Son of Hamas
As a graduate of Liberty University I’ve been ashamed to watch the rise and fall of Ergun Caner, who recently lost his position as dean of Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary. Caner received heavy scrutiny over the past year for fabrications he made about his life as an American Muslim and his conversion to Christianity, seemingly for personal gain. I will not rehash the details here, so if you want an overview of the situation you can get a good summary at this site.
In the midst of such lies and half-truths it is refreshing to hear about Mosab Hassan Yousef, the author of the NY Times bestseller, “Son of Hamas.” Yousef is the eldest son of a founding member of the terrorist organization Hamas, and even participated in acts of terrorism and torture in his young adulthood. He eventually became a Christian and as a result had to seek political asylum in the US. I haven’t read the book yet, but I have it on my Amazon wish list and look forward to picking it up some day (Tim Challies reviewed the book here). Phil Sumpter linked the following videos on his blog recently, which I found fascinating. Although I have no doubt that Ergun Caner was raised in an Islamic home and converted to Christianity, the embellishments in his own story for self aggrandizement are disappointing to say the least. Yousef’s story, however, is of a different kind. His is a true story of a true terrorists and a loss he suffered for embracing the gospel. The videos below provide a glimpse into his life as a Muslim, struggling to understanding the love of God and how to communicate that to his family.
Hymns on Piano
Here are twelve hymns I recorded on piano for my wife as a birthday gift in April (she really liked it!). I thought some of you may enjoy them. Many thanks to Andrew Case for the mix, and to Clifton Baptist Church for letting me use their piano!
Before the Throne of God Above
How Sweet and Aweful is the Place
Jesus, What a Friend for Sinners
I had to minimize the files, so unfortunately the quality is not the best. Also, most of these were recorded on the first take so you may hear mistakes here or there (i.e. copyist errors…).
Pun from Judges 16
The Old Testament is full of literary and rhetorical devices, most of which are only obvious if you know Hebrew. I’m still working on Hebrew so I don’t always notice these things when I’m reading through a text. But one such literary device that is usually recognizable is the “pun,” which in some cases adds tremendous interpretive weight to a passage. A pun is a play on words which at times yields funny results.
Consider the following passage from Judges 16 that Charles Halton pointed out in a recent article in JBL (“Samson’s Last Laugh” in JBL 128.1 [2009]: 61-64 ). This is, of course, the famous story of Samson and the Philistines. After being deceived by the promiscuous Delilah, Samson is tortured by the hands of his captors and forced to do hard labor. In 16:25-27 the Philistines desire to get one last laugh over Samson, and it is here that we see the pun: “And when their hearts were merry, they said, ‘Call Samson, that he may entertain us.’ So they called Samson out of the prison, and he entertained them. They made him stand between the pillars . . . Now the house was full of men and women. All the lords of the Philistines were there, and on the roof there were about 3,000 men and women, who looked on while Samson entertained” [ESV].
Halton shows that the majority of English translations miss the significance of the pun. The verb “to entertain” can also be rendered “to crush,” since the only difference in the Hebrew root is a sin (which would mean, “to entertain”) and a shin (which would mean, “to crush”). These two letters are indistinguishable in an unpointed text, so Halton suggests that the author of Judges makes a play on words; that is, the italicized text above means both “entertain” and “crush” to communicate two different things. And, of course, we all know how the story ends. Halton concludes,
“The author of this pericope used the ambiguity of the verb in Judg 16:25, 27 to articulate two points of view. The masoretic tradents follow the perspective of the festive Philistines as they vocalized shq to convey the notion that Samson’s captors brought him into the temple in order to entertain them. The second point of view is that of the narrator. The narrator injects an element of dark comedy into this account stating that the Philistines summoned Samson in order to crush themselves. Like other figures in the Bible, Samson destroyed a pagan sanctuary and crushed the cultic idols to bits. This time, however, the crushed cultic objects were the Philistine men and women.”
Fun stuff! In a sick sort of way…
Syncing Zotero with multiple computers
Maybe you’re like me and you have a laptop for when you’re at school and desktop for home. Fortunately, Zotero allows you to sync your sources from both computers automatically. Just follow these easy steps:
- Create a Zotero.org account here
- Once verified, click on the Zotero icon on your Firefox web browser, then the “actions” button, and then “preferences“
- Click on the “Sync” tab at the top
- Type in your username and password for Zotero.org
- Make sure “Sync Automatically” and “Sync Attachment Files in My Library using Zotero” are both checked
- Open your other computer and type in your log-in information in Zotero “preferences” as before
- Close the page and restart Firefox. Click on the Zotero icon again and either wait for Zotero to begin syncing automatically, or start the process by clicking on the “Sync to Zotero Server” button.
I did this on a Mac, so it may look a little different on Windows. The steps are essentially the same. Now every time I add a new source on my laptop it will show on my desktop as well, and visa versa.
Away with you, formatting demons! Be gone!
Zotero
Let’s get honest with one another: How many of you, as you write papers, leave little comments in parentheses or in a footnote to remind yourself of the source you are quoting from, only to go back and spend two hours formatting your footnotes once you’ve finished your paper? I’ve been there, and I’m never going back. Zotero is the reason why.
First, an overview:
And here it gets awesome:
If you haven’t checked out Zotero yet, you should! It’s a free Firefox extension and a real time saver. While I’ve had to make minor changes to Zotero’s footnote info from time to time (mainly spacing), Zotero still helps with many of those pesky formatting issues. Plus, you no longer have to go back through every footnote and add the bibliographic information. It works with almost every style guide, including Turabian, MLA, and APA. Just add your source from Zotero, make whatever comments are needed in the footnote, and continue writing your paper.
Many thanks to Jim Hamilton for telling me about Zotero a few months ago, and Andy Naselli for telling him!
Pray for Dr. Peter Gentry
Dr. Gentry recently found out that he has prostate cancer and will need surgery in December. Please pray for him and his family during this difficult time.
Dr. Gentry is Professor of Old Testament Interpretation at Southern Seminary.
Daniel (WBC) – John Goldingay
I recently finished reading this commentary for my PhD seminar on the prophetic literature. The commentary is technical in the sense that the reader should know biblical Hebrew (and maybe Aramaic) while reading it, but he/she can still engage the work without it as well. The Word Biblical Commentary series breaks up each section (or, chapter) into four parts: Form, Setting, Comments, Explanation. One strength of Goldingay’s commentary lies in the “explanation” section, even though it is somewhat redundant in following the “comments.” There, he thinks through the text theologically and expounds on the material in light of God’s unfolding revelation. The problem is that this is Goldingay’s only strength. Sure, one might gain insights from Goldingay on Daniel’s language, how other non-canonical writers were influenced by Daniel, or even Daniel’s use of the OT, but observations like these are few and far between. Goldingay, rather, thinks that chapters 1-6 are allegorical “historiography” (and thus not actual history), that Daniel was not an historical person, and that the book should be dated during the Maccabean era (c. 168 BC) instead of during the time of the Israelite exile (605-538 BC, as the book itself attests). This dating leads Goldingay to interpret Daniel through the lens of secondary Jewish literature rather than in the context of the Bible, which I believe to be a serious flaw. Furthermore, the meaning of the text is lost in oodles of material on the book’s form, some of which is helpful, to be sure, but liberal to say the least.
In the end, I wouldn’t recommend this commentary for pastors since it lacks that sort of quality. Perhaps students of the OT or of intertestamental literature may benefit, but the commentary is lacking theologically, and Goldingay particularly avoids interaction with conservative approaches. It’s also dated (1989). I haven’t read Steinmann or Lucas yet, but at this point I’m still partial to Baldwin, which is also dated and very short.
Was Adam for real life?
As an evangelical Old Testament student I see Tremper Longman’s name pretty frequently. I begrudgingly read his Introduction to the Old Testament as a junior in college but enjoyed it in the end. I also found his commentary on Proverbs somewhat helpful (though not in the Waltke sense).
However, I’m often at odds sometimes with much of what Longman says or writes. For instance, I remember Dr. Gentry dismantling Longman’s thesis in the NICOT series that Ecclesiastes is equivalent to fictionalized biography (i.e. Frame Narrative theory – see Duane Garrett’s refutation as well in his own commentary, 260-65), which I found to be a serious flap on Longman’s part. I also recently came across this interesting little clip of Longman commenting on the historical Adam, which just adds to my disparity:
For Longman, then, Adam’s historicity isn’t really the main point, and shouldn’t really affect our exegesis or theology. But that’s the question: Does Adam have to be an historical figure for the Bible to make sense, like Longman says? And, what are the implications for sin and headship if Adam is not? Biblical theology? Further, what would John Walton say (for those of you who have read his new book)?
How to write a lot!
Wow! I haven’t posted anything in…how many weeks? 11 it is! I’ve been pouring over a good bit of material in 1 Peter and Daniel, which took over my summer and now consumes most of my time during the week. However, I’ve written a number of posts that are saved and waiting to be edited. Perhaps they will appear this semester (oh, the suspense…).
But until 9/17, the day I present my exegesis of 1 Peter 2:4-10 in my first PhD seminar, I will probably (well, definitely) not post anything. After that presentation I’ll get back to it. In the meantime, I commend this short post to you by Charles Halton on how to make writing part of your daily scholarly life (Jim Hamilton is excellent at doing this). Halton also links to an interview with John Goldingay that I found interesting. I’m currently reading through Goldingay’s commentary on Daniel (WBC), which I hope to write a review for this semester. In my opinion, Goldingay is excellent on theology but totally unconvincing on historical issues surrounding Daniel. Enjoy the Halton post!
Interview for the Towers Newspaper
I was interviewed this week by Garrett Wishall for the seminary newspaper about SBTS students being messengers for the SBC. You can read the article here.
I must confess that I am somewhat disenchanted by demoninational politics, which may or may not be apparent in the article. At the risk of sounding cynical I will refrain from elaborating on that point. What I hope to convey is that I love the church and think that the work of the IMB and NAMB (entities of the SBC) are absolutely necessary and needed (not to mention fruitful). Therefore, I gladly support the SBC and will continue to serve in the denomination as long as the Lord allows.
