Fuller Seminary's New Library Featured in LA Times
I was happy to see that my favorite place to study was in today’s LA Times in an article that also featured my friend Noel. Fuller’s old library was kind of dingy, with an elevator that seemed as if it belonged in a haunted mansion. I actually feared for my life taking that elevator. Their new elevator is this huge snazzy thing that announces in a pleasant female voice, “Going up.” “Going down.” It gets old after awhile if you sit too close to the elevator as you study.
The exterior of the building is designed to look like an open book (see picture to the right), which is kinda neat. There is a balcony on the top floor, so you can admire the mountains and a good bit of Pasadena. Perhaps the lovely LA smog. If you sit by the windows on the second floor, the tops of the palm trees keep you company.
Noel is right about the competition over outlets in the old library. There were these power strips that looked like they eventually would have started an electrical fire apocalypse. Fuller students almost universally use laptops everywhere they go, which is an interesting contrast to UCLA undergrads. The new library makes it easy to plug in wherever you feel like studying at the moment, with a mix of comfy chairs, communal tables, or studious carrells for options.
Overall, a wonderful new library. And I haven’t even mentioned the amazing collection of books!!
Quranic Studies Taking a Note from Biblical Studies?
In his lecture today, Prof. Bartchy referenced an intriguing article in the NY Times about current study of the Qur’an. The Qur’an is considered by Muslims to be the very words of God, spoken through the prophet (peace be upon him) who spoke the words of God for his companions to transcribe verbatim. For Muslims, then, the Qur’an represents the actual words of God–without a hint of human authorship: the final revelation of God. Prof. Bartchy often says that many Christians (namely, conservative Evangelicals) wish the Bible was the Qur’an. That is, many Christians wish that the Bible was wholly God’s word without any human influence.
Those of us who believe in the authority and inspiration of the Bible, but also engage in true critical scholarship, must be honest about the humanity which drips from every holy page. By accepting the Bible’s (divinely inspired) humanness, I am able to tackle difficult questions of history while also living my life in accordance with the divinely inspired message of the text. This position may make me a liberal to my more conservative Evangelical friends, while it makes me a conservative to my more “secular” friends. However you categorize it, this is the sort of position that is uber-controversial for devoted Muslims to hold when related to the Qur’an.
But are things changing a wee bit at a time? A recent conference at the University of Notre Dame, “The Qur’an in Its Historical Context,” represents a burgeoning intellectual movement seeking to apply critical research to the Qur’an. The site describes the conference as “a major international conference addressing the most recent theories, controversies, and discoveries in the field of Quranic Studies.” It builds off an earlier conference held at Notre Dame, intending to be “a unique forum for a discussion of the historical circumstances in which the Quran was formed, and of its relationship to earlier literature, notably the Bible.” A glance at the conference schedule reads like sessions in the program book for SBL.
Nicholas Kistof’s NY Times article makes an interesting parallel to critical scholarship of the Bible:
“We’re experiencing right now in Koranic studies a rise of interest analogous to the rise of critical Bible studies in the 19th century,” said Gabriel Said Reynolds, a Notre Dame professor and organizer of the conference.
The Notre Dame conference probably could not have occurred in a Muslim country, for the rigorous application of historical analysis to the Koran is as controversial today in the Muslim world as its application to the Bible was in the 1800s. For some literal-minded Christians, it was traumatic to discover that the ending of the Gospel of Mark, describing encounters with the resurrected Jesus, is stylistically different from the rest of Mark and is widely regarded by scholars as a later addition.
Likewise, Biblical scholars distressed the faithful by focusing on inconsistencies among the gospels. The Gospel of Matthew says that Judas hanged himself, while Acts describes him falling down in a field and dying; the Gospel of John disagrees with other gospels about whether the crucifixion occurred on Passover or the day before. For those who considered every word of the Bible literally God’s word [i.e., objective historical truth], this kind of scholarship felt sacrilegious.
This is my favorite bit from the article:
One scholar at the Notre Dame conference, who uses the pseudonym Christoph Luxenberg for safety, has raised eyebrows and hackles by suggesting that the “houri” promised to martyrs when they reach Heaven doesn’t actually mean “virgin” after all. He argues that instead it means “grapes,” and since conceptions of paradise involved bounteous fruit, that might make sense. But suicide bombers presumably would be in for a disappointment if they reached the pearly gates and were presented 72 grapes.
This point gets at the profound task that Quranic (or biblical) scholars have to undertake. An otherwise harmless word study has profound implications for how religious followers understand and act upon their faith. With Bartchy, I think this parallel has profound pedagogical relevance when teaching critical biblical studies to committed Christians.
Happy Birthday, Darwin
Two hundred years ago, on this day, Charles Darwin was born. His work (and reactions to it) has led to some of the most frustrating conversations I have ever had, among other things. NPR had an interersting story this morning about Darwin’s relationship with his wife and her influence on him in his struggle with faith. It should also be noted that the entire library of Darwin’s works are now available for free.
To leave you with some food for thought, I would like to share the last lines of Darwin’s Origins of Species:
Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.
Baylor Backpedals on SAT Payments
After a little while of defending the “win-win” integrity of providing financial incentives for their freshmen to retake the SAT, Baylor University has dropped the program:
After several days in which educators and admissions experts nationally lambasted its plan to pay accepted applicants to raise their SAT scores (and presumably the institution’s ranking in U.S. News & World Report), Baylor is admitting a mistake.
Lori Fogleman, a spokeswoman, said in an interview Thursday night that the university “goofed” by offering the cash incentives. “We have heard the criticism,” she said. “It just had the appearance of impropriety. It raised unnecessary questions.”
[ . . . ]
Because Baylor adopted the program after a drop in its SAT average — and amid a concerted effort to raise its U.S. News rankings — the payments were widely criticized as an attempt to game the system. Critics said that Baylor was becoming the “poster child for SAT misuse,” and faculty and students said that they were embarrassed by the initiative.
From Inside Higher Ed.
Baylor Pays Freshmen to Retake SATs?
Well, this is new. It strikes me as somewhat unethical and probably not the sort of thing a Christian university should be doing:
Baylor University in Waco, Tex., which has a goal of rising to the first tier of national college rankings, last June offered its admitted freshmen a $300 campus bookstore credit to retake the SAT, and $1,000 a year in merit scholarship aid for those who raised their scores by at least 50 points.
Of this year’s freshman class of more than 3,000, 861 students received the bookstore credit and 150 students qualified for the $1,000-a-year merit aid, said John Barry, the university’s vice president for communications and marketing.
“We’re very happy with the way it worked out,” Mr. Barry said in a telephone interview. “The lion’s share of students ended up with the $300 credit they could use in our bookstore. That’s not going to make or break the bank for anybody. But it’s sure been appreciated by our students and parents.”
The offer, which was reported last week by the university’s student newspaper, The Lariat, raised Baylor’s average SAT score for incoming freshmen to 1210, from about 1200, Mr. Barry said. That score is one of the factors in the rankings compiled by U.S. News & World Report.
See the NY Times article here. So, they are spending [(861x$300)+(150x$1000)=] $408,300 to jack up their score an average of 10 points? Even ethical issues aside, is such a small increase even worth nearly a half a million dollars? One point brought up in the article is that only freshman were given the opportunity. One sophomore is quoted: “I think the people who put forth this decision completely compromised what they say Baylor is about: its Christian values, the integrity of Baylor, the integrity of Baylor 2012.”
Update (10/15/2008): The Chronicle for Higher Education has a more thorough assessment than the NY Times posted. I appreciated this bit, which seems to confirm my doubts that this was an effective plan, ethics aside:
The Lariat reported that the retesting policy raised the freshman class’s average score to 1210 from 1200. That jump, however, would not alter the college’s ranking, according to Robert J. Morse, director of data research at U.S. News. “This shows a lack of understanding of the statistics used in our rankings,” he said in an e-mail message. “If they think that 10 SAT points makes a ‘real’ difference, they are wrong.”
The Daily Show mentions Messiah College, again
This Monica Goodling fiasco just won’t stay buried, I guess. Messiah College has once again had its reputation dragged through the mud (find more in this old post). The Daily Show has taken an even lower blow in its mention of Messiah College. In a “stroll down memory lane” on the show, Jon Stewart covered the Goodling scandal again. This time, Stewart goes beyond merely using the name of the school as a laugh line (as he did in May 2007) and says, “Messiah College: where people have faith that they’ll receive a quality education and yet somehow it never arrives.” Never mind that Messiah College was ranked by U.S. News & World Report as number four in its “Best Colleges” for comprehensive bachelor’s colleges in the North in 2007 and 2008. And never mind that it is actually a pretty progressive place! The comment is about a minute into this video:
[vodpod id=Groupvideo.1438156&w=425&h=350&fv=videoId%3D178077]I’m going to repeat what I said during the bad press about Goodling:
“Lesson: Don’t judge an entire academic institution based on the actions of one of its alumni. At the same time, don’t pass immediate judgment on an alumna because of your assumptions about Christian colleges.”
Come on, Jon Stewart. We know you’re smarter than that.
The Bible judged by its cover…
I just came across the article, “Selling the Good Book by its cover,” by Stephanie Simon at the LA Times. It is an interesting look at something I’m always fascinated by when I go to the bookstore: what do the Bibles look like here? Here are some excerpts from the article, which features the efforts of Zondervan publishers:
GRAND RAPIDS, MICH. — The original scribes of the Bible may have been inspired by God. Their modern-day successors? They find inspiration in vacuum cleaners, polka-dot bedspreads and a slick, hot-pink Juicy Couture purse.
This all may sound a bit irreverent. But consider it from the Bible publisher’s point of view: How do you sell a really old book that 91% of households already have?
You can’t update the content, or get the author on Oprah.
But you can make the look sizzle. If pink and shiny sells a purse, why not a psalm?
[ . . . ]
It’s still possible to purchase, for as little as $7, a traditional Bible with a stiff, dark, fake-leather cover, of the sort that used to be tucked into pews all across America. But if the industry had stuck to those, it wouldn’t be selling $770 million worth of Bibles a year in the U.S. alone.
Figuring an average price of about $30, which may well be conservative, that adds up to 25 million Bibles a year. By comparison, Scholastic has shipped 14 million copies of the latest Harry Potter book in the U.S. The second-hottest book this year, “The Secret,” has sold about 3 million copies.
In that context, the Bible’s success is phenomenal. Zondervan plans to keep stoking demand by making sure God’s word looks hip, sounds relevant and is advertised all over, including in Rolling Stone magazine and Modern Bride, on MySpace — even on a jumbotron in New York City’s Times Square.
[ . . . ]
Zondervan began churning out limited-edition, one-season-only Scripture: a thin checkbook-shaped Bible with jazzy blue and silver stripes for $30, a square Bible in meadow green for $35, a pocket-size edition in soft browns and oranges for $20. At least a third of Bibles are purchased as gifts, and Zondervan made sure there was one for every occasion — even sorority rush. (The light-pink and apple-green colors of Alpha Kappa Alpha have been a big hit.)
[ . . . ]
All this has raised predictable concerns.
“Where the fine line between accessibility and desecration is, is not real clear sometimes,” says Phyllis Tickle, a noted Christian author. “I find it really, really distressing to think that young people may have their first impression of Christian Scripture presented to them in an almost pandering way.”
[ . . . ]
In a way — an admittedly commercial way — theologian Kurt Fredrickson sees modern publishers as following the hallowed footsteps of Christian heroes such as Jan Hus, William Tyndale and Martin Luther, who risked their lives to bring God’s word to the masses.
“For centuries, there’s been a desire to make the Bible more accessible,” says Fredrickson, who directs the doctor of ministry program at Fuller Theological Seminary.
Yes, the concept of a trendy Gospel may sound tacky.
“But we’re Americans,” Fredrickson says. “We’re always trying to find a niche.”
I admit that I’m conflicted about this trend. I find myself probably somewhere between Tickle and Fredrickson. I am certainly disgusted by some of the gimmicks, but on the other hand, if the gimmicks get people to read the Bible (rather than letting it sit pretty on a shelf), then I think that’s a good thing. Sure, people who are not trained in biblical studies may not understand the historical situation and the nuances of literary criticism. But I think it’s still good for people to read it for themselves, and making it more “hip” looking may help some people do that. To be honest, I think my Quest Study Bible by Zondervan was one of the reasons I got so excited about the Bible in high school. And that initial excitement got me here, so I can’t argue with that.
Christian High School Student Sues his Teacher for "Anti-Christian" Remarks
Okay, so when I was a fundamentalist high school student, sure, I felt like I was an oppressed minority. This is the nature of fundamentalism, you think that your group (no matter how big) is a small minority facing attacks from all sides. So, all comments, especially from authority figures, are subject to this filter that is actively searching for “Anti-Christian” attacks. Now, I don’t know if this kid is actually a fundamentalist, but he and his parents seem to at least be acting with this “minoritized” suspicion.
A LA Times article reports an ongoing story at Capistrano Valley High in Orange County, noting that 16 year-old Chad Farnan, along with his parents, “filed a lawsuit alleging that [James] Corbett[, an Advanced Placement European history teacher,] had violated the student’s constitutional rights by making ‘highly inappropriate’ and offensive statements in class regarding Christianity.” What were the allegedly offensive statements?
At the heart of the Farnans’ lawsuit is a tape recording from what they said is a class lesson Corbett taught Oct. 19. The lawsuit notes that Corbett told students that “when you put on your Jesus glasses, you can’t see the truth,” and that religion is not “connected with morality.”
Hmmm. Well, perhaps the teacher could benefit from using a little more sensitivity and, well, precision in his comments. Unfortunately, we don’t have a transcript of what he was talking about, but as one perceptive supporter of the teacher points out in the article: “It’s hard to teach European history without being somewhat critical of organized religion. But aren’t we supposed to learn from our mistakes? Isn’t that why we study history?” The article also references a Quaker student and an Irish Roman Catholic student who have not been offended by any the history teacher’s remarks. The Catholic student adds: “For hundreds of years the church was corrupt, and that has to be discussed.”
I can certainly imagine a context in which the teacher is raising legitimate concerns about corruption in the religious institutions of European history. For example, let’s say that part of the lesson for the day is this: The state churches of Europe were not interested in worshiping God, but rather protecting their power. For the religious institution, religion was not “connected with morality.” Many Christians today don’t recognize the corruption of the church’s past because they are trying to see church history through rose-colored glasses. But we have to recognize the truth of history and “when you put on your Jesus glasses, you can’t see the truth.”
This is the context within which I imagine the teacher giving his comments. Like I mentioned, he probably could have been a little more careful about the way he made the comments, but if he said something like I imagine, then he’s raising a valid point about ideological presuppositions when studying history. It seems to me that an Advanced Placement course should address the issue of preconceived notions in historical investigation.
The article highlights the 300 or so supports outside the school rallying on behalf of the teacher, Dr. Corbett. They have cool signs like, “Who would Jesus sue?” I like that one. They also talk about a Southern Baptist pastor, Wiley S. Drake, in the crowd recording interviews with the supporters for his Internet radio show. Drake is a guy, by the way, who has called his own supporters to pray for his critics to die (see here too–so much for Jesus asking us to love our “enemies”). His comments for the LA Times article are entirely in line with the attitude I mention at the beginning of this post: “I’m tired of being criticized and ostracized for being a Christian. I’m glad Chad filed his suit. It’s time we Christians fought back.”
It’s this “fighting” mentality that leads this situation in to a frenzied circus. I don’t know the context, so I’m like every other observer, but I would think that a civil conversation with the teacher would do the trick. I’m not proud of the fact that I was a creationist in high school, but a friend and I raised concerns with my high school psychology teacher about how she talked about evolution “as if it were fact” (those were my words at the time). She told us that she had thought about the issue of creationism and was sensitive to our concerns. She just didn’t see the evidence for creationism, but she’d be willing to take a look at any evidence we might have had. No law suit. Just a conversation. And it worked out okay. And I changed my mind when I got to college anyway, so I completely agree with her now.
I know that it’s tempting to see the world against you as a Christian high schooler at a public school, but honestly, I’d hope that a Christian school would give you the same kind of critical reflection on the history of the church. Christians shouldn’t feel they have to defend all the despicable acts of Christian history. I can only hope that the fever dies down and conservative Christians start to see that “fighting” is not as productive as conversing. Who knows, people might actually learn something from the conversation.
Update (12/23/07): See some reflections on this article and my post over at if i were a bell, i’d ring.
Update (12/28/07): See this editorial at the LA Times.
Huckabee and his "Theology Degree"
Like Michael Westmoreland-White and Jim West, I am skeptical of thinking a “theology degree” could qualify a person for presidency of the United States. I do see some potential benefits, depending on one’s training in that degree. For example, if a person focused on the relationship between theology and culture in American society or perhaps comparative religion, I think that they would be well-trained with some helpful intellectual tools to assess the religious landscape of the United States and how it affects public policy. I think a theology degree could possibly help an elected leader critically evaluate the use and abuse of religious language to make public policy decisions. Huckabee’s rhetoric is something else. It seems that Huckabee is posturing himself as the most Christian candidate out of all the Republicans. Note this NPR piece highlighting one of his ads in Iowa playing “Silent Night” in the background and talking about the “celebration of the birth of Christ.” I especially liked the comment from NPR’s Martin Kaste afterwards: “Now there’s a wily trick: you get ahead in the polls and then you declare Christmas!”
Check out how he’s talked about his “theology degree”:
I’m as strong on terror as anybody. In fact I think I’m stronger than most people because I truly understand the nature of the war that we are in with Islamofascism. These are people that want to kill us. It’s a theocratic war. And I don’t know if anybody fully understands that. I’m the only guy on that stage with a theology degree. I think I understand it really well. [Interview with Christian Broadcasting Network on 11/8/2007]
Or in answering the creepy questioner who asked “Do you believe this book?” [holding up a King James Version of the Bible] on the CNN YouTube Debate on 11/28/2007 (See James McGrath’s post):
And as the only person here (probably) on the stage with a theology degree, there are parts of it I don’t fully comprehend and understand, but I’m not supposed to, because the Bible is the revelation of an infinite God and no finite person is ever going to fully understand it. If they do, their God is too small.
He made a few mistakes while answering the YouTube question, like calling the bit about “plucking out your eye” “allegorical” (perhaps it is hyperbole, but not allegory) and his mention of Matthew 25 is a particular interpretation of the text, an exegetically questionable one. But the second quote here is clearly a better use of his alleged “theology degree” than the former.
As it turns out, however, Mike Huckabee does not have a “theology degree.” He spent a year at Southwestern Theological Seminary and dropped out to go work for televangelist James Robison. Check out this bit in a NY Times interview Zev Chafets had with Huckabee:
If young Mike Huckabee was ever rebellious or difficult, there’s no record of it. He preached his first sermon as a teenager, married his high-school sweetheart and went off to Ouachita Baptist University in Arkadelphia. There he majored in speech and communications, worked at a radio station and earned his B.A. in a little more than two years. He spent a year at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Tex., before dropping out to work for the televangelist James Robison, who bought him his first decent wardrobe and showed him how to use television.
During this interview, Huckabee also made the faux pas of wondering aloud about Mormonism:
I asked Huckabee, who describes himself as the only Republican candidate with a degree in theology, if he considered Mormonism a cult or a religion. ‘‘I think it’s a religion,’’ he said. ‘‘I really don’t know much about it.’’
I was about to jot down this piece of boilerplate when Huckabee surprised me with a question of his own: ‘‘Don’t Mormons,’’ he asked in an innocent voice, ‘‘believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?’’
A theology degree doesn’t have to make you an expert in comparative religion. There are a lot of foci to a theology degree. I’m focusing on New Testament studies and by the time I finish my Master of Divinity this summer, I will not have had a single course on Mormonism. On the other hand . . . neither does it make you an expert on “Islamofascism” (a scary term in the mouth of someone running as the most Christian candidate for president), which Huckabee claims to “understand really well” because he is the only one with a “theology degree.” Even if he had a degree in theology, he would not necessarily be qualified to “understand really well” Islamofascism. Huckabee claimed both a degree that he didn’t have and expertise that such a degree would not have given him.
Mike Huckabee responds to the ensuing fuss:
I have a bachelor of arts in religion and a minor in communications in my undergraduate work. And then I have 46 hours on a master’s degree at Southwestern Theology Seminary. So, my degree as a theological degree is at the college level and then 46 hours toward a masters — three years of study of New Testament Greek, and then the rest of it, all in Seminary was theological studies, but my degree was actually in religion.
Did he really major in religion? Or communication like the NY Times article says? Is Mike Huckabee making his “theology degree” claims sound better by telling the world he was a religion major instead of a communications major? Ouachita Baptist University (who named its school of education after him) says that Huckabee graduated in 1976 with a degree in “pastoral ministry”:
Governor Huckabee and his wife, Janet, entered Ouachita as freshmen in the fall of 1973. The couple married following their freshman year. The Governor graduated from Ouachita in 1976 with a degree in pastoral ministry.
“Religion” sounds better than “pastoral ministry” when you’re in politics, I guess. Well, this mess clearly shows that Huckabee has some problems showing himself in an accurate light. But further, I’m just a little perturbed with how he used a “theology degree” to gain him some traction with voters. People already make assumptions about what my theology degree means. This just makes it worse.
Update (1/08/08): See also Dwight’s reflections on the issue at Versus Populum.
The irony of George Bush
I try not to get too political on this blog, but this is just too good to resist. Besides, it lends itself to an interesting exercise of interpreting the words of the powerful.
In vetoing the recent bill on stem-cell research, Bush made the following comments:
America is also a nation founded on the principle that all human life is sacred — and our conscience calls us to pursue the possibilities of science in a manner that respects human dignity and upholds our moral values.
[ . . . ]
Destroying human life in the hopes of saving human life is not ethical — and it is not the only option before us.
Does he not realize what other policies he might have could be interpreted through these words? What of collateral damage? What of the science of our vast cache of weapons? The second statement I’ve quoted is particularly interesting. Those exact words could have been applied to going to war with Iraq. The same words could be used to oppose the death penalty for people who are a “threat” to others.
Anyway, these smaller posts will have to suffice while I’m in a two week intensive at Fuller–not much time to blog at the moment.
-
Elsewhere . . .- Blog titles beginning with "A" to "Z" on your reader Mark Goodacre
- Of making many books there is no end Chris Brady
- Free Online: The Liddell-Scott Jones Lexicon S and C
- Does Higher Criticism Attempt to “Destroy the Bible”? II agathos
- Steven J. Friesen and the Identity of Satan’s Throne in Pergamum alan
- Does Higher Criticism Attempt to “Destroy the Bible”? agathos
- Bloomsbury buys Continuum Mark Goodacre
- Imperial America Peter J. Leithart
- C.F.D. Moule on the Birth of the New Testament d. miller
- Responding to Kostenberger (with comparisons to Marshall) Jeremiah
-
As a member of RevGalBlogPals, I am committed to building a supportive online community for women clergy, women church professionals, and women in religious life.
Research assisted by: