Biblia Hebraica Moves to Washington

Or "why I only posted 20 times in 2011."

2011 was a year of transitions for me and my family. First, I switched PhD programs at the beginning of the year. My thesis proposal was submitted to the University of the Free State, South Africa last March. After struggling to decide on a topic at UW-Madison, I jumped at the opportunity to combine research on ancient Bible versions with Translation Studies methodology with Jacobus Naudé and Cynthia Miller-Naudé. I hope to make significant progress on that research this year, since other transitions consumed the rest of 2011.

In June, I began working for Logos Bible Software as a contributing editor for Bible reference in their publications department. I began telecommuting from Wisconsin and started planning our cross-country move. We intended to move mid-summer, but the reality of packing up after 6.5 years in one place with a growing family slowly corrected that plan to a late summer move. We finally arrived in Bellingham, Washington in late September.

I spent six months this year writing over 200,000 words. That kept me a little too busy for recreational writing like blogging and even research writing like my thesis work. In the meantime, we were all adjusting to a new timezone, new climate, new city, new church, new friends, and the new slightly strange Pacific Northwest culture.

My goal for 2012 is to find balance. Keep up with family, friends, research, and hobbies like blogging. I even plan to add exercise to the mix (the quintessential cliche New Year's resolution).

 

 

A World Without God

The latest issue of Bible Study Magazine has my Hebrew word study dealing with the word pair tohu and bohu (as in "formless and void" from Gen 1:2). An edited version of the article is available on the LogosTalk blog, too.

What does it mean that the earth was formless and void? Did it already exist and God just shaped it? And did God create the matter and then shape it for a purpose?

Check out the blog post to find the answer or pick up a copy of the Nov/Dec issue of BSM to get the full discussion.

The Historical Jeremiah

Many readers of the Bible come to the text with the unexamined (and usually unqualified) assumption that the literature is unequivocally historical. In other words, the people existed and the events happened more or less as described by the text. But was the version of the character presented in the text an accurate portrayal of the real, historical figure? We can't know. I've realized that history-writing is much more about creating a plausible narrative about the past than about precisely recording the details. So, the historical person and the biblical/literary character are not one and the same. In the case of Jeremiah, no scholar highlighted the difficulty of reconstructing historical and biographical information from the biblical account as thoroughly as the late Robert P. Carroll. Despite his reputation as the quintessential skeptic and practitioner of a hermeneutic of suspicion in biblical exegesis, I found his honesty about the limits of our knowledge refreshing and his conclusions quite in line with what I've proposed before.

The ‘I’ and ‘me’ of various prose pieces are assumed by most exegetes to represent Jeremiah as speaker, and the editorial framework frequently attributes prose actions and statements to him. Reading the book at face value and following the dictates of traditional and conventional readings of the text, the bulk of modem scholars have understood Jeremiah to be the book of the life and times of Jeremiah the prophet, with direct access to his words, deeds, innermost thoughts and reflections. Such an approach presupposes so much historical information to which nobody has access and a one-to-one correspondence between text and social reality that it is an extremely problematical reading of the book. The precise relation between the character constructed by the writers of the tradition and a hypothesized ‘historical’ Jeremiah behind the book is a very difficult question to answer, though not acknowledging its existence in the first place does not make it any the less real a problem for interpreting the book. For the purpose of this chapter the character of Jeremiah presented in the book will be treated as the creative fiction of the editors and writers who produced it and the relation between the ‘historical’ Jeremiah and the ‘fictional’ Jeremiah will be left to the speculative sophistications of the reader....

Although the majority of scholars continue to read Jeremiah as a biographical or autobiographical set of documents, and this ‘compact majority’ must be recognized for whatever value may be attached to such statistical reports, we cannot prejudge the issue as if there were no alternative or more feasible accounts of how the book was put together. Such accounts undergird the logic of the claim that perhaps the figure of Jeremiah is more the creation of the tradition than the creator of it.**

The bottom line is that reading any biblical book as if it provides direct historical/biographical information is problematic, especially in light of the clear theological program that motivated the anonymous writers behind the bulk of the historical narrative (the so-called Deuteronomists and the Deuteronomic school). What was their theological program and how did it affect the "spin" they put on the biblical history? Tune in next week...
**Quoted from R.P. Carroll, Jeremiah (London; New York: T&T Clark, 2004), 75, 77.

Thou Shalt Not Study Ezekiel

It's just too dangerous to study Ezekiel, especially chapter 1. The Talmud records that:

The rabbis taught: It happened once that a certain child, who was reading in his teacher's house in the Book of Ezekiel, was pondering over 'Hashmal, and there came out fire from 'Hashmal and burnt him, and they sought in consequence to conceal the Book of Ezekiel. (b. Hagigah 13a)

The word "hashmal" only occurs 3 times in the Hebrew Bible, all 3 in Ezekiel's attempts to describe the appearance of God Himself. Since we don't really know what the Hebrew word was trying to describe, Jewish exegesis imbued the word itself with the dangerous power of God's presence as if the ark of the covenant itself was in the room (see 2 Sam 6:6-7 for an example). Rashi, the great medieval Jewish commentator, moves on from Ezek 1:4 with the comment that attempting to understand this verse was not allowed.

The rabbis prohibited anyone under age 30 from studying Ezekiel because of this incident. One needed to be sufficiently mature in the study of Torah before they would expound the secrets of Ezekiel 1, especially the divine chariot. So if your Bible reading plan takes you through Ezekiel, be careful and you may want to implement the buddy system. Never read alone. Just in case.

Online Bible Study Tools

Over the past few years, I've found myself increasingly reading my Bible and working on Bible studies without a physical Bible in hand. Websites, smartphone apps, and Bible software programs have made it less and less necessary for me to open a book. There are pros and cons to this, but there is no denying that our relationship with the written word is changing rapidly.

I was asked recently how I do Bible study and what digital tools were out there, so in this post, I want to list some of the online Bibles and Bible study tools that I've come across. I also use a number of Bible study apps for iPhone and have tried every single one I could find, so I may discuss those in the future. I've also used a number of good Bible software programs. (Go here for a good post comparing available Bible software programs. He's tried out more than I have.)

For plain, old access to the Bible text, I most often go to the online ESV. If I want access to a number of versions to compare or a different version than ESV, I use BibleGateway.com. It has many versions to choose from and is easy to use. They've started adding additonal resources like commentaries and dictionaries. Since I have print versions of both the ESV Study Bible and the NLT Study Bible, I also get online access to their content. This is nice because study Bibles are big and heavy. I also use Biblia.com because it will sync with the resources in my Logos 4 library, but even without that feature, it provides access to many study tools and Bible versions. If you register for an account with the site, you get access to an additional 31 resources. I'm not sure if Biblia.com is meant to replace it eventually, but for now, Bible versions are also accessible at http://bible.logos.com/.

There are many websites now that provide access to Bible versions and classic Bible reference works that are in public domain. I've known about StudyLight.org for a while, but not used it much. I recently discovered BibleStudyTools.com that claims to have the Web's largest library of online Bible study resources. I haven't tested the claim, but there was a lot of available content. I will probably use it more in the future. I used to use the NET Bible but hadn't visited their site for a while. It has a clean fresh look and easy to use interface, so I recommend it if you want to use that version for reading or study. They also have a lot of free articles available at Bible.org. Some are by known Bible scholars, teachers, and pastors.

I like Biblos.com and Blue Letter Bible because they have Bible versions in Hebrew and Greek. They also have Bible dictionaries, maps, and encyclopedia articles. The Unbound Bible also has many versions including Hebrew and Greek and some public domain study tools, but their web interface is very basic. I also discovered that Lifeway has an online Bible library which also looks like mainly public domain Bible reference works and translations, but I haven't spent much time using it.

The bottom line is that all the Bible study resources offered for free are essentially the same set of public domain works. Bible.org is the exception and the text notes alone for the NET Bible are very helpful. I spend most of my time at the online ESV Study Bible but I just might start using Bible.org as a close second. My goal is to direct you to some websites that might help you with your Bible study, but remember there are limits to what you'll be able to get for free and sometimes the old classics from 100 years ago aren't exactly up to date on their interpretations. If you're serious about having access to some of the best digital tools available for Bible study and research, you might just want to check out a Bible software program like Logos 4.

Computer Cracks Code of Source Criticism

If you haven't already heard, a fascinating study by an Israeli research team (comprised of 2 computer scientists and a Bible scholar) suggests that the fine bits of circumstantial data used by Bible scholars to tease out the varying voices of biblical sources and authors can be run through a computer model as a way of separating the different strands of composition. The Pentateuch and the book of Isaiah are the most debated (probably) so the results on those sections will give us the most to talk about. Here are some quotes from the article at Ha'aretz.

The new software analyzes style and word choices to distinguish parts of a single text written by different authors, and when applied to the Bible its algorithm teased out distinct writerly voices in the holy book.
...
When the new software was run on the Pentateuch, it found the same division, separating the "priestly" and "non-priestly." It matched up with the traditional academic division at a rate of 90 percent - effectively recreating years of work by multiple scholars in minutes, said Moshe Koppel of Bar Ilan University near Tel Aviv, the computer science professor who headed the research team.
...
Similarly, the book of Isaiah is largely thought to have been written by two distinct authors, with the second author taking over after Chapter 39. The software's results agreed that the book might have two authors, but suggested the second author's section actually began six chapters earlier, in Chapter 33.

This is very interesting for my continued musings on the composition of the book of Isaiah. I'd always felt the "voice" in Isaiah had started to switch to "Deutero-Isaiah" (traditionally the writer of 40-55) a bit before the historical interlude in chapters 36-39 was (more or less) cut-and-pasted from 2 Kings 18-20, probably in chapters 34-35. I hadn't thought of chapter 33 as Deutero-Isaiah, though. Food for thought.

A copy of the paper from the conference where this research was presented can be accessed here.

HT: Agade

New Book on Jewish Babylonian Aramaic

Just in time for Father's Day (hint), Eisenbrauns has released a new book on the grammar of Babylonian Aramaic. I really should be reading more Aramaic (as should all of you), so don't miss this one!

This book is the first wide-ranging study of the grammar of the Babylonian Aramaic used in the Talmud and post-Talmudic Babylonian literature (henceforth: Rabbinic Babylonian Aramaic) to be published in English in a century. The book takes as its starting point the long-recognized problem of the corrupt nature of the later textual witnesses of Babylonian Rabbinic literature and seeks both to establish criteria for the identification of accurate textual witnesses and describe the grammar of Rabbinic Babylonian Aramaic. The book is both programmatic and descriptive: it lays the foundations for future research into the dialect while clarifying numerous points of grammar, many of which have not been discussed systematically in the available scholarly literature.

Missed the Rapture . . . Again

The passing of May 21, 2011 without a world cataclysm brings to light the number one reason you should avoid prophesying at all costs.

There's no margin for error and the biblical consequences are severe. Just read Deuteronomy 18.

Deuteronomy 18:20–22 (ESV)
²⁰ But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ ²¹ And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— ²² when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.   (emphasis added)

How do you know if a prophet is really from God?

Well, he's always right.

But what if he prophesies and it doesn't come to pass?

You have two options:
1) Kill the false prophet or 2) Subtly rework the prophecy so that it is now looking ahead to another time in the future. The problem with option 2 in this case is that there was a specific date set which was missed and then another date set which again passed without incident.

Will this be the next Great Disappointment?

Stop setting dates for the rapture!

The End is Near

In case of rapture, this blog will be unmanned.

It never ceases to amaze me that despite all the failed predictions of the past, people somehow still think their calculation will be the right one. I would think the warning of Matthew 24:36 would be enough to convince them that WE CAN'T KNOW.

Fortunately, James McGrath saved me the time of rounding up all the buzz on this craziness. I especially recommend this post by Rachel Held Evans who points out the connections with the most famous failed forerunner of Harold Camping and manages to give some spiritual food for thought along the way.

NIV Ads: Just Marketing or Plain Misleading?

I have not been a fan of the NIV ever since I was able to understand the complexities of translation philosophy. In my opinion, it was more popular due to its marketing strategy than for its merit as a translation. (My opinions on the NIV can be found mixed among my posts on bible translation.) I'm sure Zondervan has high hopes that NIV 2011 will help them retain market share and win over the crowd that largely panned TNIV due to the gender translation issue. While initial reports suggested NIV 2011 was more restrained on that issue, I don't think they went far enough to fix the problems with TNIV (as noted here). My litmus test remains their translation of Isaiah 19:16. TNIV and NIV 2011 gut the original of its intentionally insulting rhetoric. I won't translate the verse here lest I offend you.

I have ignored most of the recent advertising push to promote the NIV 2011, but a full back cover ad on a Christian magazine caught my eye. Here's the text from the ad. Is it just marketing spin or a misleading misrepresentation of the facts?

It's amazing how going back to the beginning moves us so far forward. Translated from the most reliable ancient biblical manuscripts. Tirelessly researched by the world's preeminent biblical scholars and linguists. And made crystal clear for English-speaking audiences worldwide. The New International Version is the translation that's easy to understand, yet rich with the detail found in the original Scripture.

Let's look at these claims and their implications.

1. "Translated from the most reliable ancient biblical manuscripts." Oh no! I need to get an NIV. My other Bibles didn't use the most reliable ancient manuscripts. Actually, most translations use the same critical texts in Hebrew and Greek created by scholars from what seem to be the most reliable ancient manuscripts. NIV has a slightly different Greek text than the standard NT critical text, but we are all essentially working with the same manuscript data. The difference is in which variations get preference in translation.

2. "Tirelessly researched by the world's preeminent biblical scholars and linguists." Other Bible translation committees don't have the "preeminent" scholars (only the eminent ones), so NIV must be better. And they worked "tirelessly" this time. Actually, in these past two decades of expanding English Bible versions, many scholars have been involved in the production of multiple versions. Some of the same people working with a different translation philosophy. But at least when working on the NIV, they didn't get tired.

3. "And made crystal clear for English-speaking audiences worldwide." This is a value judgment. Crystal clear relative to what? Young's Literal Translation? The New American Standard? The King James? What is made clear? The meaning of the "original"? The English style? 

4. "easy to understand, yet rich with the detail found in the original Scripture." It's as easy to understand as most moderately idiomatic English translations. But I don't understand how they can claim, in all seriousness, to be "rich with the detail found in the original Scripture." The gender-sensitive issue forces a translation that completely suppresses the rich metaphorical detail of the Hebrew in Isaiah 19:16.

I realize that some people will honestly agree with the opinions about the NIV found in this ad. Only the last claim is, in my opinion, stretching the truth. Our Bible translation preferences have been conditioned from years of using a particular favorite. For a long time, the NIV has been that favorite for a lot of people. An ad like this is designed to get people to stick with the NIV, hopefully without thinking too much about it.