On a previous post of mine where I brought up Michael Gorman’s explanation and thoughts concerning Theological Interpretation, the man himself wrote a comment in reply to some of the questions and critiques in the comments section.  You can read it HERE (see comment #6) Read more

A very common mistake that researchers make is what I call the ‘weak cumulative argument’.  This involves some thesis: ‘NT author X is referring to issue E whenever he brings up words/concepts A, B, C, or D’.  This often happens in studies that are intertextually-driven.  The problem here is that often the author can find one, two, or three examples that clearly make these connections.  However, he or she ends up spending many chapters looking for more ‘subtle’ examples.  Suprise! ... Read more

If you attended SBL this year, you may have noticed the numerous sessions on the subject Theological Interpretation of Scripture.  These sessions, some of which I attended, were very popular and rooms were filled to the brim. The interest in this topic is certainly there, but there is much confusion as to what exactly it is, what it stands for, and how it is done.  I respect many of the scholars who identify with it (Richard Hays, Walter Moberly, Mike... Read more

Our fourth ‘common mistake’ in theological research has to do with how we place an author (Paul, Luke, Matthew, John) in their own setting.  In an attempt to understand a particular NT author, many scholars scour contemporary writings (whether Jewish or Greco-Roman) to discern the influences on that NT writer. We must be cautious, though, of too eagerly searching for answers outside of the text.  What often ends up happening is this:  We think Paul (or Luke or whoever) connects... Read more

The third post in this series focuses on the problem of written work that lacks the simplicity and clarity to communicate well to the intended audience. In a sense, the writer probably thought it all made sense because he or she has been thinking about this work for a long time. What is usually missing in such work is necessary statements that preview the argument, summarize it afterward, and offer lots of important linking phrases like ‘The reason why this... Read more

In the last CMTR post, I mentioned the common mistake of trying to cover too much in a piece of research (like a thesis).  It is a discipline to reign in your argument and narrow your focus so as to keep the discussion tight.  This also makes the piece easier to evaluate as an examiner, book reviewer, or general reader.  Here I would like to highlight the opposite problem – narrowing your topic so much that you lose the forest... Read more

I have decided to launch a series of posts on the act of doing research specifically focused (in this particular series) on common mistakes in theological research.  This does not mean that I have all the answers, but that I am reflecting on this as a cautionary note for myself, but with also a wider aim of helping others.  Some of these I have discovered while reviewing or interacting with the work of others.  Some of these I have been... Read more

I recently came across this comment by Mike Gorman regarding the journal Biblical Theology Bulletin – ‘despite the title, [it is] a journal devoted primarily to social-scientific perspectives…’ (Elements of Biblical Exegesis, Hendrickson, 2008). Gorman is right.  This is more or less a social-science journal.  What is to stop them from changing their name?  It is a bit odd that the name of the journal seems almost completely useless either for readers or for authors (unless you are ‘in the... Read more

I am finishing Doug Moo’s new Colossians/Philemon commentary (Pillar, 2008) and I have benefited much from this book.  One particularly thorny issue is the matter of slavery in the NT.  Why did Paul, the theological sage, not outright condemn the practice of slavery when he championed equality on so many levels?  There are certainly some answers out there.  Moo himself throws out the common response that quickly dismissing (i.e. freeing) slaves might send them away only to a life of... Read more

A commenter on a previous post asked me if the new acquisition of Bruce Longenecker will have a positive impact on Baylor’s rankings as a place to do NT PhD studies.  Well, for some time now I have been impressed with Baylor and I once considered applying there (but my own GRE scores were…less than ideal!).  I am publishing an article (coming out in 2009) in Baylor’s Perspectives in Religious Studies because I think it is a journal that puts... Read more