karl Giberson emphasized the importance of remembering that the Bible is not a book but a library. Scot McKnight shared quotes from him and others on the subject. Steve Wiggins blogged about the Ark Park as Six Red Flags. Martin LeBar shared a quote from Galileo on science and Scripture. Mason asked whether we are missing the point of Genesis 1, interacted with some of the other big voicesand discussed the relevance to this topic of loving God with all your entrails. Joel took on Al Mohler, and Jim West told Ken Ham to shut up and offered Al Mohler something to read. Chad Holtz told Mohler “to hell with Adam and Eve.” RJS asked if the Gospel begins with Adam and Eve. Ken Schenck talked about it over coffee, and even the Biscuitnapper ranted on the subject of creationism, and we also learned what GOP candidates think. Randall Rauser recommended making peace with Darwin, and the British Center for Science Education pointed out that young-earth creationists also deny the conclusions of historians when they are at odds with their understanding of the Bible. Even my own pastor had thoughts on the creation-evolution topic. And just as of posting this, the news that John Schneider has resigned from Calvin College over the controversy.

RJS discussed Adam in Paul’s theology. Jeremy did a Q&A wish Sarah Ruden, author of Paul among the People. Tim Gombis discussed Habakkuk and Gospel improvisation. Nijay Gupta remembered (Bruce Longenecker remembering Paul remembering) the poor. Derek Leman explained Paul’s emphasis on Gentiles being made kosher to God. Matthew Malcolm interpreted the interpretation of tongues.

D. Miller suggested that Christianity is more ethnocentric than Judaism. Chaplain Mike discussed Torah, faith and works of the Law,

Joel Watts continued blogging through Scripture and the Authority of God, reaching chapter 5, chapter 6, chapter 7 and chapter 8. Over on the same blog they also blogged Paul among the People (more than once), Jesus and Money, and finished reviewing The African Memory of Mark. Joel also blogged about mimesis, sharing videos and linking to a web site about the work of Rene Girard.

Andrew Perriman blogged about historical and theological interpretation of the Bible. Daniel Kirk blogged about day one of a colloquium on theological interpretation, and added reflections after the second day. Andrew Perriman also discussed views of salvation in which history is or is not important, why you won’t go to heaven when you die, and the resurrection of the dead.

Scot McKnight interacted with Richard Bauckham on the use of the Bible in politics, and in a second part and a third.

Amanda Mac discussed James Cone’s perspective on the dialectic between Bible and experience.

Pete Enns continued discussing what inerrancy is and isn’t.

Henry Neufeld shared an example of the etymological fallacy.

Doug Mangum discussed online Bible study tools, and Ben Witherington blogged about the Bodleian Library’s KJV app. AWOL shared Bible software reviews. IGNTP Papyrus transcriptions became available online. James Tucker discussed the powerhouse of Bible software.

Lynn Cohick was videoed speaking about women in the Roman world.

Roger Pearse blogged about the Von der Goltz Codex.

Apocryphicity discussed similarities between ancient forgeries and modern ones.

Brian LePort (twice), Josh McManaway (twice), Jeremy Thompson, Rod of Alexandria, Joel Watts and Henry Neufeld were among those who responded to Michael Patton on the subject of Roman Catholic scholars. Maire ByrneSon of the Fathers and Women in Theology blogged about the assumption of Mary (yes, I know that isn’t in the Bible). But so what? Neither is an Encomium on the Archangel Gabriel of Unknown Authorship.

Paleojudaica, Rogue ClassicistN. S. Gill, and Jeffrey Garcia mentioned the statue of Hercules found in the Jezreel valley.

3QuarksDaily had a piece on the city of Ugarit.

The Talmud Blog explored redaction, transmission and interpretation.

Rod of Alexandria proposed that bibliobloggers need to do more bibliovlogging (or does it become vivliovlogging?). And a new carnival idea emerged as a result. The subject for October will be mythicism.

Tim Henderson considered whether Celsus provides evidence of early orthodox primacy, and also discussed Justin’s view of Jewish Christian legitimacy.

Otagosh pointed out that the Common English Bible has yet to live up to its name and discussed some examples of the translation.

Yitz Landes blogged about Metatron in a video game and Jesus in the Talmud. There was discussion of Hebrew and Jews in Persia.

Andie Byrnes shared a book review about the Jewish history of Egypt and the Cairo Genizah.

Craig Evans explained why he is suspicious of the authenticity of Morton Smith’s “find” at Mar Saba. Mike Kok, Rod of Alexandria, Tony Burke, myself and others also joined in the conversation, with several exchanges back and forth.

The lead codices were making ripples again, with the forger admitting they were fake, and David Elkington insisting that his were real. Oh, and there was at least one on sale on eBay for around $13,000. For more information, see posts by Steve Caruso, Joel WattsJim DavilaDan McClellan, Tom VerennaDirk Jongkind, Dorothy King, Jim West as well as the editorial by Philip Davies. But perhaps most importantly, see Dan McClellan’s very recent post offering a preliminary translation.

Robert Holmsted blogged about basic word order in Biblical Hebrew. Contrast that with Steve Runge’s post on contrast. Hear some Hebrew here.

David Stark pointed out new images in InscriptiFact of relevance to Biblical studies.

Ari Lamm offered a belated post on Day 2 of SBL.

Several bloggers mentioned that Eugene Nida passed away.

It is the start of the semester, and so I don’t have the time to make this second installment more organized than most sequels tend to be. I thought about giving this episode a sci-fi theme running all through it, with a lateral thinking puzzle component, but decided not to…yet. But there is still a new hope, not for an initial and confusingly numbered fourth episode, but for a third installment that may bring order and stability to the galaxy/empire of bibliblogging and to this month’s Biblical studies carnival! So please do let me know in the comments section if there are posts that should be included but have not been! And indicate whether you would like me to combine all the round-ups that make up this/next month’s carnival into one giant hyper-jam-packed special edition, and if so, whether it should be released direct to Blu-Ray.

  • Matthew Malcolm

    Nice! I suggest you do a disappointing series of prequels, in which you explore everything that happened before this month.

  • http://www.nearemmaus.com Brian LePort

    Thanks for the mentions! Great sequel.

  • http://jamesbradfordpate.blogspot.com James Pate

    Good carnival!  There’s a lot of appealing material there to go through!

  • http://www.patheos.com/community/exploringourmatrix/ James F. McGrath

    @c5114f3f791e3e55161a146ae249f318:disqus , I love it. There will definitely be prequels, even if it has to wait until years in the future, when current fans of the Biblical Studies Carnival are older and will inevitably find that the prequels don’t recapture the magic of the original trilogy… 

  • http://bwsixteen.wordpress.com/ BWSixteen

    Thanks for acknowledging my existence. Vader would likely adopt you as his second son.
    BW16

  • dpettegrew

    A prequel is brilliant.  

    For your sequel (or prequel?), you can add this post on Erastus (http://corinthianmatters.com/2011/08/17/the-search-for-the-historical-erastus/) which has been followed by comments from Erastus scholars.

  • Chad Holtz

    Thanks for the shout out!  

  • Pingback: James F. McGrath

  • Jim West

    Too ‘listy’.

  • Pingback: Sue Hurrell

  • Mike K.

    Isn’t the second movie always the best in a trilogy?  Great job again, and thanks for putting this much effort into this not once but three times!

  • http://www.facebook.com/thatjeffcarter Jeff Carter

    Thanks for including me.  Wow.

  • Henry Neufeld

    I vote for the prequel idea. Thanks for the fun of the double carnival.

  • http://rantingbiscuit.blogspot.com/ Biscuitnapper

    Gosh, thanks for the mention! I’ll try to provide a more reasoned critique next time…