Acadadia: Busy Quarter
If you pay attention to my blog at all, you may have noticed the recent silence. Never in my life have I had such a full overflowing plate of responsibilities. I mentioned in my earlier post on my experience of acadadia that I had to put some academic responsibilities from the fall quarter on hold due to the birth of my son. So, this quarter, I had to finish up those things from last quarter (now completed), jump from a community college Latin course to the UCLA one (a big leap!), keep up with new research responsibilities, grade exams and papers for a Roman history course at UCLA, apply for a 09-10 TAship and a summer research grant, commute to UCLA every weekday, and be a good husband and father.
Thus continues the great balancing act of my life. Based on my experience so far, I would like to recommend to readers not to have a child in the first year of your doctoral program! One of my peers is in the ABD phase of his doctoral program and had a baby just weeks before we did. He is still having a difficult time, but at least has some breathing room. That’s my life lesson for today. That said, I love our crazy Declan to bits and wouldn’t trade him for all the stress relief in the world.
Next quarter should be interesting. I have to dust off my Hebrew for a Hebrew seminar in the NELC department on “Knowledge, Revelation, and Authority: Wisdom and Apocalyptic in Second-Temple Judaism and Beyond” with Ra’anan Boustan (the other person I’m working closely with in my program — aside from Bartchy). Even though those intense NELC folks will leave me in their Semitic language dust, I look forward to the topic and the chance to improve my Hebrew. When Boustan told me the topic, there was pretty much no way I could not take the class. Aside from the Hebrew course, I will continue taking Latin. And I will be sitting in on Bartchy’s undergraduate course, “Jesus of Nazareth in Historical Research.” That means my classes span three separate UCLA departments next quarter: NELC, Classics, and History. I may be taking a break from grading next quarter, which will give me an opportunity to focus more on my work and being a good husband and daddy.
By the way, I just joined the bandwagon at Twitter. Follow me, if you dare!
Christians Writing about Judaism (with Bias)
This past Monday, I gave my first oral presentation (my first assignment!) of my doctoral career at UCLA. For our class on “Jews, Gentiles, and Christians in the Roman World,” taught by Ra’anan Boustan, we first covered the historiography of how Christian writers have treated Judaism throughout the millennia. The major works that I presented on were George Foot Moore’s “Christian Writers on Judaism” (from Harvard Theological Review in 1921), a chapter out of E.P. Sanders Paul and Palestinian Judaism (“Tannaitic Literature,” pp. 33–59) and a hefty excerpt from Charlotte Klein’s Anti-Judaism in Christian Theology (pp. 1-66). Making my way through all that history of scholarship and planning a presentation on it was a beastly task. But the results were interesting, so I’d like to share it here with you all.
Part of the reason that this reading was so overwhelming, besides the overabundance of name after name, is because it was so negative. We read about one guy after another (yes, all men) who poorly interpreted Judaism. Moore begins his article with this statement: “Christian interest in Jewish literature has always been apologetic or polemic rather than historical.” That sets the tone for the whole reading. (To make a simplistic clarification, “apologetic” is defending that Christianity is true, while “polemic” is closer to a hateful attack on Judaism).
Moore first covers Christian writings on Judaism through the eighteenth century. In the early centuries of this period, Christian writers set up caricatures of Jewish apologists as straw-men that could easily be knocked down. After a few centuries, Jews and Christians both stepped up their game. Jewish authors challenged Christianity on the basis of Christian documents and doctrines. Christian authors used authoritative Jewish writings, such as the Targums and Midrash (going beyond merely the OT), to show that true Judaism actually verified the claims of Christianity. During this period, most Christian writers were polemical, though there were some exceptions that were merely apologetic.
In the nineteenth century, Christian scholars made an attempt to depict Judaism from an objective historical angle, though Moore believes they were unsuccessful. Judaism was viewed primarily through the lens of the New Testament. Judaism was addressed as the “background” of the New Testament. Many scholars worked on collecting parallels found in Jewish writings to the New Testament.
Ferdinand Weber stands out as one who represents another trend in Christian writing on Judaism. Weber sought to develop a systematic theology of Judaism, using the systems of Christian theology to depict historical Judaism. Within Weber and other authors of that time, we see a shift in thinking about Judaism. Now, the theology of Judaism is thought to be radically different (and inferior) from that of Christianity. The God of Judaism is far removed from humanity and inaccessible. Weber describes the “soteriology” of Judaism (a Christian term referring to the theology of salvation) as wholly legalistic. At the judgment, the Jew will stand before God with their transgressions on one side of the scale and their good works and acts of atonement on the other. Their works are what make them righteous, but their eternal salvation is uncertain according to Weber. If they do happen to lean on the righteous side, this leads to self-righteous pride in the faithful Jew.
Sanders and Klein pick up where Moore leaves off, showing that Moore made some headway in the study of Judaism, but ultimately his rallying cry for fair scholarship on Judaism was nullified. Klein notes that scholarship that perpetuates old biases is not malicious, hateful, or anti-Semitic (contrary to Nazi “pseudo-scholars”, like Kittel), but rather they show an ignorance of the sources and of their own bias. Sanders highlights the work of Billerbeck and Bultmann as nullifying the work of Moore. Billerbeck with his widely used parallels between rabbinic literature and the NT and Bultmann who added his supreme weight in NT studies to the Weber line of thinking about Judaism.
One of the key problems seen in this quick history of scholarship is that assumptions can become so deeply rooted as to go unquestioned and unsupported within scholarship. Even well-meaning and careful scholars fall prey to inherited harmful presuppositions.
Bias is a legacy that lasts generations in complicated and hidden ways. So, what do we do with our presuppositions? How do we approach historical documents? What sources do we use to talk about “normative Judaism”? Is there such a thing as normative Judaism?
These are all difficult questions, no doubt. And the track record of scholarship does not give us a heck of a lot of hope (though things have certainly gotten better since Sanders and Klein wrote in the seventies). But personally, I feel like we can make great progress by trying to be self-aware of our biases (what do we want the texts to say) and trying to be as honest as possible. I also think we can help things if we can just be a bit more sensitive to concerns that have been raised by others. For example, though this issue isn’t mentioned above, if you are going to use the term “conversion” for what happened to Paul, you should probably explain why and acknowledge the concerns raised by folks who think that’s an anachronistic or otherwise inappropriate term for Paul. I don’t think sensitive and self-aware scholarship is an impossibility!
Oriented
Yesterday, the incoming graduate students in UCLA’s Department of History were officially welcomed with an orientation and reception. The experience actually made me feel like I’m quite ahead of the game. During the 90 minutes or so of orientation presentations, I actually didn’t learn all that much. I have been eager to learn about the sorts of classes I need to take and have been pushing forward with that. I have a readership lined up with Bartchy. I’m enrolled for classes. I know the basics pretty well.
When they brought in the experienced folks to help get the newbies acquianted and acclimated, I already knew the two guys there from my field. There are only five people in my field, including myself, and I’ve met all of them. It’s an amazing team.
When I went off with Kevin (fourth year, ABD, teaching fellow) and James (second year) to chat it up, we hit the ground running with all the ins and outs: what I have to know about language exams, what’s expected for grading, how to go about juggling classes. I had already discussed some of this stuff with them, but we went even deeper. And we just laughed and had a good time.
Later, when we were partaking of the treats laid out for us and chatting with Bartchy (our faculty advisor), Kevin mentioned how surprised he has been with this program. We all hear PhD horror stories about abusive bipolar advisors, uber-competitive grad students who hide library books, etc. Kevin has been amazed at how gracious and warm the people have been: Bartchy himself, the grad students, even the department staff. Kevin himself, along with the three others in my program, is a model of that graciousness.
I joked that Kevin was getting my hopes up high, but Bartchy told me to let my hopes remain high and soar on them. On that note, I am ready to start soaring this Thursday when class sessions commence!
Scored a Readership: History of Early Christians
Today I have learned that I will be the reader for Prof. Scott Bartchy’s course, “History of the Early Christians“. The reader at UCLA is basically a grader. I’ll be grading the mid-terms and finals. Actually, I’ll be both enrolled in the course and grading it. Obviously, I won’t be grading my own work!
I graded similar topics for a course called New Testament 2: Acts-Revelation at Fuller, though there were more assignments for that course. I look forward to getting more pedagogical training, even if the grading might not always be fun. Here’s a description of the course:
Christian movement from its origins to circa 160 C.E., stressing its continuity/discontinuity with Judaism, various responses to Jesus of Nazareth, writings produced during this period, movement’s encounters with its religious, social, and political world, and methods of research.
Transitions: Becoming a(n) (academic) dad
Perhaps the reason that I have been so silent on my blog lately has been the monumental transitions in my life. At the top of that list is my coming fatherhood. My wife and I are expecting a baby boy, born in early December. Advent will have tremendous meaning for us this year!
Besides thinking about birth and parenting issues lately, I have been finishing up my last courses at Fuller Seminary and preparing for my first quarter as a doctoral student this fall at UCLA. My blog had previously been tied to my identity as a Fuller student in a drive to get into a doctoral degree. Now that my search is over and Fuller coursework will soon be finished, my blog has to adapt.
I now hope to adapt to the changes by writing about my doctoral studies at UCLA and my thoughts about being a dad in academia.
The classes I’m currently enrolled in are: History of the Early Christians (Bartchy), Spirituality and Sexuality in the Early Christian Movement (Bartchy), and Jews, Gentiles, and Christians in the Roman World (Boustan). I will also be studying elementary Latin at Pasadena City College, which is a more convenient commute and covers basically the same material as UCLA’s Classics Dept. I will probably also be a “reader” (aka a grader) for an undergrad course at UCLA, but that hasn’t been set in stone yet. That all begins at the end of September.
My first parental sacrifice seems to be that I will not be able to attend SBL in Boston. Since I grew up in Massachusetts, I’ve been looking forward to this one for a couple years. It’s very sad, but it really is a no-brainer given the timing. My baby is a higher priority than SBL! 
More thoughts to come . . .
I'm goin' to UCLA!
I am pleased to report that I have been offered admission into the Ph.D. program in UCLA’s Department of History, to work under Scott Bartchy, and I have accepted the offer! The specialty is technically called “History of Religions,” but I will mostly be concentrating on Christian origins (especially the New Testament, but also beyond). I understand there was only one spot and I am tremendously honored to have been chosen.
Why UCLA? Several reasons, let’s go for bullet points (in no particular order):
- I am excited to work with Scott Bartchy, who is a member of the Context Group and has significant experience in social concerns (e.g., slavery, gender roles, community formation) with the New Testament, using sociological and anthropological methods of historical research. I have become more and more drawn to social concerns in Christian origins and Bartchy will help me dive in with both feet. More on Bartchy below.
- I also have a burgeoning interest in apocalypticism and Christian origins (as if anyone could define apocalypticism). I am especially interested in comparing and contrasting Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature. A fairly recent addition to UCLA’s Departments of History and NELC, Ra’anan Boustan, has worked in Jewish apocalyptic issues and in Jewish-Christian relations, which is a great resource for my interests.
- I have the freedom to piece together my own program, taking a combination of graduate seminars, directed readings, and even upper division undergrad courses not only in the History Department, but also in world-class departments like NELC and Classics.
- Even though, I’m interested primarily in the New Testament and Christian origins, I can’t shake my interest in the history of Israel, subsequently of Judaism, and their literature. NELC faculty members such as Bill Schniedewind, especially with his interest in sociolinguistics of Hebrew and the social/cultural history of ancient Palestine, will provide deep wells of knowledge for my research.
- In this program, I will get a well-rounded education, with some training in the history of western civilization generally and world religions.
- The opportunity to do adjunct teaching in New Testament studies during my dissertation at several excellent Christian schools in the area. I think this will help prepare me by exposing me to various types of settings engaging students in biblical studies.
- UCLA’s Department of History, according to US News and World Report, is one of the top ten history programs in the country. We all know that such rankings are tenuous, but it’s still nice. Check out the response to the rankings several years back by the American Historical Association.
- I’ve met some of the graduate students who are studying in the history department and become friends with one of Bartchy’s grad students, Kevin Scull. They are happy and seem like tons of fun. That makes a world of difference!
- Also, it doesn’t hurt that Fuller has plans to finish construction of their new snazzy library, which will apparently be the largest theological library on the Pacific Rim, in early 2009. I will certainly be frequenting Fuller’s campus while I’m in the program at UCLA.
Some more on Bartchy: He’s down to earth and has a balanced perspective. He’s a jazz pianist and marathon runner. Professor Bartchy is pretty progressive (see a couple articles on his earth-friendly home; and an online interview on his views of Christianity). He cares about his students, even the undergrads! (At a big research university like UCLA, that’s saying a lot.) Bartchy is involved in campus life, participating in panel discussions on religion. He founded and directs the Center for the Study of Religion at UCLA, which brings together disciplines that work on religion from various angles and which also offers an undergraduate major in religion. As I understand it, UCLA has been slow to consider religion as a valid field at a state sponsored university (with perhaps understandable skepticism), but Bartchy has been leading the way to establish the study of religion on campus. His dream would be the creation of a department of religious studies, where “we would have a budget, and we could call in scholars and very distinguished people who might not fit into the agenda of any particular department” except for a religion department. Bartchy is sensitive to various religious experiences in his teaching. In fact, he offers a helpful metaphor for dealing with difficult research issues: the moving around and adjustment of ideological buckets (maybe I’ll say more about that some other time). All of this to say that Scott Bartchy not only offers academic expertise that is quite relevant to my research interests, but he also models a kind of actively involved educator and mentor to students that I would like to become.
In one sense, my decision to study the New Testament within a history department is a statement about my modern sensibilities. While many are declaring the death of the historical method of interpreting the Bible, here I am signing up for historical scholarship on the Bible and the foundational period of Christianity and Judaism. I believe that postmodern-ish methods of interpreting the Bible from various minority perspectives and social locations are enormously helpful in both keeping the practice of the historical-critical method in check, while also offering unique points of view on how to apply our historical findings to the contemporary global situation. But, for myself, I would like to be firmly planted in the historical foundation of research before jumping too deeply into postmodern or postcritical approaches. What better way to do that than study the Bible and its historical context at one of the best history departments in the country?
-
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: