Last Hallow’s eve I related an ancient ghost story from Phlegon’s Book of Marvels: A ghost story (from Phlegon): Bouplagos stood up from among the dead (Bou!). Now it’s time for another scary one. (For other “marvels” related by Phlegon also see my posts here and here.)

Once again in relation to battles between Rome and the Hellenistic (Greek) kings, Phlegon relates an ominous story of fateful predictions regarding Rome’s armies. Receiving warning messages from the gods themselves, Publius, a general in the Roman army, “began to rave and behave in a deranged manner, making many utterances in a state of divine possession, of which some were in verse and some in prose” (Book of Marvels 3.8). In essence, again and again these messages are that Rome better watch out! The Greeks, with the assistance of their gods, will make the Romans suffer for their incursions into Greek territories.

These inauspicious warnings to the Romans from one of their own (but really from the Greek gods) culminate in Publius climbing an oak tree and uttering the following: “Romans and other soldiers, it falls to me to die and be devoured by a huge red wolf on this very day. . . take the imminent appearance of the beast and my own destruction as proof that I have spoken by divine intimation”(3.13).

No sooner had he uttered this (apparent) final prophecy before the wolf showed up, “ripped him open and devoured him while everyone looked on. . . [The wolf] consumed his body except for his head”. His head survived for good reason, for there was one more divine message in verse to come from the bodiless head:

“Touch not my head. . . But stop
And listen to the prophecy by means of which I shall declare the truth to you.
To this land there will come a great and powerful Ares [Greek god of war],
Who will dispatch the armed folk to Hades [Greek god of the dead] in the darkness below and
Shatter the stone towers and the long walls.
Seizing our wealth, our infant children, and our wives
He will bring them to Asia, crossing over the waves.
These sure truths Phoibos Apollo [Greek god of oracles] has spoken to you,
The Pythian [Apollo], who sent his powerful servant and
Led me to the abode of the blessed and of Persephone [wife of Hades].”

Time to smarten up and listen to the Greek gods, you Romans! It’s not everyday that a decapitated head talks like this, you know.   (Translations are from W. Hansen, Phlegon of Tralles’ Book of Marvels [Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1996]).

In the event that you are too frightened, perhaps this photo of my son in Halloween garb from a few years back might ease your mind (BOO!):

I have been involved in an ongoing seminar within the Canadian Society of Biblical Studies that looks at the intersection of Travel and Religion in Antiquity (click for the accompanying website and some of the topics covered). Consideration of the realities and modes of travel are, of course, essential in understanding how religious life was affected by transportation.

So I was very interested to hear (on Troels Myrup’s blog) that Kristian Minck, a graduate student in archeology at Aarhus, Denmark, now has a blog focussing on Ancient Transportation: Roman Wagons and Beyond (his MA thesis is on wagons specifically). So far he has some interesting posts on Roman roads and on wagons themselves. Minck also points to some useful online materials regarding land transport by Dr. Judith A. Weller: Roman Traction Systems. Such issues are also important in studying travellers like Paul.

Paul’s relations with the communities of Jesus-followers he founded varied. While he has almost nothing but praise for those at Thessalonica (according to 1 Thess), I have already outlined his rocky relations with some of those at Corinth. If 2 Corinthians 1-9 actually comes (chronologically) after 2 Corinthians 10-13, then at least at Corinth these relations turned around and ended with some level of reconciliation.

We lack any sign of reconciliation between Paul and the followers of Jesus in Galatia, however. (For more on this see the posts by Mark Goodacre, as listed further below). In a previous post on Paul, the Galatians, and circumcision (NT 1.6), I have discussed these rocky relations with the Galatians as well as the other teachers who Paul views as opponents to his own “good message”. In particular, there I focus on Paul’s interpretation (midrash) of the story of Abraham in order to counter his opponents’ views.

If the absence of any mention of donations from Galatia for the poor at Jerusalem in Paul’s latest letter — that to the Romans in the mid-late 50s CE — is any indication then it seems that the Galatians continued to follow leaders of the Jesus movement other than Paul. Not only has Paul seemingly lost the support of the Galatians by this time (they are not mentioned as contributors to the collection), but he is even worried that the leadership at Jerusalem itself may not accept the financial gift from the Achaians (Corinth and Cenchreae are in this region) and the Macedonians (Thessalonica and Philippi) which he had hoped would lessen tensions between Paul with his Gentile followers and the groups of Jewish followers of Jesus at Jerusalem. For in Romans, Paul states:

“At present, however, I am going to Jerusalem with aid for the saints. For Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make some contribution for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem; they were pleased to do it, and indeed they are in debt to them, for if the Gentiles have come to share in their spiritual blessings, they ought also to be of service to them in material blessings. When therefore I have completed this, and have delivered to them what has been raised, I shall go on by way of you to Spain; and I know that when I come to you I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of Christ. I appeal to you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf, that I may be delivered from the unbelievers in Judea, and that my service for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints, so that by God’s will I may come to you with joy and be refreshed in your company” (Romans 15:25-32 [RSV]).

UPDATE: Thanks to the mention by Mark Goodacre, I now see that Loren Rosson has a post addressing Paul’s feelings at the time of writing Romans: Why Paul Took Up the Collection (Rom 15:25-32).

There is an excellent series of posts by Mark Goodacre that addresses many other issues regarding the situation in Galatia and Paul’s views on what was happening:

• Paul’s lack of travel plans in Galatians
• Paul’s loss of Galatia 1
• Paul’s loss of Galatia 2
• Were the Galatians already circumcised? 1
• Were the Galatians already circumcised? 2
• Were the Galatians already circumcised? 3
  
• Were the Galatians already circumcised? 4
  
• Were the Galatians already circumcised? 5
• Were the Galatians already circumcised? 6
  
• Were the Galatians already circumcised? 7

There is an ongoing seminar within the Society of Biblical Literature that looks at the nature and importance of banquets, symposia, and cultural practices associated with meals (including sacrifice) for our understanding of early Judaism and Christianity within the context of the Greco-Roman world. That seminar now has a website (which I have created and host here) where you can view photos or read papers relating to Meals in the Greco-Roman World.

“Form of . . . a rhetorically persuasive super-apostle!”

Paul’s relations with various groups of Christians at Corinth had its ups and downs, but mostly downs it seems. In the time leading up to his writing of what we call 1 Corinthians (actually at least his second letter to them — see 1 Cor 5:9), there were divisions among different groups meeting in different homes, and there were also divisions between those who, in Paul’s view, thought they were superior either socially or spiritually. Some wealthier members with time for leisure were arriving early for the Lord’s supper and consuming all the better food and wine before the arrival of the lower class Christians who had to work for a living (11:17-34). Some Corinthians who felt they had a special connection with things spiritual were viewing their ability to receive divine messages in the form of seemingly nonsensical languages (”tongues”) as a sign of superiority over those who did not receive such messages (12-14). Some other Corinthians, like the woman Chloe, who was likely a leader, were concerned about the situation and communicated this to Paul by messenger (1:11).

Rocky relations continued or even intensified afterwards when Paul made another visit to Corinth, one that he calls a “painful visit” (2 Cor 2:1). A “tearful letter” (2:4) was soon to follow, and it seems that this tearful letter is at least partially preserved in 2 Corinthians 10-13. (2 Corinthians is most likely more than one letter, with chapters 10-13 chronologically predating chapters 1-9).

In that tearful, angst-driven letter (2 Cor 10-13), Paul struggles with the problem that some among the Corinthian followers of Jesus were preferring some other travelling leaders who had arrived in Corinth after Paul’s departure. And these leaders were teaching about Jesus from another angle. Paul sarcastically calls these leaders “super-apostles” (12:11) and, like Paul, they were Jewish, not Gentile (11:22).

What were their super-powers? Not flying. For one, they gave good speeches — better than Paul’s in the view of at least the educated Corinthian Jesus-followers. Paul characterizes these Corinthians as complaining that Paul is “humble when face to face” but “bold” when away (10:1). Furthermore, some of the Corinthians “say ‘His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account.’” (10:10; RSV).

The derogatory view of Paul as a wimp may well be part of a larger problem of enmity which some Corinthians were showing towards the apostle. For, unlike the super-apostles who did accept the Corinthians’ financial support in their teaching endeavours (perhaps in line with the teaching of Jesus in Luke 10), Paul had blatantly rejected the Corinthians’ offer of a financial gift to support Paul’s activities. To top things off, he had rejected the Corinthians’ gift while accepting a similar gift from the more amicable Macedonians. He blatantly states this in the key passage 2 Cor 11:7-14 (likely the Philippians are in mind, as his letter to them clearly shows that he accepted gifts or benefactions from them). This sort of approach might only intensify the enmity.

In the Greco-Roman world, such benefaction or patronage should be accepted if one did not want to shame the giver and trigger precisely the enmity of the giver (i.e. you would be treated as an enemy). According to such reciprocal, societal conventions, the appropriate response to benefaction would be for Paul to accept the gift and offer some form of honour in return. Saying that you were rejecting the gift and support so as to avoid “burdening” someone, as does Paul, wouldn’t do much. So the reasons why the Corinthians preferred the super-apostles over Paul was somewhat complicated, involving rhetorical ability, economic relations, and cultural conventions.

This is the situation which leads Paul to his very sarcastic response, in which he argues that he is at least as good as these super-apostles (12:11) and in which he engages in all kinds of over-the-top boasting while asserting that he doesn’t like to. In essence he says: “I don’t like to boast, but if I were to boast like a madman then I would say that I am not only equal to but superior to these so-called super-apostles . . . I even took a trip to the third heaven (who of them can say that). I’m not such a wimp, and even if I am, God is on the side of wimps.”

The extremely rocky relations were not to last forever, though. For, if 2 Corinthians 1-9 actually post-dates chapters 10-13, then by the time Paul wrote that letter the Corinthians had been reconciled with Paul, partly as a result of his tearful letter:

“even if I made you sorry with my [tearful] letter, I do not regret it (though I did regret it), for I see that that letter grieved you, though only for a while. As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting; for you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us” (2 Cor 7:8-9).

All’s well that ends well.

(I won’t explain what I am alluding to in the opening line of this post, which, if I am lucky, will at most give one or two readers a retro-chuckle).

Particularly interesting for the study of ancient travel are Paul’s descriptions of his plans to visit particular groups. In Paul’s lack of travel plans in Galatians, Mark Goodacre gathers together and discusses passages in which Paul describes his travel plans. Mark continues his argument that Paul lost in his dealings with the followers of Jesus at Galatia, and that the lack of any travel plans in that particular letter suggests he may have already felt he was going to lose to his opponents when he was writing. Did Paul give up?

UPDATE: Now also see Mark’s further post on Paul’s loss of Galatia I.

This past week we’ve been reading Paul’s first letter to the Christians living in Thessalonica (1 Thessalonians), which happens to be the earliest writing regarding followers of Jesus in the Roman world (dating sometime in the 40s or around 50 CE). In other words, it is our earliest glimpse into this Jewish Jesus-movement as it made its way into a Greco-Roman world. This letter from Paul to a group of Jesus-followers in the Greek city of Thessalonica in Macedonia is very important for several reasons, a couple of which I’d like to mention here.

First of all, it is in this letter that we first see evidence of what a Jew like Paul taught his listeners when he travelled to a particular city. In the first chapter Paul speaks of the great reputation of the followers of Jesus at Thessalonica, pointing out how other Jesus-followers in Macedonia and elsewhere respected those Thessalonians highly. This rhetoric of praise (epideictic or demonstrative rhetoric) continues throughout the letter, by the way. In the process, Paul provides a glimpse into the core of his teaching to the Greeks:

For they themselves report concerning us what a welcome we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10 [RSV]).

This short passage is jam-packed with important information regarding the earliest “good message” (gospel) as taught by Paul. (1) Paul taught that the Jewish God was the only God (Jewish monotheism), (2) that the one Jewish God had a Son that had been raised from the dead, and (3) that there is a coming wrath and the Son, Jesus, would save the Thessalonian Jesus-followers from that wrath of God.

This third point regarding a coming wrath is part of what scholars call the apocalyptic worldview, and Paul expands upon it when he is faced with the worries of some Thessalonians whose friends and family have died before the arrival of the Son. You can read about that for yourself in 1 Thessalonians chapters 4 and 5 (especially 4:13-5:10).

Basically, one can outline the apocalyptic worldview or perspective in a simplified manner as follows:

We are living in an evil world dominated by evil forces. There is a constant struggle between these evil forces and the forces of good, and evil seems to have the upper hand. Humans are part of this ongoing dualistic struggle and take sides as either the righteous (e.g. sons of light) or the wicked (e.g. sons of darkness). But God has a plan to end that ongoing struggle.

God will intervene in a cataclysmic way and the final massive battle between good and evil will end in the triumph of good over evil. This will happen very soon. Through God’s wrath, evil forces, under the leadership of Satan (or Belial, or some other name for evil personified) will be either obliterated or tortured forever. Some important figure (or figures) sent by God, such as an anointed priest or prophet or king or warrior or all of the above, will play a key role in the final triumph of God.

God or his messenger will judge and separate the righteous people from the wicked people. There may be a resurrection of the dead who will also face such categorization. The righteous will go on to live forever in bliss with God in his new creation or kingdom or paradisical world. The fate of the wicked will be the same as the evil forces, such as Satan, who will face the wrath.

This basic perspective as outlined here holds true for the members of the Jewish Dead Sea sect (perhaps Essenes) and for Paul, as well as for some other Jews. Not all Jews in the second-temple period were apocalyptic, I should add, but both Paul and the Dead Sea sect (and most likely Jesus too) were. This worldview has also been important for many Christians throughout Western history. There are differences in the details from one apocalyptic thinker to the next, but basically the overall components of the worldview are the same.

If you are interested in reading further posts on this subject, click on my category for apocalypticism or on my category for the history of Satan (who plays a key role in the apocalyptic worldview). I also have a specific post which deals with Zoroastrian apocalypticism, which is an important factor in understanding the emergence of the apocalyptic worldview within Judaism and Christianity. In Zoroastrianism, the ongoing battle is between Ahura Mazda (Lord Wisdom) and Angra Mainyu, head of the evil forces.

You can read far more about apocalypticism in early Judaism and Christianity, as well as throughout history at the fine Apocalypse! site connected with the PBS Frontline documentary. Felix Just also supplies a number of useful links on the topic.

P.S. How long can I maintain references to song titles in my post titles?

Jim Davila was recently at a conference at the University of Ottawa (on “Christian Apocryphal Texts for the New Millenium: Achievements, Prospects, and Challenges”). There Louis Painchaud (U. Laval), a very trustworthy expert in Nag Hammadi and Gnosticism, presented a paper in which he argues against the mainline interpretation and translation of the Gospel of Judas. Thanks to Painchaud, Jim provides a summary of the paper entitled À PROPOS DE LA (RE)DÉCOUVERTE DE L’ÉVANGILE DE JUDAS. You can read the abstract on Jim’s blog, but essentially Painchaud argues that the Gospel of Judas portrays Judas as an evil character, not as the rehabilitated figure as presented in the translation and interpretation published by the National Geographic Society (and as espoused by Bart Ehrman, William Klassen, and others): “A close reading of the Gospel of Judas reveals a totally different picture. Judas is guilty of sacrificing the man who wore Jesus, he is a demon, misled by his star, and he will never make it to the place reserved for the Holy Generation. He is both demonized, in the same way as he is demonized in the Gospel of John, and assimilated to Juda the patriarch eponym of Judaism through the question “What advantage…? (GosJud 46:16; Gen 37:26).” (cited from Painchaud’s summary).

If that entire National Geographic translation is contaminated by a particular interpretation of how Judas is presented in that writing, then a whole lot of recent commentary (including my own previous posts based on the National Geographic translation) will need to be tossed in the garbage. A new translation of the Coptic Gospel of Judas by Painchaud would be helpful, of course, but that is a considerable undertaking. We’ll have to wait and find out more. If I only knew Coptic! Now this is exciting stuff!

Mark Goodacre’s post on the equivalence of the events described by Paul in Galatians 2:1-10 and by the author of Luke-Acts in Acts 15 — commonly called the Jerusalem council — provides a good overview of the discussion on these key passages involving Paul’s visit to Jerusalem. It has also sparked considerable debate (less so a “sharp contention” as in Acts 15:39) on whether another Jerusalem visit described by Acts, namely the one in Acts 11, is to be equated with Galatians 2 instead. The reason why this issue is so important and debated is that it has significant implications both for the chronology of Paul’s life and for the question of the historical (in a modern sense) reliability of the Acts of the Apostles. Check out the posts to see for yourself. The appearance of these blog posts is a timely development in light of the fact that we are comparing precisely these passages (Gal. 2:1-10 and Acts 15) in tutorials this week.

In ‘Come! Plunge the knife into the baby’ I discussed the ways in which ethnographic stereotypes concerning the dangers of foreign ways and peoples also came to be applied by outsiders to Christians as minority cultural groups in the ancient Mediterranean. Some Greek or Roman authors who described the cultural practices of others, including those of both Judeans (Jews) and Jesus-followers, did so in a way that emphasized the “inhuman” or “sub-human” activity of apparent foreigners who were either little known and/or disliked. And there was a common stockpile of accusations that were used in stereotyping “the other” including human sacrifice, cannibalism, and “improper” sexual practices. One reader of that post (Nathan) astutely asked:

“In regards to the allegations of infanticide and cannibalism [in the case of Christians] might the gospel of Judas also allude to such allegations, when it characterizes certain of the proto-Orthodox as ’slayers of children’ (sec. 40; cf. 38)”

In Judas Iscariot as the “good guy”?, I have discussed other aspects of the Gospel of Judas (for online translations and discussions go here and here). The passage in the Gospel of Judas which Nathan has in mind runs as follows:

The twelve disciples ‘[said, “We have seen] a great [house with a large] altar [in it, and] twelve men—they are the priests, we would say—and a name; and a crowd of people is waiting at that altar, [until] the priests [… and receive] the offerings. [But] we kept waiting.”

[Jesus said], “What are [the priests] like?” They [said, “Some …] two weeks; [some] sacrifice their own children, others their wives, in praise [and] humility with each other; some sleep with men; some are involved in [slaughter]; some commit a multitude of sins and deeds of lawlessness. And the men who stand [before] the altar invoke your [name], [39] and in all the deeds of their deficiency, the sacrifices are brought to completion […].”

After they said this, they were quiet, for they were troubled.

Jesus said to them, “Why are you troubled? Truly I say to you, all the priests who stand before that altar invoke my name. Again I say to you, my name has been written on this […] of the generations of the stars through the human generations. [And they] have planted trees without fruit, in my name, in a shameful manner.”’

(Gospel of Judas 38-39. Translation by Rodolphe Kasser, Marvin Meyer, and Gregor Wurst, in collaboration with François Gaudard, cited from the online version on the National Geographic website).

Troubling indeed. Here we are witnessing the use of ethnographic stereotypes (slaughter of children, “improper” homosexual activity, etc.) in order to demonize, or to characterize as “other”, those who consider themselves to be part of the same cultural group, namely followers of Jesus. Notice especially that “all the priests who stand before that altar invoke my (namely, Jesus’s) name.”

Here the author of the Gospel of Judas has Jesus taking sides in the internal debates within Christianity. Jesus, claims the author, is on the side of the author and his group of Jesus-followers and not on the side of others who claim to follow Jesus. This is an internal battle within Christianity itself here.

There is irony in the way that the Gospel of Judas does this, however. For Jesus is here presented as speaking to the “twelve disciples” and the vision of “twelve priests” slaughtering children and generally running amuck that these disciples witness is, it seems, a vision of themselves! They, the twelve disciples of Jesus, are the ones that behave in a shameful manner, and it is the twelve that represent other followers of Jesus with whom the author of the Gospel of Judas has major disagreements. In this writing, Judas is taken as the ideal disciple and follower of Jesus who is set apart from the other shameful twelve disciples. Judas, as I have discussed in my previous post on the subject, is the favourite of Jesus in this writing.

It seems that many combatants in these internal battles within Christianity used similar ammunition, namely the stereotypes which were common in some descriptions of foreign peoples, in ethnographic descriptions. Previously we had known quite a bit about Christian authors like Epiphanius who condemned certain Christian “gnostic” groups and accused them of engaging in heinous crimes of human sacrifice and sexual perversion. Now we have a clear case in which one particular “gnostic” author or group turned the tables.

The recent hosting of the Biblical Studies Carnival has pushed me over the brink of 50,000 unique visitors at this blog since May 2005. This made me think to look at the number of visitors for my main website, www.philipharland.com, which is now over 100,000.

Looking at the locations of recent visitors on the blog and website, I find visitors from the following countries in the past day or so:

Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Costa Rica, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Korea, Latvia, Netherlands, Norway, Philippines, Romania, Russian Federation, South Africa, Spain, Turkey, UK, USA.

This kind of makes it seem worthwhile that I started to do this geeky website thing.

Welcome to the tenth Biblical Studies Carnival. As usual, quite a lot is going on in the many blogs that deal with biblical studies and related areas, including the Ancient Near East and the Greco-Roman world.

HEBREW BIBLE AND THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST

Was there sex in Eden?: Both Stephen Cook (parts 1, 2, and 3) and Chris Heard have posts discussing the Genesis story of the garden of Eden (parental discretion is advised).

Exodus Decoded: Ever commented on what you thought about a flick (e.g. “I found the repetition of ‘nee’ particularly distracting from the plot-line”) and had the producer contact you directly in an attempt to refute your critique? Well, that’s what happened to Chris Heard over on his blog, Higgaion! Chris has a series of posts dealing with a controversial and slickly-produced documentary called The Exodus Decoded, by Simcha Jacobovici. The documentary claims to unearth “the true story of the Exodus” and Chris shows just how un-true key aspects of Jacobovici’s theory really are, despite how exciting it would be if they were true. (Part 1 is here, and then follow the links to following parts at the bottom of each post. There’s nine–make that eleven–so far!).

Listen to the tunes Abram heard before he listened to Yahweh: Francis Deblauwe discusses the success by a team of archeologists and others in reconstructing a playable Mesopotamian Lyre based on the so called Gold Lyre of Ur, dated to the third millenium BCE. If you watched Live 8, then you may have already seen and heard an unfinished version of the lyre. I wonder what the Edge would do with a Mesopotamian lyre?

Gathered to the ancestors: Stephen Cook has begun an interesting series on Israelite burial practices and conceptions of death, starting with Abraham’s burial of Sarah (part 1, part 2).

God’s crossword puzzle, or “cent, cent, quarter and dollars”: A post on דבר אחר (dawar akher, literally “another interpretation”) investigates and provides an interesting interpretation of the mysterious Writing on the Wall in the story of Daniel (chapter 5). The king won’t be too happy about the solution to this crossword puzzle.

Learning the a,b,c’s in Bronze Age Canaan: Duane Smith continues with his series of posts on evidence for scribal training and scribal schools in Canaan and the Ancient Near East: How to Recognize a Scribal School - Part 4: Evidence for the training of scribes in Late Bronze Age Canaan.

I do not like them (Hebrew and Greek, that is): For those learning Hebrew or Greek, Tyler Williams gathers together a couple of funny sketches in Abbott & Costello Learn Hebrew (written by Rabbi Jack Moline) and Dr. Seuss Learns Greek (written by someone).

SECOND-TEMPLE JUDAISM AND EARLY RABBINIC JUDAISM

Counterfeit prophecy: Torrey Seland discusses a recent article he has written on Philo of Alexandria’s views on “magic”.

Those elusive Essenes by the Dead Sea: Over on Rogueclassicism, David Meadows highlights an article concerning the theory of archaeologist Yizhar Hirschfeld. This archeologist claims that the place where the Dead Sea scrolls were found is not an Essene site and that the Essenes mentioned by Pliny the Elder can be found and, in fact, have been found (by this archeologist). Balancing things out, the article also cites solid scholars who plainly reject this suggested new site for the Essenes mentioned by Pliny the Elder (Natural History, 5.15.17) .

Sects and violence: I’ve recently offered a couple of posts dealing with the diversity of groups in Judaism in the first century and with the tensions that culminated with the destruction of the second temple in 70 CE. And, as the latter post shows, if you thought that the practice of exposing one’s posterior area for comic-affect or insult was a modern cultural convention, you’ve got something to learn.

Come blow your horn: Menachem Mendel discusses Mishnaic and Talmudic traditions associated with Blowing Shofar on Shabbat in connection with the Jewish New Year (Rosh Hashannah).

EARLY CHRISTIAN WRITINGS AND THE GRECO-ROMAN WORLD

Is Wright wrong? (and, yes, I came up with that brilliant play on words myself): Jim Davila challenges several aspects of N.T. Wright’s claims regarding the Gospel of Thomas, including the question of whether that Gospel was originally written in Aramaic and whether it reflects early material traceable to Jesus himself. (The Gospel of Thomas is available in many translations online here, for you to decide what you think about it).

Blogen-what?: Blogentary, like commentary but on a blog. Michael Pahl is continuing his interesting series of posts that will add up to an online commentary (blogentary) on Paul’s first letter to the Christians at Thessalonica (1 Thessalonians). Michael’s most recent post deals with what is absolutely essential for understanding this or any letter by Paul, namely, the real life cultural contexts in which the members of the earliest Jesus-groups found themselves (the Greco-Roman city of Thessalonica, in this case). He links to and discusses several photos of the ruins at Thessalonica. On a related note (and thanks to a note on Roman Archaeology), there are recent plans to engage in further excavation of Thessalonica: “Drill aids digs in Thessaloniki: Large-scale metro excavation could illuminate Hellenistic and Roman periods.”

What time did Paul arrive in Corinth (and was he late)?: The perrenial issue of when Paul wrote what is occupying a number of New Testament bloggers. The whole discussion of Pauline chronology was re-started by Mark Goodacre, whose first post was Does Galatians post-date 1 Corinthians?. Several others have responded and they list links to all the relevant posts, including Loren Rosson, Michael Pahl, and Stephen Carlson. Loren in particular offers a post focussing on the the difficulties in dating Galatians specifically.

What a difference an epsilon can make: In Textual Criticism and the Antioch Incident, Stephen Carlson discusses the textual variant which changes the “they [some from James] came” to “he [Peter?] came” in Paul’s run-in with Peter over eating with Gentiles.

Lists: Over on Thoughts on Antiquity, Ben C. Smith has a series of useful posts on early Christian canonical lists, including an introduction regarding the importance of these lists of early Christian works and discussions of the Marcionite canon, the Muratorian canon, and Origen’s discussion of what that church father considers valuable Christian writings.

Bart on the text of the Bible: “The Bible is corrupt, man” (no, the other Bart). The Evangelical Textual Criticism blog has an interview with Bart Ehrman regarding his views of textual corruption and the impact of his works on public perceptions of the Bible.

Do not get drunk with wine: Pliny the Elder joins the author of Ephesians (5:18) in warning of the evils of drinking, but from a more practical perspective. This ancient description of a hangover may be a timely warning in light of forthcoming Oktoberfest.

Cult of the severed head: Moving into religions in territories conquered by the Romans, where Christian groups were soon to be established, Troels Myrup Kristensen has a fascinating post on the cult of the severed head in Gaul (France). He cites the Greco-Roman geographer and ethnographer Strabo, who wrote in the time of Augustus.

Just a final comment on the online “Nerd Test” that several biblical studies types have been completing, some claiming low nerd-levels: Only complete nerds would fill out such a test, so this is redundant and, when it indicates low levels of nerdiness, entirely inaccurate.

The November edition of Biblical Studies Carnival (no. XI) will be hosted by Michael Pahl over at The Stuff of Earth. So submit to him your suggestions of posts to include for the next round.