Since the annual meeting for the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) is coming up later this month, and it’s my first run-in with the bigwig conference, it may be a good time for me to think about what I am interested in pursuing as a potential scholar. What captures my attention, passions, and interests in the field of biblical studies? I’m still trying to figure this out myself, so I’m just going to do a list format here. And maybe I should start with what I don’t want to do, since that’s easier to know.

Things that make me go “ugh…”:

• Highly speculative historical reconstruction of events: What is the dating for Paul’s various letters to the Corinthian churches? Did the exodus really happen and, if so, when? What were the origins of the Dead Sea Scrolls community and who was the “Wicked Priest”? It’s not that I don’t appreciate the work that others do in trying to figure these things out, but it’s just not my bag, baby. These actually are pretty tame as far as speculation goes. Generally, the more speculative it is, the more abhorrent I find it.
• Source and redaction criticism: Did one definitive “Q” source exist (that is, a source used by both Matthew and Luke) and of what did it consist? What parts of the Pentateuch were written by the J, E, D, and P sources? Again, not bad work, but not for me.
• Highly philosophical interpretive methods: Highfalutin language and incomprensible systems and grids is a major turn off. I do like a bit of poststructuralism in moderation, but for me, it can sometimes skate the edge of boredom.
• Historically disconnected and overly postmodern “reader-response” criticism: Boy if that doesn’t show my bias, eh? I don’t like history to reign supreme in hermeneutics, but I also don’t think that each individual reader is the be all and end all of the interpretative endeavor.
• Solely ideological criticism: I am a feminist and at times I like to dance with… (no, not with the devil in the pale moonlight)… liberation theology. I think that it goes over-the-top, however, when it is an undergirding hermeneutical method. I appreciate the work that some feminists and liberationists are doing to ask the difficult questions, but I worry about losing historical perspective . . . similar to my concerns about reader-response criticism.

Things that make me go “mmm…”:

• Jesus: This is a little complicated. I’m not into a ton of speculation about the “historical Jesus,” but I don’t mind it as much as other speculative issues. I’m more intrigued by how Jesus is remembered by the New Testament documents and what that means for the history of the church and for Jesus followers today. But I do enjoy thinking about Jesus’ historical and cultural context. This is the purpose for historical research for me: not figuring out exactly how things happened, but pondering the significance of the surrounding culture (especially early Jewish culture).
• Anabaptist hermeneutics: What does critical New Testament scholarship mean when interpreted through the lens of a radical lived-out faith community? For example, what do we do with the early chapters of Acts and the Sermon on the Mount?
• Intertexuality: What is the relationship between various texts? As far as specific textual relationships go, having taken VanderKam’s course on early Judaism, I’m particularly interested in Second Temple Judaism. I’m also interested in texts that have no direct link (that we know of) and yet still share similar language and themes.
• Narrative or literary criticism: I like looking at the final form of the text in Scripture and wondering what it means, rather than contemplating what its source was and how it came to be… blah, blah, blah.
• Canonical criticism: What is the relationship of this text within the larger canon and what might it have meant to the community which pulled it together? I like the emphasis on community here. Inspired community formed the canon and hopefully an inspired community interprets it. My former pastor and newly inaugurated Goshen College president, Jim Brenneman (who studied with James Sanders) has dragged me a little closer to canonical issues.
• Apocalyptic literature: The last year or so of seminary life has really hit home the idea that apocalyptic literature was not an escape from present requirements but a motivation to “stay the course,” as it were. I’ve fallen in love with Matthew 25 and I think I could do a dissertation just on that text!
• Second Temple Jewish literature: I mentioned this above, but I think it deserves its own bullet point. I really enjoy reading about Jewish ideas around the time of Jesus and the early church. I can see myself getting into rabbinic literature at some point, but I’m not there yet.
• Some text criticism: Though you might think it too laborious for one such as myself, I nevertheless do enjoy doing some nitty gritty textual research. I really like some of the things I’ve read from Bart Ehrman (even though we don’t hang our hat on the same theological presuppositions).

In sum, I am not enthused by a lot of historical speculation, but don’t like total historical apathy. In that way, I would hope for some balance between the extremes. Most of my “mmm” category entails thinking about interpretation. Historical context is good only in service to our reading of the biblical text, not the other way around. At least that’s my way of looking at it. At the end of the day, the most important question to me is: what do we do with the words and narratives of Scripture?

To be perfectly honest, though, what really excites me is working through issues with other people. My eyes are more towards teaching, communicating, and discussing difficult things about biblical interpretation than it is making a name for myself on the details of lonely scholarly work. But you have to go through the latter to get to the goal of the former. And it’s not that I’m terribly adverse to
the academic minutia, that just isn’t my focus. Some of it is more interesting than other parts, but I don’t want to get lost in the abyss of research while forgetting the joy of the community.

[By the way, the pictured teacher is Brian Smith at Messiah College (my esteemed alma mater). Brian is hands-down and without-a-doubt the most significant inspiration that I have in becoming a teacher of biblical studies. He's an OT guy, but that's okay. Some of us need to take a look at the introduction to the New Testament KIDDING! Anyway, he's the best teacher I've ever had and I want to be like him.]