Keep your Greek: Testing some lines 5

19 01 2010

From the chapter on reading Greek quickly:

When we read Greek quickly, it helps us to get ‘the vibe’ of the language. To get the vibe of something, you need frequent exposure to it, but also some comprehension of the bigger picture.

Reading quickly will also help you to ‘internalize’ the language in a way that slow and careful reading may not. To ‘internalize’ a language means that you no longer treat it as an abstract ‘code’ to be deciphered. Rather, it becomes more like a song you know really well.

Reading quickly also feels more like you’re actually reading because you’re taking in more content, and therefore piecing together the ideas and the wider message of the text.

Read Greek quickly and dig the vibe, man.

Posted by Con Campbell





Review of Granville Sharp’s Canon and Its Kin

11 01 2010

Allow me to share the (unedited) conclusion of my review of Dan Wallace’s new book. I’ve already offered a few thoughts about the book here, and the rest of the review will be found in the Themelios journal later in the year. Yes, I know it’s a bit gushing, but it reflects my honest opinion!

It is rare to be invited to review a book that is both a landmark and robust to the point of seeming virtually irrefutable. It is a landmark book because it has in my opinion put to rest the debate about Sharp’s rule, and has shown that it is of enormous importance both to Greek syntax and to theological exegesis of the New Testament. Truly, the humble Greek article reaches the heights of the deity of Christ! The book is robust in that it is difficult to imagine its key conclusions being overturned any time soon, if ever. If such claims appear grandiose, the following is more so: this book will stand the test of time as one of the best contributions to Greek syntax of the twentyfirst century. Dr Wallace is to be congratulated, and all serious students of the Greek New Testament should read his book, and will do so to great profit.

Now, go read the book!

Posted by Con Campbell





Preaching without notes

8 01 2010

I’m a convert to preaching without any notes.

I know it’s not for everyone, but I reckon more preachers could do it if they wanted to.

I’ve preached evangelistically without notes for years, by memorising certain talks that I knew I would get to repeat many times. But I’ve not thought it “worth it” to preach all the time without notes. Until now.

I recently preached 5 talks at the Queensland CMS Summer School, one talk each day. With the exception of one point in my last talk, during which I was struggling with a severe stomach bug, I didn’t forget anything I had planned to say. I really enjoyed the freedom of not using notes, and was surprised by how much detail could still be offered without them.

Why is it good?

There are several things I can think of, but three things stand out.

1. The ability to connect to hearers is greatly enhanced away from a lectern. I’ve preached a lot with notes and without, and there’s no question in my mind that without notes, connection is better. I feel better connected, and from feedback it seems that hearers do too.

2. The freedom to “reshape” the talk as you go can be very useful. Sometimes I don’t like being locked into my notes, and certain parts of a talk might be crying out for further comment or a slightly different direction. I think the vibe of “the moment” is key here, and it’s all intuition, but preachers know what I mean, I’m sure. Now, I used to improv when using notes anyway, but it can be awkward then returning to notes after an unexpected improv bit. By not using notes at all, this problem disappears.

3. There is a need to be more connected to the text being preached than to the notes of the sermon. I used to need to know my notes and the text, but now I only need to know the text.

Drawbacks?

Surprisingly, I never felt at risk of forgetting what I’d planned to say, so that was not a drawback.

Also, as mentioned above, I had suspected that details might suffer, but this was not the case. In fact, I think details were communicated more clearly this way than they have been with notes at various times.

A common assumption is that learning the talk will add so much time to preparation that it is not worth the effort. I agree, if it does take a lot of time, but if you can work out a method that does not require much time, this is not a problem. I think I’ve discovered a way that works for me, so it adds maybe an hour of extra work.

I think the main drawback is that 70% of the feedback I received (especially from other preachers) included some comment or question about preaching without notes. There’s a risk that it (at least initially) distracts from the message. Which is kinda counter-productive, huh? But once people get used to it, I think that problem disappears.

Posted by Con Campbell





What’s in a word?

1 01 2010

In reading about a debate on “Patronage” vs “Benefaction” it occurred to me that lots of people are ignorant of a really important discussions about the nature of words. So here is the first of a few extracts from Chapter 3 of Anthony Thiselton’s  “New Horizons in Hermeneutics”. Hope this is helpful in stimulating your thinking…

All texts presuppose code. The text of a medical prescription, for example, has been encoded by a medical practitioner in accordance with the conventions of the profession, and invites a pharmacist to de-code it for action in light of these shared conventions. A music score has been encoded by a composer, and waits to be decoded by an orchestra or singers in a musical event. In these exampels, however the code is not the items of information which constitute the “message.” The codes is the sign -system, lattice, or network, in terms of which the linguistic choices which convey the message are expressed. The musical code which enables the composer to specify the production of a particular note for a particular length of time is not the note itself (which would be the message); but the stave or staff of five parallel horizontal lines (together with the clef and the specified areas where possible choices about key signature and time would be supplied) which constitute the structure in terms of which given notes can be chosen and properties specified. Complex texts may presuppose several different layers of code. For example, the Apocalypse of John at one level presupposes the range of possible lexical and grammatical choices available in Hellenistic Greek… But it also operates on the basis of a system of conventions used by earlier apocalyptic. Some allusions to earlier texts such as Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel are not merely reminders about earlier traditions… Language in the Apocalypse of John about “one hundred and forty-four thousand” (Rev. 7.4) presupposes a code which is different from that which generates meaning in the case of mathematical propositions. In the case of mathematics, the network of choices operates in terms f a contrast which opposes or excludes “one hundred and forty-four thousand and one” or “one hundred and forty-three thousand and ninety nine.” But the text of Revelation presupposes contrastive networds which signal differences between completeness and incompleteness with reference to a history of traditions about “twelve” which have become familiar enough to represent a convention among certain communities. Where horses’ heads seem to become merged with heads of lions (Rev. 9.10) the code which is presupposed is not that of empirical visual observations and description. The “measuring” of the temple (Rev. 11.1-2) may perhaps involve several layers….

Posted by Bruce Lowe





A Not-So-Silent Night

29 12 2009

This is a bit late for Christmas, but will be useful for next year.

I was sent a copy of his new book, A Not-So-Silent Night: The Unheard Story of Christmas and Why it Matters, by my friend, and Zondervan senior editor, Verlyn Verbrugge.

Verlyn explores the ‘dark side’ of Christmas, setting the events of Jesus’ birth in their historical, scriptural, and cultural contexts. While there is of course much to celebrate at Christmastime, Verlyn argues that there is also much for sombre reflection. He likens Christmas to Good Friday: it’s good in a bad way.

It’s a great read. Some of the highlights include the exploration of the shame culture in which Mary suffered, being pregnant out of wedlock, the connections to the cross in the birth narratives, the debunking of the notorious “no room at the inn” story, and the many allusions to the beginning of a celestial war marked by Jesus’ birth.

The book is pitched at a popular level, so it’s short (98 pages) and easy to read (I read it in about 80 minutes). But it’s one of those books that, while being easy to read, is full of provocative (and in many cases, new) ideas.

I will definitely be dipping into this book for future Christmas sermons.

Posted by Con Campbell





Introverts in the Church

21 12 2009

I picked up this new book, by Adam S. McHugh, at the SBL conference in New Orleans. When I bought it at the IVP stand, the woman serving me said, ‘So, you’re an introvert, huh?’ To which I replied, ‘Isn’t everybody at SBL?’.

At a conference for Bible geeks, there is no doubt a high proportion of introverts. But introverts are certainly not on home turf in many of our churches.

I recently read the book and recommend it for any introverted Christian, AND all extroverted pastors.

It’s helpful for introverts to alleviate the guilt that our extroverted evangelical culture sometimes causes. The book offers understanding that some introverts may not yet have about themselves, and provides lots of helpful hints and tips for being an introvert in ministry. It lets introverts off the hook at times, and challenges us at other times.

It’s helpful for extroverted pastors to help them to understand 50% of their congregations, and to be able to have effective team ministry with introverts. The book describes some ways in which extroverts and introverts can work together powerfully for good.

Probably the chapter I found most helpful was on introverts in leadership. There is a lot of helpful advice here for introverts who find themselves leading ministry teams, and how to lead as introverts, rather than pretending to be extroverts.

There are a few things in the book that I found a bit odd, arising out of the author’s apparently slightly-mystical version of evangelicalism. Extolling the virtues of some monastic practices was one of those things, but there’s still food for thought there.

If you’re an introvert, read it. If you’re an extroverted pastor, read it.

Posted by Con Campbell





Morality Not an End in Itself

13 12 2009
C. S.
Image via Wikipedia

C. S. Lewis once said:

“I think all Christians would agree with me if I said that thought Christianity seems at first to be all about morality, all about duties and rules and guilt and virtue, yet it leads you on, out of all that, into something beyond. One has a glimpse of a country where they do not talk of those things, except perhaps as a joke. Everyone there is filled full with what we should call goodness as a mirror is filed with light. But they are too busy looking at the source from which it comes. But this is near the stage where the road passes over the rim of our world. No one’s eyes can see very far beyond that: lots of people’s eyes can see further than mine.”

Posted by Bruce Lowe

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]




“Pursue Academic Responsibility”

9 12 2009
Master (Cap and Gown)
Image by Naked_Eyes via Flickr

Recently I came across this quote from and old book: “Letter’s Along the Way” (Carson and Woodbridge). I thought it was worth posting:

“Pursue academic responsibility and trust God to work out the details of who hears you and what influence you have. Responsible scholarship has far more potential for discovering and buttressing truth and for winning people’s minds than mere respectability anyway. If instead you take the lower road and pursue mere academic respectability, you may gain more plaudits from the world, but it is far more doubtful that you will have the approbation of Heaven. Once in a while there have been scholars who have gained both; it is doubtful if they have ever done so by pursuing respectability.” (p176)

Posted by Bruce Lowe

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]




Reading Granville Sharp’s Canon and Its Kin, by Daniel B. Wallace

7 12 2009

I’ve been asked by Themelios to review Dan Wallace‘s new book in the Studies in Biblical Greek series, called Granville Sharp’s Canon and Its Kin: Semantics and Significance.

I read about a third (120+ pp) of the book today and thought I’d share what I think so far.

First, who would have thought that a book about one function of one element of the Greek language (the article) would be so enthralling! Wallace demonstrates from the outset that the exegetical and theological significance of the TSKS construction (article-substantive-καί-substantive) is of utmost importance, applying to NT christological texts that (if Sharp’s rule is correct) explicitly call Jesus God. The book is exciting, and well written.

Second, Wallace is thorough, possibly to the extreme. An example of this is the mini-biography of Granville Sharp that is offered in the historical section of the book. I would argue this is not really needed, and will probably not significantly affect the thesis of the book (in spite of Wallace’s claim to the contrary), but it is so interesting that the reader will quickly forgive this indulgence.

Third, the historical survey is very useful, as it answers one question that I’ve held for some time: if Granville Sharp’s rule is both correct and important, why has it been so neglected in Greek grammars and NT commentaries? Wallace convincingly argues that it is basically Georg Winer’s fault. As the preeminent Greek scholar of the nineteenth century, his almost off-hand (and theologically prejudiced) comments on Titus 2:13 set a pattern of neglect of Sharp’s rule through to the present day.

There’s more to be said about what I’ve read so far, but I will save it for the formal review in Themelios.

More to come in one or two future posts.

Posted by Con Campbell





Stephen C. Carlson was right: Archaic Mark is a fake

7 12 2009

The contentious document known as Archaic Mark has been proven a forgery.

This confirms the arguments of Stephen C. Carlson (who I heard making his case as last year’s SBL in Boston). Some of his interlocutors on that occasion were not convinced (and one in particular was quite rude about it!).

Read about it at the University of Chicago site, and at the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog.

Posted by Con Campbell