By now, Calvin is used to my rants about Mark Driscoll, and closely related, the whole, “make the church and Jesus more manly” movement. I think the author of this Christianity Today article summed up my thoughts on the matter nicely, and without all the vitriolic comments I would like to contribute (which would be un-Christlike for a man or woman, might I add).

If there’s one thing I can’t stand, it’s when something is going in the wrong direction, so people swing to the opposite extreme and come up with ideas just as bad (or worse) that they claim are the “true” way. Yet, it seems to be human nature to make these gigantic pendulum swings. The biggest life lesson my parents taught me that has most blatantly stayed with me and even helped me in my chosen career, is that usually the best option is somewhere in the middle. (Of course “middle” is all in one’s point of view, but the principle still remains!)

This is a little delayed, but I’m finally motivating myself to post some random thoughts about the SBL Regional we attended recently.

First, my favorite paper by far was The Nature and Identity of ‘Satan’ in 1 Chronicles 21:1 by Ryan Stokes of Yale University. Calvin and I met Ryan at the Second Temple conference we attended a few weeks back, and I thought his paper was excellent. Of course, I’m partial to anything having to do with gods, mythology, or possible supernatural beings. But, his comparison of the 1 Chronicles passage with the Numbers passage that a “satan” appears in was very interesting to me. It’s not something I considered before, so I felt like I learned something. The other papers were generally decent, some more so than others.

Second, books!!! Of course, I found myself salivating over the (albeit small) supply of books on display at the conference. Several caught my eye, and we’ll be placing an order with the conference discount soon. I’ll mention one book in particular that stood out to me, because it caused somewhat of an epiphany for me by the very fact that when I saw it my reaction was interest. The Quest for the Historical Israel: Debating Archaeology and the History of Early Israel by Finkelstein, Mazar, and Schmidt: why on earth should I be drawn to this book? I am quite positive of the fact that I am not and do not desire to be an archaeologist. Nor does archaeology interest me over much. After some thought over why I wanted this book, I decided that it’s not as much the archaeology, as the “quest for the historical Israel” part that drew me. Ever since reading William Dever’s three-part series on this topic, I have become very interested in maintaining a sense of reality to the study of the Bible. I want to keep up on what archaeologists are saying about Israel, even if I don’t want to “study” archaeology. Dever had convinced me that biblical scholars need to be in dialog with archaeologists, and upon sighting this book, I realized that this idea has stayed with me.

Third, I feel relieved now that I’ve seen some papers given at an SBL meeting. I feel as though I have more of an idea of what to expect now should I want to submit a paper for next year’s regional. I also feel some pressure off, at least for a regional meeting, as there were many different types of presenters, some dry and deadpan, others who managed to make the fact that they were reading a paper to me interesting. I hope to be one of the more animated presenters when I get there one day…

So that’s not exactly a full-blown itinerary of the day, but there are the main thoughts I have coming away from the conference. All-in-all, it was a good day, and I am really looking forward to national this fall.

There are three topics lately that have sparked some interest in me. The first stems partly from a conference Calvin and I (and Adam and Jen) attended the week before last, The Other in Second Temple Judaism. Calvin has already posted about it here and here. Susan Ackermann, who was on the panel of three ladies that gave some closing thoughts on the conference, stirred things up a little by noting how in all the papers that had been given at the conference, not one was about woman as the “other.” She commented that back when she was an up and coming scholar, it was almost assured someone would have talked about that. Further, she said that some might take this to signify that the idea of woman as “other” has died down, because women have finally found their place in biblical scholarship. Then she gave her opinion that she wasn’t so sure about that.

Now I’m not a self-proclaimed feminist like Ackermann, but some of her comments, as well as those of Adela Collins, interested me. When I look at biblical scholarship (say, when I’m browsing the faculty for an Old Testament department at a university), to be sure there are one or two women sprinkled in there. But by in large, the majority of biblical scholars are still men. One of the big things with “feminist theology” is, of course, that the religious history of Judaism and Christianity has been dominated primarily by the opinions and interpretations of men. And, while I take issue with some of the theology of Mark Driscoll (as Calvin recently posted on), I do believe that men and women are different, and certainly view the world differently. So this interested me. I can’t say exactly how yet, but it did.

The second topic that I’ve been thinking about for a more lengthy period of time is the Old Testament and justice. Mostly, this is because of the Global Biblical Justice class I am taking this semester with Dean Borgman. The prophets have become more interesting to me as the voice crying out against injustice, as well as the Exodus as a liberation theme. So, once again, I don’t know where I’m going with all that, but it’s been something on my mind as an interest.

As far as Jeremiah goes, I’m planning to do a Readings course in Jeremiah and Lamentations (with some historical background from 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles thrown in) this summer. (For those who don’t know, that basically means translating - in my case, Jer. 1-15, Lamentations, and the appropriate historical sections). I’m terribly excited about it, because Jeremiah has always fascinated me. I read through Jeremiah again recently, and the way that the prophet’s heart and soul seems to go into his message, even if it tears him to pieces to have to preach it, is captivating. Perhaps after this summer I’ll have a better idea in what direction I want to take that.

So, there are three topics that have been floating around in my head recently, so I’m just getting them out there, in this “journal” thing I’m doing. Egads, some people must take me for such a liberal, here I am talking about feminist and liberation theology. I really don’t know enough about either to jump on any bandwagons (and I’m not given to jumping on bandwagons anyways), so don’t be worried.