Appeal to Examine Robinson Papers at Claremont Graduate University

On Bart Ehrman’s blog, Mark Goodacre recently posted about the ambiguities and contradictions around the circumstances of the discovery and acquisition of the Nag Hammadi Codices. He mentions specifically that Robinson’s accounts (pl) have contradictory details, and that scholars such as Kasser and Krause questioned their plausibility.

During a tour of the Special Collections at Honnold-Mudd several months ago, I saw that the Robinson papers were being processed. That work may still be in progress or perhaps completed by now, but in either case there is a new opportunity here for one or more scholars to examine those papers and see if they shed any light on the historical circumstances of the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Codices.

Given the upcoming meeting at Claremont Graduate University of the International Association of Coptic Studies, there will also be ample opportunities to incorporate Robinson’s papers into presentations and even on-site displays.

– Mark Bilby

First Reviews of First Book

While several copies are still out for review in different journals, the first few reviews have started to appear:

  1. Clark, Roland. Review of As the Bandit Will I Confess You: Luke 23,39-43 in Early Christian Interpretation, by Mark Glen Bilby. Catholic Library World 85.2 (December 2014): 122-123.
  2. Phillips, Thomas E. Review of As the Bandit Will I Confess You: Luke 23,39-43 in Early Christian Interpretation, by Mark Glen Bilby. Religious Studies Review 41.2 (June 2015): 75.
  3. Widdicombe, Peter. Review of As the Bandit Will I Confess You: Luke 23,39-43 in Early Christian Interpretation, by Mark Glen Bilby. Journal of Theological Studies 66.1 (April 2015): 435-437.

– Mark Glen Bilby

Reflections on Juvencus, Evangeliorum libri, Book 4

Today I completed my feedback on Scott McGill’s forthcoming annotated translation of Juvencus’ Four Books of the Gospels, the first major Christian epic poem, a metrical retelling of the Gospel of Matthew (more or less). My interests in the text are manifold, but especially for the ways in which the Gospel of Luke finds its way into the retelling.

As noted in a previous blog post, book 1 of the Evangeliorum relies heavily on Luke, especially its birth and childhood narratives. As is well known, John and Mark have nothing to say about Jesus’ earthly life before his ministry, and Matthew’s infancy narrative is much shorter and quite different than Luke’s. So it makes sense, given the canonical sources available and Juvencus’ efforts to retell the whole life of Christ, that he would depend so heavily on Luke for his birth narratives, even while taking Matthew as his base text for the bulk of his composition.

What I found among books 2-4 were rare and fairly brief references to Luke’s Gospel. For example, in 3.81-83, Juvencus borrows Luke’s unique phrase, “that is enough,” in order to make a clever intertextual connection between the Gethsemane arrest and the feeding of the five thousand:

The disciples showed that there was nothing more
to eat but two fish and five pieces of bread.
“This is enough,” he said.

Besides the Lukan infancy narratives, the longest episode pulled from Luke is 14:7-11, a passage Aland’s synopsis entitles “Teaching on Humility,” but one that amounts to instructions on where to sit as a guest at a feast, and on whom to invite to the feasts one hosts. In 3.614-621, Juvencus weaves in this uniquely Lukan teaching so as to bolster the brief Markan/Matthean counsel about how those who humble themselves will be exalted. This appears immediately after Jesus’ rebuke of the sons of Zebedee for their request for eschatological places of glory. Apparently Juvencus thought that meal decorum, humility, and (perhaps) the inclusion of the poor were important enough so as to adventure out from his base text.

Surprisingly, book four had only one clear and very brief reference to Luke, specifically 17:34, about judgment dividing two people “in the same bed.” He inserts this saying in place of the Matthean mention (24:41) of two women at the mill. Perhaps he found the Matthean text too rustic.

What is most surprising about book four of the Evangeliorum is that the uniquely Lukan details and narratives related to the Passion and Resurrection are almost entirely absent. Juvencus’ retold Gospel has no second cup at the passover, no miraculous healing of the servant’s ear, no Annas, no Herod, no threefold assertion of innocence, no repentant criminal, no mourning crowds, no Emmaus road encounter, no post-resurrection feast with the disciples, and no ascension.

In summary, Juvencus was not primarily interested in navigating through or creating a harmonized Gospel (akin to Tatian’s Diatessaron). Instead, he sought to fashion a harmoniously epic version of the life of Jesus. Given the priority of Matthew’s Gospel for many early Christian interpreters, it makes a lot of sense that Matthew’s Gospel remained his consistent default.

– Mark G. Bilby

Reflections on Juvencus, Evangeliorum libri, Book 3

This is the third in a sequence of reflections on Scott McGill’s forthcoming (December 2015)  annotated translation (the first ever complete English translation) of the Four Books of the Gospels by Juvencus, the first great Christian epic poet. I continue to be impressed at the way Juvencus interweaves allusions to Latin classical poetry (especially that of Vergil), the narrative of Matthew, and also intertexts with other scriptures.

One such interweaving appears in lines 630-635 of book 3. This one stands out to me not only for its content, but also for its creative resequencing. As McGill mentions in his preliminary notes, these lines invert the order of Mt 21:4-7 (630-632 render Mt 21:6-7, while 633-635 render Mt 21:4-5).

Without delay, the disciples did as told.
They led the pair, spread a soft cloak upon
the gentle foal, and made a place to sit.
The ancient prophet’s vatic voice streamed down:
“Behold, your kind king comes; a gentle ass
and trailing foal bring him upon their backs.”

In my view, this inverted sequence dramatizes the episode. Rather than keeping with Matthew’s customary narrative pauses to quote a prophecy fulfilled, Juvencus makes the ancient speech into a present heavenly portent and voice that accompanies Jesus’ ascent. This shift also creates a resonance with other heavenly portents in the scriptures, most notably the “voice from heaven” at the baptism (Mk 1:11, Mt 3:17, Lk 3:22) and elsewhere (Dn 4:31, Jn 12:28, Ac 11:9, 2 Pt 1:18, Rv 10:4, 8, 11:12, 12:10, 14:2, 7, 13; 18:4). The inclusion of a heavenly portent here at the triumphal entry also recalls many possible scenes from Greek and Latin epic poetry.

– Mark Bilby

Thoughts on Juvencus, Four Books of the Gospels, Book 2

Scott McGill has graciously continued including me during the editorial process of his work on the first English translation of Juvencus’ Four Books of the Gospels. I’ve mainly been able to help by catching additional scriptural intertexts.

In this regard, one set of lines that especially caught my attention was 2.124-126.

You’ll see the whole sky split apart and God’s
swift angels enter heaven and return
bearing a gleaming crown for the Son of Man.

In the immediate context of the poem, Juvencus is retelling John 1:43-51, and here in particular, John 1:51, “Very truly, I tell you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.”

But embedded within this retelling is a possible allusion to Isa 64:1 (“O that you would split the heavens and come down.”) and a probable one to Rev 6:2 or Rev 14:14 (in which Jesus is respectively described as being given and wearing a crown).

The allusions to epic poetry abound, but the more I read Juvencus, the more he impresses me as an adept intertextual interpreter of the sacred scripture.

– Mark G. Bilby

Juvencus and the Literary Reception of Luke

I’ve been working on some articles for the Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception that deal with the reception of Luke, including its reception in literature. The Four Books of the Gospels by Juvencus, written around 330 CE, is the earliest known great work of literature exploring and retelling Lukan narratives. Thanks to the work of Scott McGill, a complete English translation is forthcoming this December.

Scott was kind enough to share with me a working draft of his translation and notes for book one. In return, and at his request, I happily offered my feedback, some of which should find its way into the notes. While Juvencus primarily relies on the text of Matthew, much of book one retells the scenes and almost all of the dialogue found within the birth narratives of Luke (chs. 1-3). The poem is replete with classical references, but also, perhaps more surprisingly, intertextual Biblical references and allusions that require a deep familiarity with the Scriptures for the reader to catch. For example, on the surface of lines 35-38 we find refashioned the words of Gabriel to Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist:

Now I, whom the Lord, Creator of the earth
and sky, made serve before him, am received
Now man’s ungrateful ears and eyes; I’ve done
the bidding of great God, to have it scorned.

But subtly embedded in these lines is Juvencus’ clever attempt to draw a parallel with the angelic epiphany found in Isaiah’s calling (Isaiah 6), and, more profoundly, to fashion the angel Gabriel as a divinely sent but humanly rejected prophet, akin to Isaiah (Isa 6:9-10) and his imitators (Mt 13:14-15, Acts 28:26-27).

Compare the text of Isaiah 6:9-10.

And he said, “Go and say to this people: ‘Keep listening, but do not comprehend; keep looking, but do not understand.’ 10 Make the mind of this people dull, and stop their ears, and shut their eyes, so that they may not look with their eyes, and listen with their ears, and comprehend with their minds, and turn and be healed.”

– Mark Glen Bilby

Insights from Israel, Palestine, and Jordan

Migdal Synagogue (2015 Jan 01)

Migdal Synagogue (2015 Jan 01)

Just yesterday I returned from a two week group tour of historical sites in Israel, Palestine, and Jordan. Hosted by the Society for Biblical Studies (SBS) and led by my friend and library director, Tom Phillips, it struck a nice balance of academic and spiritual interests. Many traditional religious sites were extraordinary and moving to behold, and these included the Western Wall, the Dome on the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque, the Church of the Resurrection / Holy Sepulchre, the Church of the Nativity, the Church of the Annunciation, the Church at Capernaum, St. George’s Church at Madaba (the location of the Madaba Map), and others.

In terms of educational value, Jerash (Gerasa) in modern day Jordan was the most profound. Unlike most ancient Roman cities, this one was not built over with later or modern construction, so the bulk of the city’s layout and many of its buildings were able to be unearthed and reconstructed. While walking its streets, I gleaned several insights into New Testament texts, insights that may find their way into journal articles as time and opportunity affords.

Sephoris/Zippori was also fascinating in that it played host to the editing of the Mishnah (the most sacred text in Judaism next to the TaNaKh) and, as the closest major city to Nazareth, may have been a destination or even a work location for Jesus. It is instructive here to remember that the Greek word in Mark 6:3 (tekton), usually translated as “carpenter” in English, can just as easily and plausibly be rendered as “builder,” “craftsman,” or even “artisan.” In other words, Jesus may just as likely have been a stone mason or mosaicist as a carpenter, and the roads, buildings, and mosaics of Sephoris and nearby smaller towns (Capernaum, Migdal) may well have been places where Jesus plied his trade.

The site at Migdal, where a synagogue was first discovered in 2009, was just recently opened to visitors. While the site was technically closed on New Year’s Day, an archeologist from the Israeli Antiquities Authority happened to be working on site that day and gave our group an expert tour. He dated the synagogue’s construction no later than 29 CE (the date of a coin in the building’s foundation) and its destruction during the early phases of the Jewish War (ca. 67-68). Since the site was not built over in later years, it is one of the best-preserved and most credible candidates for the earliest synagogue yet discovered. Christian historians and pilgrims will find the site fascinating because of its potential connections to Mary Magdalene (Migdal = Magdala, Mary’s possible hometown), obviously a very popular figure in Christianity through the ages and today, as well as its potential connections to Jesus himself. The Roman Catholic church has built a beautiful church on the site which features the Magdalene and other early Christian women (Luke 8:1) prominently. The altar, designed in the shape of a boat, has as its mast a cross. Looking past the altar to the Sea of Galilee through a huge window, participants in worship will feel as if they are floating in one of the stories set there. The site, along with the hotel currently being constructed there, will almost certainly be a very popular destination for myriads of visitors (scholarly and religious) in coming years.

– Mark G. Bilby

Leuven Symposium on the Sources of Luke-Acts: Paper Summaries

Here is the promised summary of the papers from the recent three day symposium at KU Leuven entitled, “Luke on Jesus, Paul and Christianity: What Did He Know?” Again, most of these presentations will likely be published in a proceedings volume late in 2015. I sent out a draft of these summaries to the presenters and received slight corrections from some. Additional corrections from the other presenters are most certainly welcome.

Christoph Heil of Graz showed that Q does not really fit the description of a “narrative Gospel” and explored the ways in which Luke sought to improve upon the narrative deficiencies of Q.

Manfred Lang of Halle-Wittenberg, using a definition of a “source” as a text used to gain knowledge of the past, contended that Acts only clearly shows the use of the LXX as a source. In other words, Luke was more of a theologian than an historian.

Andries Zuiderhoek of Gent explored ancient practices of munificence and showed how Luke’s depiction of Jesus simultaneously draws upon these conventions and subverts them regarding the inclusion and treatment of the poor as recipients of benefaction.

Vadim Wittkowsky argued that parallels between Acts 12 and Mark reflect not merely a literary but also a personal relationship between the evangelist Luke and the evangelist Mark.

John Kloppenborg of Toronto showed how Luke’s geographical knowledge varies widely, from non-existent or vague in Palestine, to modest on the Levantine coast, to superb on the Eastern Aegean coast. This knowledge runs parallel to that of several ancient geographers and maps, making them possible sources of some or much of Luke’s geography.

Dan Smith of Huron University College contended that the various speech-events in Acts, a series of failures and successes, collectively picture Christianity as an esteemed philosophy at home in prominent cultural centers but not in synagogues.

Cilliers Breytenbach of HU-Berlin drew upon epigraphical evidence regarding Roman roads to show how the so-called Southern Galatian hypothesis is not necessary to make sense of the geographical dilemmas between Paul’s travels in his letters and in Acts.

My presentation was next, but I provided in a previous blog post a full abstract of the paper and a summary of the conversation that followed.

Tom Phillips of Claremont School of Theology argued that Acts obtained the idea of Paul’s citizenship in response to Pliny the Younger and his pioneering legal precedent regarding the treatment of Christian citizens. He also pointed out how Pliny’s influence may unravel other knots in Acts, including the geographical problems and oddity of the Spirit’s instruction to avoid Bithynia.

Giovanni Bazzana of Harvard focused on continuities and discontinuities between ethics of wealth and poverty in Q and Luke. While both texts represent a sub-elite class, a shift from village to urban settings occurs from Q to Luke. Luke also incorporates Jewish topoi of almsgiving.

Michelle Christian of the University of Toronto showed how ancient numerical and accounting practices lend insight into Luke 19:12-27 and Acts 19. Both reflect a Lukan tendency to exaggerate (rather than diminish) numbers in a way typical of the large-scale accounting practices of elites. This contrasts with Luke’s depiction of actual coinage and precise amounts when speaking about persons of lower social classes.

Jens Herzer of Leipzig argued that close affinities exist between Acts and 2 Timothy and Titus, similarities that suggest Luke as amaneunsis of the two latter texts and his identity as traveling companion of Paul. 1 Timothy should instead be understood as a later composition unrelated to this author.

Markus Oehler of Vienna thoroughly analyzed the references to places throughout Luke and Acts, comparing the two. Among the more notable observations was that the location and character of the upper-room is quite ambiguous and that caution should be exercised in regard to a geographical analysis when theological concerns are foremost.

Dieter Roth of Mainz, in anticipation of his soon-forthcoming critical edition of Marcion’s Evangelion, demonstrated that some of the recent arguments of Vinzent and Klinghardt are detached from that text. He hinted that Marcion’s text may show a working knowledge of the redacted/canonical text of Luke, which runs counter to Tyson’s anti-Marcionite hypothesis.

– Mark Bilby

Leuven Symposium on Luke-Acts: Personal Summary on Acts and Pliny

This past Friday concluded a three day symposium at KU Leuven entitled, “Luke on Jesus, Paul and Christianity: What Did He Know?” Organized by Joseph Verheyden and John Kloppenborg, it brought together a wide array of fine scholars who explored the sources and intertextualities of Luke and Acts. Most of the papers will likely be published as an edited collection, probably late in 2015. In an upcoming post, I will include a brief summary of each conference paper, but I am giving the presenters a chance to comment on my summaries before I do that.

In the meantime, I will take the liberty of summarizing my own paper and discuss its response. Here is the abstract:

A movement is afoot among scholars to situate the Acts of the Apostles in the 2nd century. An important test case for this thesis (whether to reject, to support, or to nuance it) is the relationship between Acts and the letters of Pliny the Younger, in particular his correspondence with emperor Trajan about Christians. A close comparison of the two texts reveals parallels notable for their analogical imitation, volume, frequency, order, distinctiveness and coherence. These parallels include: 1) marketplace disruption as the impetus for arrest and trial, 2) the presiding official’s abjection over the spread of Christian influence, 3) a puzzled response at the accused and official inquiry made to a political superior, 4) direct appeal to the emperor as a sacred custom, 5) the use of the term Christian as a opprobrium by a Roman official during a trial, 6) considerable vexation about the application of the Christian label, 7) survival predicated upon paying homage to the public gods, 8) official pressure for the accused to face actual charges in a proper trial, 9) the presiding official’s ridicule of Christian citizens as mindless, and 10) the remittance of Christian citizens to the capital for trial. Both even 11) know a lawyer with the uncommon name of Tertullus who represents an anti-Christian party. Finally, an intertextual relationship enhances interpretability, clarifying Acts rather than obscuring it. This correspondence would indeed have been available and known to someone writing in western Asia Minor in the 110s or subsequently. The earliest history of the interpretation of both texts also dovetails. In sum, it is probable that Acts depends on Pliny’s correspondence with Trajan. Moreover, in its broader cultural, social and historical context, Acts not only presumes Pliny’s letters but is situated in the very world brought about by them.

Essentially, this was a modestly edited version of a presentation I gave at SBL in 2009. That presentation, made on the last day of the conference and lightly attended, seemed to go over the heads of most in the audience, probably because a 2nd century date for Acts was a relatively new idea at that point in time.

This conference was different in many ways. I had a full 45 minutes to present, followed by 30 minutes of discussion. Some of the world’s best New Testament scholars were in attendance. A complementary case for Acts having an historical (though not literary, per se) relationship to Acts was made by my colleague, Tom Phillips, based on an SBL presentation he made in 2010. Over the past five years, the number of scholars entertaining a 2nd century setting for Acts has grown, and several of the conference attendees voiced their view that Acts belonged to a Hadrianic timeframe.

So, with these many advantages, I felt that my argument was heard and taken seriously. That is not to say, however, that everyone was instantly persuaded. Some expressed a hesitant acceptance, others pointed out possible issues and problems to consider, and still others said that they were not convinced, but would continue to consider the case I made.

As I said in the introduction to the presentation, the argument that Acts depends on Pliny (even if second-hand or as an oral tradition) is probably a fairly controversial idea to most scholars today. That said, I felt that my paper received a sympathetic and critical hearing, and I could not ask for anything more than that!

– Mark Glen Bilby