At least for theology nerds. It’s funny because Trump wouldn’t know divine impassibility from Divine Brown.
Daily Archives: 14 Oct 2016
Christoph Heilig’s Forthcoming Volume: Paul’s Triumph – Reassessing 2 Corinthians 2:14 in Its Literary and Historical Context
Paul’s metaphorical language in Second Corinthians 2:14 has troubled exegetes for a long time. Does the verb ‘thriambeuein’ indicate that Paul imagines himself as being led to execution in the Roman triumphal procession? Or is, by contrast, the victory in view that the apostles receive themselves? Maybe the Roman ritual does not constitute the background of this metaphor at all? Clarity with regard to these questions is a pressing issue in Pauline studies, given the fact that this metaphor introduces a central passage in the Pauline corpus that is of crucial importance for reconstructing the apostle’s self-understanding. Heilig demonstrates that, if all the relevant data are taken into account, a coherent interpretation of Paul’s statement is possible indeed. Moreover, Heilig brings the resulting meaning of Paul’s statement into dialogue with the political discourse of the time, thus presenting a detailed argument for the complex critical interaction of Paul with the ideology of the Roman Empire.
Definitely need to read this one. Heilig is a great young scholar and his last name is pretty spiffy too. Since Chris Tilling has forsaken me for SBL I’ve replaced him as my go to Paul specialist with Christoph. Because.
Anyway, if Paul is an interest of yours, you may want to get a copy when this comes out.
New in Bible and Interpretation–
A History of the Hasmonean State: Josephus and Beyond
Josephus cautiously avoided messianism in his history of the Has- monean period. He appears to have been reluctant to document any Hasmonean history that involved the violent messianism of the type that had contributed to the outbreak of the First Jewish War. Instead, he stresses that the Hasmonean family’s rule had gone well until they had established a monarchy and allowed sectarian factions to inﬂuence politics. Josephus wrote his books partly to support the aristocracy, namely the rule of the Pharisees and their leaders. For Josephus, these groups represented caution and Roman aristocratic values. They were opposed to the religious zeal of the Zealots and related Jewish groups that had caused the rebellion against Rome. For Josephus, the priests and the aristocrats were the only legitimate Jewish leaders.
Is to tell them that they aren’t ready. They aren’t ready to publish a book. They aren’t ready to write for Vetus Testamentum or New Testament Studies. They aren’t ready because they haven’t read enough. They haven’t thought enough. They haven’t discussed enough. Their ‘new insight’ is actually old news and it’s already been said better long before they were conceived. And they would know it if they had read enough, and thought enough, and discussed enough.
We do students no favors when we encourage them to publish before they’re ready. We only set them up for rejection, discouragement, and disappointment. Further, if they do publish then we have set them up for scorn and mockery.
Academic honesty matters. And it’s ok to honestly admit that lacking the prerequisite preparation and maturity do not make for happy writers.
Students, do your research. And that means taking the time and making the effort to do it. And then, when you’ve matured, do publish. We joyfully await your insights (and not the insights recycled from predecessors whom you don’t even know existed).