Dear Intrepid Google-searcher:
What's on my mind?
Title: From “God” (θεός) to “God” (ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ): A New Discussion and ProposalThe 2010 meeting will be in Dallas, so if you're around, come out and see us!
Abstract: The Sahidic Coptic version of the New Testament is among the most important early versions of the New Testament. It is regarded as an excellent representation of the Alexandrian text-form, and in turn serves as a significant resource for textual criticism and the history of interpretation. Because of this significance, this article will explore the Sahidic Coptic's translation of the Greek nominative singular θεός. No current publication examines whether Sahidic Coptic translators uniformly translated the nominative singular θεός, particularly with respect to the issues of definiteness and the Greek article. This article will attempt to answer two distinct but interconnected questions: (1) Did the Sahidic Coptic translators uniformly translate the nominative singular θεός? (2) How can the assessment of the Sahidic Coptic translators inform a discussion of history, transcription, and translation of John 1.1c. We will begin by establishing criteria for the relevant texts in order to form a database of New Testament references. From that database, we will evaluate four possible solutions with respect to the Sahidic Coptic translational patterns and John 1.1c: (1) were the Coptic translators attempting to indicate the presence or absence of the Greek article without making an interpretive distinction; (2) were they trying to make an interpretive distinction regarding the definition of θεός in John 1.1c; (3) were they trying to clarify a syntactical issue; or (4) were they making a stylistic distinction.
in a few minutes, a post will go up for admissions officers who might be searching about me in the coming weeks. i've been applying to phd programs, and the deadlines are finally coming 'round. in a decision as much as for my own sanity as anything else, i won't be posting anything else until i begin to hear back from those programs. hopefully, i'll have good news in a month or so!
should i be using quicksilver? i've tried before, and just couldn't get it down.
A few things lighting the biblioblogosphere on fire this cold month of December:
- I'm a couple days late with this, but Doug did a fantastic job putting together this month's BSC (48, for those counting at home).
- However, based on the amount of work he had to put in for it, Doug's unsure how much longer the current paradigm can hold.
- Dan Wallace posts on some of the difficulties evangelicals can have being taken seriously in the academy. 270 comments and counting at Parchment and Pen, in one of the most civil comment threads I've read in a long time, along with a host of reactions (I like James McGrath's, and there's an interesting comment thread on Joel Watts). I've had a couple thoughts since I first read the post and some of the comments:
(1) Everybody's got stories. You'll read about the evangelical student who was dismissed without even a thought to her extensive education and preparation, followed by the rogue professor dismissed from his conservative institution for having the temerity to deviate from the company line. The liberal institution that judges applicants solely on merit, regardless of their beliefs, and the conservative seminary that prevents students from graduating because of theirs. There's no reason that such stories can't ALL be true. The best light to read Dr. Wallace's critique, in my opinion, is that there is a particular irony in the fact that some scholars (SOME) who claim to be so open-minded can nevertheless hold inaccurate prejudices against a certain set of people (in this case, PhD-pursuing evangelical seminary students). Furthermore, it would be better for everyone if this weren't the case.
(2) Similarly to the discussion of women in the biblioblogosphere from a few months ago, if someone were to make me aware of how my prejudices have affected them negatively, I don't want to list for them the ways in which I think they are wrong and ought not to have taken offense. Instead, I want to find a way to understand where they are coming from, what their struggle is, and how I can make that just a little bit easier.
(3) In that line, I am happy to report that my own experiences in the PhD application process have thus far been overwhelmingly positive (in this way, I echo Mike). I've had some great interactions with various professors via email, and I hope to be able to report some positive news in a couple months!
(4) As a bit of a side note, I was surprised by how many people focused on Dr. Wallace's definition of "Christian." Do people not know that Dr. Wallace is an evangelical Christian? 'Cause that's how most evangelicals define "Christian." He wasn't saying that anyone had to accept his definition; he was just describing the state of SBL for the readership of a blog that is quite conservative. Is anyone arguing that he wasn't describing the membership of SBL accurately?
- Finally, the word of the day for this blog is vindication. Vin-di-ca-tion. (Reax: Mark Goodacre, Stephen Carlson, Jason Staples, James McGrath, Jim West, Pat McCullough [who I think was the first to notice])