Tuesday, November 27, 2012

The Jesus SeM&Minar

Today in my historical Jesus class we conducted our very own Jesus SeM&Minar.  Now I must admit, I got this brilliant idea from James McGrath of Exploring our Matrix fame as I used his syllabus as the template for my own course this year as I was teaching it for the first time.  I thoroughly modified his syllabus to my own needs, but I had to keep the Jesus SeM&Minar.  

The idea is to, Jesus Seminar style, vote on various sayings and/or deeds of Jesus as to their historical probability, but instead of using colored stones, one uses M&Ms.  More fun, and hey, you get to eat your vote after you are finished. 






Here is how I set up the voting for our class.


Red M&M = He said/did such a thing
Orange M&M = He said/did something like this, but not exactly as the text(s) present it
Green M&M = He probably did not say/do such a thing
Brown M&M = He almost certainly said/did no such thing

These colors more or less correspond to the Jesus Seminar's Red, Pink, Gray, and Black.  

I was a little nervous going into the class because my student makeup is to a great extent on the conservative evangelical end of the spectrum and I was afraid of vote after vote of all red M&Ms, because for many conservatives, if it is in the Bible, it has to be historically factual.  

I chose 6 sayings/deeds that we were to vote on.  They are: 


1.     The Beelzebul Controversy (Mark 3:20-22, Matt 12:24, Luke 11:15)
2.     The cleansing of the Temple (Mark 11:15-16, Matt 21:12, Luke 19:45, John 2:13-16)
3.     Jesus walking on water (Mark 6:47-52, Matt 14:24-33, John 6:16-21)
4.     The Parable of the Mustard Seed (Mark 4:30-32, Matthew 13:31-32, Luke 13:18-19, Gos Thomas 20)
5.     Let the dead bury their own dead (Luke 9:59-60, Matthew 8:21-22)
6.     Church Discipline (Matthew 18:15-20)

After voting, I had the students defend their positions based on various Jesus criteria (multiple attestation, dissimilarity, embarrassment, coherence, historical plausibility, etc.).

I stacked the deck in my selection of deeds/sayings, choosing some that Jesus scholars clearly think are historical and others that are clearly on the non-historical side. Out of 15 students, plus my vote, here are the results.

Beelzebul: 8 Red, 7 Orange, 1 Green, 0 Brown
Temple Cleansing: 9 Red, 7 Orange, 0 Green, 0 Brown
Water Walking: 6 Red, 2 Orange, 8 Green, 0 Brown
Mustard Seed: 10 Red, 6 Orange, 0 Green, 0 Brown
Dead bury own dead: 9 Red, 5 Orange, 1 Green, 1 Brown
Church Discipline: 4 Red, 6 Orange, 4 Green, 1 Brown

Looking at these vote counts, it was not as I feared.  Obviously there was some conservative tilt with a lot of red and orange.  The biggest red light issue for me was the walking on water with 8 votes going toward historical authenticity, or at least close to authentic.  But, miracles are a touchy issue and I understand the vote, even though I tried to get the students to disengage their belief and try to act under the confines of historical research only. 

The other shock for me was perhaps #6, Matthew's exposition on church discipline.  This is a largely anachronistic use of the ekklesia, portraying Matthew's Sitz im Leben, not that of Jesus.  Yet, this vote was actually the most interesting, because the verses that I had included in the vote really can be broken down into two sections: vv. 15-18 which is talking about church discipline proper, and vv. 19-20, which talk about binding and loosing and where two or more are gathered.  I called a re-vote, this time just on vv. 15-18 and the results were fascinating. 1 Red, 2 Orange, 5 Green, and 8 Brown.  Wow, 13 people in my class were skeptical or outright dismissive that these words belonged to the historical Jesus. I believe I have succeeded in communicating that the gospels do indeed often represent not just the brute facts of history, but also the concerns of the evangelists themselves.

It has been a really fun class this semester.  I have learned a lot, I think my students have learned a lot, and this Jesus SeM&Minar was a great way to bring many themes from throughout the semester into one discussion here at the end of the semester.  Thanks again to McGrath for the idea.



  

Monday, November 19, 2012

Leaving the SBL

Well, another year, another SBL. Great weather in Chicago this year. The highlight for me: the biblioblogger's gathering last night. Even though I don't blog much anymore, and i felt a little like a poser last night, those bibliobloggers are just the most fun.




A parting pic down Michigan ave as I waited for the airport shuttle.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

Location:S Michigan Ave,Chicago,United States

Thursday, September 6, 2012

God Declares Independent

In a strangely prophetic post last week, I mentioned that if God were to send a hurricane to Charlotte to disrupt the Democratic National Convention, then we would know that God was truly an independent and not tied to either party, since Hurricane Isaac disrupted the RNC.  Well, we see through a glass dimly, but we see nonetheless.  While it is not a hurricane, strong thunderstorms are expected to roll through Charlotte this evening which has prompted the DNC to move Obama's address from the outdoor venue, Bank of America Stadium, to the Indoor Time Warner Cable Arena.

I guess God thinks that both parties do not represent God's interests right now.

PSA: if you are taking this seriously, see my previous post here.


Tuesday, August 28, 2012

The Dangers of Sarcasm in Print

Using sarcasm in print is always dangerous because print cannot convey things like tone of voice, body language, etc.  Therefore, I would like to thank James McGrath for noticing that yesterday's post was indeed a parody. 

McGrath calls for consistency among a certain brand of conservative evangelicals who see every natural disaster as God's judgment on sinners.  At least be consistent and call Isaac God's judgment against the Republican National Convention. 

No doubt, tomorrow morning we will probably read about how Isaac is yet again God's judgment against the "Big Easy," just seven years after his last smackdown of the sinful city with Katrina.  But if these hurricanes were God's judgment against New Orleans, must we not also follow logic and declare that God deliberately took momentum out of the Republican Party's national convention in a similar judgment?

Perhaps the lesson to be learned here is: "Don't schedule your party's national convention in a hurricane prone area during the height of hurricane season."

Below is an image from McGrath's blog, speaking to the same issue.

Monday, August 27, 2012

God Declares against the Republicans

It is official, the Republican National Convention has been thrown off by Hurricane Isaac.  As many in the past have claimed, God hurls hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes at the godless.  Therefore, since Isaac has interrupted the Republican National Convention, God must be against the Republicans. 

I guess we will have to wait to see if God also sends a hurricane to Charlotte in a couple of weeks, thus declaring himself an independent. As one who lives in NC, here's to the democrats.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

LOST: The Final Tally








Well, the re-watch is done, and I can say that the show is still every bit as satisfying on re-watch as it was the first time through.

One thing that my wife and I did this time through was to tally up several aspects.  You can see my ragged tally list in this picture.  One tally list records how many flash back/flash forward/flash sideways episodes a certain character got.  That is, how much time did the show spend developing certain characters.  Here is the list in order of episodes each character got.


  1. Jack: 12 episodes (7 flash back, 2 flash forward, 1 present, and 2 flash sideways)
  2. Locke: 10 episodes (9 flash back, 1 flash sideways)
  3. Kate: 9 episodes (7 flash back, 1 flash forward, 1 flash sideways)
  4. Jin and Sun (counted together because they could not be separated): 8 episodes (6 flash back, 1 flash forward/flash back, 1 flash sideways)
  5. Sayeed: 7 episodes (5 flashback, 1 flash forward, 1 flash sideways)
  6. Desmond: 7 episodes (6 flash back, 1 flash sideways)
  7. Sawyer: 6 episodes (5 flash back, 1 flash sideways)
  8. Hurley: 6 episodes (4 flash back, 1 flash forward, 1 flash sideways)
  9. Charlie: 4 episodes (4 flash back)
  10. Ben: 4 episodes (2 flash back, 1 flash forward, 1 flash sideways)
  11. Walt and Michael: 4 episodes (4 flash back)
  12. Eko: 3 episodes (3 flash back)
  13. Juliette: 3 episodes (3 flash back)
  14. Claire: 3 episodes (3 flash back)
  15. Ana Lucia: 2 episodes (2 flash back)
  16. Boone: 1 episode (1 flash back)
  17. Shannon: 1 episode (1 flash back)
  18. Rose and Bernard: 1 episode (1 flash back)
  19. Richard: 1 episode (1 flash back)
  20. Daniel: 1 episode (1 flash back)
  21. Miles: 1 episode (1 flash back)
  22. Jacob and Smokey: 1 episode (1 flash back)
  23. Nikki and Paulo: 1 episode (1 flash back)
Notice the number 23?

Other characters on the show with significant roles but no dedicated episodes: 
Libby
Rousseau
Alex
Charlotte
Lapidas
Penny
Widmore
Eloise
Ilana
Christian
Cassidy
Nadia

Does this list by number of dedicated episodes fairly depict the importance of the characters in LOST?

Some surprises to me: That Desmond jumps ahead of both Sawyer and Hurley, that Daniel, whom I feel fairly connected to, only had 1 flashback, that Nikki and Paulo ever deserved an episode.

Monday, July 9, 2012

"Losties" vs. "Others": Body Count

So, Brooke and I are doing another lost re-watch.  We started one which sputtered out last year, but this will be the first re-watch of the entire series, and the first time we have re-watched season 6 at all.

Several things have struck me during this re-watch, but what I want to post about here is the actual body count of "Others" vs. "Losties."

Lost is a great example of how point of view/perspective can shape our realities.  In Lost, we are, at least for the first 3 seasons, given the point of view of the "Losties."  From their perspective, the "Others" are a brutal and malicious group of practically wild savages, while the "Losties" themselves are a reasonable and logical group of people merely defending themselves.  Yet, one surprising statistic might be all that is needed to show how perspective can change everything.

<> At the end of season 3, the body count of the "Losties" is 18, to 3 for the "Others."  That is, the Losties have killed 18 of the "Others" while the "Others" have only killed 3 of the "Losties."  That statistic might sound surprising to those who have watched the show, but I have kept a fairly rigid count during this re-watch. I have not counted some kills such as "Losties" on "Losties," like Ana Lucia's killing Shannon, Michael's killing of Ana Lucia and Libby.  Nor have I counted "Others" on "Others" kills such as Juliette killing Danny or Mikael killing the two women in the Looking Glass station.  Beyond season 3, keeping a body count becomes pointless as the groups have essentially dissolved or been realigned. 

Some notable kills:

"Others":
1) Ethan kills Scott or Steve, can't remember which.
2) Goodwin kills Nathan
3) Mikael kills Charlie

That was all the "Others" kills in the first three seasons.  Sure, Ethan tried to kill Charlie, Danny would have shot Kate and Sawyer, but I am going with actual kills.

"Losties":
Charlie kills Ethan
Eko kills two "Others" on the beach in self defense
Ana Lucia kills an "Other" on the beach during a raid
Ana Lucia kills Goodwin
Sun kills Danny's wife on the boat
The grand killing spree comes in the finale of season three when 7 "Others" are killed on their beach raid trying to take the pregnant women and are blown up with dynamite.  3 more "Others," including Tom and Ryan, are killed subsequently as Hurley runs over Ryan, Sayeed snaps the neck of another, and Sawyer shoots Tom at point blank range.
The other 2 kills are of "Other" extras during various skirmishes, one as Kate, Jack, Sawyer and Hurly are on their way to the "Others'" camp, and one during Kate and Sawyer's escape attempt.

So, which group is more malicious, bloodthirsty, and brutal?