Comments on: How Saturated is New Testament Scholarship? http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/ The Jesus Tradition—Then and Now Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:43:53 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: Brandon Wason http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-683 Brandon Wason Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:37:51 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-683 Thanks a ton, Mark! Thanks a ton, Mark!

]]> By: Mark http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-682 Mark Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:35:02 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-682 Martin Hengel, “Aufgaben der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft,” NTS 40 (1994): 321; published in English as “Tasks of New Testament Scholarship,” BBR 6 (1996): 67. The source that led me to the article was "Jack of All Trades and Master of None: The Case for “Generalist” Scholars in Biblical Scholarship" by Michael F. Bird with Craig Keener in SBL Forum at http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=820 Mark Martin Hengel, “Aufgaben der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft,” NTS 40 (1994): 321; published in English as “Tasks of New Testament Scholarship,” BBR 6 (1996): 67.

The source that led me to the article was “Jack of All Trades and Master of None: The Case for “Generalist” Scholars in Biblical Scholarship” by Michael F. Bird with Craig Keener in SBL Forum at http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=820

Mark

]]> By: Mark http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-652 Mark Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:20:23 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-652 Brandon, The quote was from Hengel's presidential address for the SNTS, I think some time in the 90s. I have the article at my office, but I'm home now and this is summer time. I maybe will be able to look it up Tuesday. I'm planning to excerpt a few tidbits from it on Theological German when I get around to it. Mark Brandon,

The quote was from Hengel’s presidential address for the SNTS, I think some time in the 90s. I have the article at my office, but I’m home now and this is summer time. I maybe will be able to look it up Tuesday.

I’m planning to excerpt a few tidbits from it on Theological German when I get around to it.

Mark

]]> By: Brandon Wason http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-633 Brandon Wason Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:44:08 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-633 John. As Rob's comment also suggests, you HB students do have more elbow-room. Your point about having to interact with the bigwigs is important. In NT, people from the older generation like Weiss, Wrede, Schweitzer, or even scholars before them such as Baur and Strauss should always be on the radar. Mark. Do you happen to have the bibliographical info on that Hengel quote? I'd be interested in reading it if it was ever published. Thomas. Exactly, we're asking the same questions for the most part, but trying to find new solutions. That's what I find appealing about approaches like socio-rhetorical interpretation (think <a href="http://www.eisenbrauns.com/item/ROBINVENT" rel="nofollow">Robbins</a>, not Witherington) because it appropriates so many new tools to analyze the text. John. As Rob’s comment also suggests, you HB students do have more elbow-room. Your point about having to interact with the bigwigs is important. In NT, people from the older generation like Weiss, Wrede, Schweitzer, or even scholars before them such as Baur and Strauss should always be on the radar.

Mark. Do you happen to have the bibliographical info on that Hengel quote? I’d be interested in reading it if it was ever published.

Thomas. Exactly, we’re asking the same questions for the most part, but trying to find new solutions. That’s what I find appealing about approaches like socio-rhetorical interpretation (think Robbins, not Witherington) because it appropriates so many new tools to analyze the text.

]]> By: Thomas Whitley http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-632 Thomas Whitley Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:18:41 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-632 Getting started on my PhD applications this fall I have thought a lot about this topic too. I often think of the words of the writer of Ecclesiastes: there is nothing new under the sun. I recently told a fellow NT student that everything has been done in our field, we just need to find different angles to come at it from. Not sure how great that advice is, but it seems to be working for a lot of other people (i.e. bringing in sociology to NT scholarship, etc). Getting started on my PhD applications this fall I have thought a lot about this topic too. I often think of the words of the writer of Ecclesiastes: there is nothing new under the sun. I recently told a fellow NT student that everything has been done in our field, we just need to find different angles to come at it from. Not sure how great that advice is, but it seems to be working for a lot of other people (i.e. bringing in sociology to NT scholarship, etc).

]]> By: Mark http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-629 Mark Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:34:21 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-629 Hengel said the days are past when you can read all the secondary literature on any NT topic--but you can read all the primary literature; i.e. Jewish, Greek, Roman (maybe we should add Coptic and Syriac) from ca 500 BC to AD 500. He also compared the size of the entire NT (wordcount or pagecount) compared, for example, to the Migne series. There will always be a need for new research, because new questions and issues arise. Hengel said the days are past when you can read all the secondary literature on any NT topic–but you can read all the primary literature; i.e. Jewish, Greek, Roman (maybe we should add Coptic and Syriac) from ca 500 BC to AD 500. He also compared the size of the entire NT (wordcount or pagecount) compared, for example, to the Migne series.

There will always be a need for new research, because new questions and issues arise.

]]> By: Rob Kashow http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-628 Rob Kashow Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:24:24 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-628 See my comment on Mike Bird's blog: http://euangelizomai.blogspot.com/2009/06/facts-and-theories-in-new-testament.html See my comment on Mike Bird’s blog:

http://euangelizomai.blogspot.com/2009/06/facts-and-theories-in-new-testament.html

]]> By: John Anderson http://sitzimleben.com/2009/06/10/how-saturated-is-new-testament-scholarship/comment-page-1/#comment-627 John Anderson Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:37:46 +0000 http://sitzimleben.com/?p=9#comment-627 In OT we have it pretty 'easy.' There are certain "giants" of the field that one must talk about, no matter how flawed their methodology or presuppositions (or no matter how much of a supersessionist they are): Gunkel, von Rad, Noth, Eichrodt, Childs. There are other names, but these are a few that come to mind. Aside from that, a usually fair--albeit arbitrary--cutoff date is usually 1950. I don't know why. Nothing really magical happened then. But you at least then still have some remnants of earlier trends (for instance, those carrying Wellhausen forward), but also some refinement and movement towards more contemporary readings. I always try to have a methodological ecclecticism when it comes to histories of research. It helps me to carve out my own niche more precisely, and in conversation--and respectful appreciation--of those that have come before. Put your ideas out there---as Luther said, sin boldly! I did with my God as trickster topic, and now I've got an article published on it, several regional and national SBL publications, and a dissertation in the works. Risks. In OT we have it pretty ‘easy.’ There are certain “giants” of the field that one must talk about, no matter how flawed their methodology or presuppositions (or no matter how much of a supersessionist they are): Gunkel, von Rad, Noth, Eichrodt, Childs. There are other names, but these are a few that come to mind. Aside from that, a usually fair–albeit arbitrary–cutoff date is usually 1950. I don’t know why. Nothing really magical happened then. But you at least then still have some remnants of earlier trends (for instance, those carrying Wellhausen forward), but also some refinement and movement towards more contemporary readings.

I always try to have a methodological ecclecticism when it comes to histories of research. It helps me to carve out my own niche more precisely, and in conversation–and respectful appreciation–of those that have come before.

Put your ideas out there—as Luther said, sin boldly! I did with my God as trickster topic, and now I’ve got an article published on it, several regional and national SBL publications, and a dissertation in the works. Risks.

]]>