Why I Love Instagram

Here are some of my favorite Instagram photos.  Yes, I took these.  No, you cannot use these photos without permission.  Yes, you can enjoy them.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Zombie Love? Was the Historical Jesus a Zombie?

Anthony Le Donne directed his readers to Scot McKnight’s interesting analysis of the zombie theme in the resurrection narratives of Jesus.  Like Anthony, I was also amused, though there were some fatal flaws with McKnight’s arguments–mainly because he takes a canonical (re: orthodox) approach to Zombies and any True™ Z-fan will tell you that the Zombie motif is far from stable or stagnant.  In fact, the Zombie motif is constantly shifting with the social currents of the time (much like figure of the historical Jesus, actually).

But let us get on with it.  First and foremost, McKnighly lays out his interpretation of the resurrection:

Resurrection is not a natural process, and it is certainly not something that makes one “the living dead.” Jesus’ resurrection was a total physical renewal. On Easter morning, death and corruption were decisively overrun in this single human person, as every cell of Jesus’ body cast off mortality for immortality.

Resurrection, then, is what it looks like when the affects of sin are removed from a human being.

That is fine; I can respect McKnight’s faith in this regard, but then we have to differentiate the physical and spiritual act of sin-cleansing from the actually event of rising from the dead.  They may be linked, but we cannot discount the fact that Jesus shows the wounds of his crucifixion (“Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”, Lk 24.39, NIV; cf. Jn 20.20) and even demands his disciples touch them (“Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.’”, Jn 20.27, NIV… yuck)!

Though it brings me no joy, I bow to the scholarship of Licona:

“[E]ven if Jesus had somehow managed to survive crucifixion, He would not have inspired His disciples to believe that He had been resurrected. Imagine Jesus, half-dead in the tomb. He revives out of a coma and finds Himself afraid in the dark. He places his nail-pierced hands on the very heavy stone blocking His exit and pushes it out of the way. Then, He is met by the guards who say “Where do you think you’re going, Pal?” He answers, “I’m out of this hole.” He then beats up the guards, after which He walks blocks if not miles on pierced and wounded feet in order to find His disciples. Finally, He comes to the house where they are staying and knocks on the door. Peter opens the door and sees Jesus hunched over in his pathetic and mutilated state and says, “Wow! I can’t wait to have a resurrection body just like yours!”

So if the Gospel narratives of Jesus’ death are to be believed, and if Licona is a trustworthy scholar (I leave those two questions to be answered at the discretion of the reader), then we must accept that Jesus actually died and then came back to life in the flesh (according to two Gospels, at least).  We know that in most narratives, Zombies also come back to life after they die and exhibit the same wounds they had at death and experience no pain–like Licona’s risen Jesus model, Zombies are able to perform amazing athletic feats without suffering from the debilitating effects of their afflictions (death), for example they can climb building or chase after cars or leap in the air or even jump out windows and land on their feet (like cats) without once stopping because of the pain.  And they do all this with super strength and super speed, in a primal fashion, which defies all physical and natural laws and order.

McKnight then tries to find an example of Biblical Zombies and decides, to my surprise, that Adam is the best option: “Looking at other stories, the better biblical example of one with zombie-ism was actually Adam. Adam dies, yet he lives.” But this isn’t so at all.  The best other example of Zombie-ism in the Bible is clearly the case of the saints rising from the grave and walking all over Jerusalem like a pack or horde of Zombies on the prowl (for brains or sins or whatever these zombies crave):

“The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.  They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.” (Mt 27.51, NIV)

Both Wright and Licona have argued that this happened (because, after all, who would make up a story like this?) so we are left with multiple examples of dead coming to life and roaming around, eating food in some instances, showing signs of exposed wounds (one must wonder in what state the dead saints must have been!), doing amazing feats (walking along roads with no signs of pain from their afflictions).

This is all just from the narrative bits now, but there is also that cannibalism thing that plays a huge role in the Zombie-ism of Jesus’ death and subsequent rising… (“Take and eat; this is my body.”, Mt 26.26-9, NIV) and the blood drinking.  This ritual cannibalism was performed by all those at the table with Jesus.  I mean, that might as well have been right out of the mind of George A. Romero!

I think we must all come to agreement here.  The historical Jesus, had he risen from the dead as described in at least some of the narratives of his resurrection, must have been a Zombie.

Apologies in advance for causing any offense; this is more of a social commentary on scholarship and some of the bizarre historical Jesuses that some scholars have proposed; as well an attempt at a humorous take on how scholarship can go seriously wrong if not done correctly.  A belated Happy Halloween to you!

Do You Like Classics and Football?

What a silly question, right?  I mean, come on, who doesn’t like Classics and Football?! Well, good on you, because I have some information you’ll be glad to read!

So for those who aren’t aware, Rutgers is responsible for collegiate football.  Seriously, look it up.  And something else you might not know: Rutgers’  first football team was made up predominantly of Classics majors!

Rutgers’ new student paper, the Daily Targum, had the good sense to show up to report on the game, which they did in astonishing detail that has often been reprinted. See here for an excellent summary (with lots of great images) from the RU Athletics website.

Unlike Princeton, Rutgers also kept a good record of its student-athletes who showed up to play that November day—27 for RU in all.

Now, a glance at the academic rolls shows that all but five of those 27 players were taking the rigorous Rutgers Classics Curriculum. The best student among them was probably the team captain, William James Leggett, Class of 1872. Before graduating, he won prizes in Latin as well as mathematics and declamation. Amazingly, he was also Targum editor, director of the baseball team, and captain and stroke of the RU crew.

But three of the members of the team were flunking freshman algebra, and one of them—Classics student William McKee ’73—had a string of absences in the week leading up the game, which the faculty marked as “excused” after the Rutgers victory.

via This day in RU history: team of mostly classicists beat Princeton in first-ever intercollegiate football game |.

With thanks to Professor Brennan on bringing this to my attention.  Rutgers, Football, and Classics: a winning combination in my book and, as it so happens to turn out, Rutgers beat Princeton that game.

Minimalists Re-enact the Last Supper

Here are my minimalist heroes, friends, and colleagues in Amsterdam proving once again that reception is everything.

NP Lemche and Philip Davies on the left, L.L. Grabbe and Thomas L. Thompson in the center.

Here is my re-imagining of the event:

I have been fooling around with editing software this evening and I think I’ve got the right combination of texture and clarity here.

 

George Athas perceptively remarks: “Minimalistically, there is no bread, no wine, and fewer disciples than we thought.  And come to think of it, it isn’t even clear whether we have a Jesus or not.”

Brilliant!  H/T Jim West.

Two in the Mail from SBL!

About this time last year I participated in an online survey for SBL concerning self-publishing and e-publishing.  I was unaware until recently that last year I had won a random prize for being a part of that survey (as do the most neurotic among us, I Googled my name in the SBL search function and found the notification).  And what was that prize?  $50 in SBL books!  And they just arrived today!  Here is what I received:

• F. Flannery, C. Shantz, R.A. Werline , eds., Experientia, Volume 1: Inquiry into Religious Experience in Early Judaism and Christianity (Society of Biblical Lit, 2008), 272 pages.
• New Testament Greek Manuscripts, Galatians (William Carey Int’l Univ Press, 2002). Compiled and Edited by Reuben J. Swanson, 135 pages.

Looking forward to delving into these soon.

Jim West Asks ‘Who Will Win Euro 2012?’

Poor Jim.  Doesn’t he know?  It is between two teams in my opinion.  But unlike Jim who sticks to arbitrary choosing or the Ukrainians who are using animals, I have a sure-fire method of predicting to whom it will all boil down.

The two teams most likely to make it to the finals (and one of which will likely win) are Italy or Portugal.  Hands down, all other teams should just pack it up now.  You’re not going to make it.

Why?  First Portugal.  Many know I’ve lived in Portugal for short time.  But many might not know I was there for Euro 2004, when Portugal defied the odds and made it all the way into the Final against Greece.  Plus (and do I really need to say it?) they have one of the best soccer players in the world: Cristiano Ronaldo.   I know the strength of the teams convictions, they have a lot of heart, and I think that goes a long way.

Then there is Italy.  Okay, I have a bias here as an Italian.  And granted there was that whole new scandal that has reflected quite poorly upon the clubs.  But let’s face it, Italy is still a force with which to reckon.   And the players are amazing.  Most are taken from top Serie A clubs, like Juventus, AC Milan, AS Roma. and Palermo.   Many of these clubs have done well in the Champions League (if only AC Milan had beat Arsenal!) and I am confident they will do well in Euro 2012.

Fun With Perception!

This is pretty cool! Because our range of perception is so small, the wall of this static image looks like it is moving!

First World Problems

Face of Jesus? Now the Talpiot Claims are Just Silly.

Mark Goodacre just last night posted up an image of a stain on the side of one of the Ossuaries of the Patio Tomb (Talpiot B).  Here it is:

Frankly, I disagree.  I think it is the Colonel, fearless in pose; a prophecy from beyond that he would make some of the most scrumptious chicken ever.  He also appeared on the Lead Codices:

And for comparison:

I don’t know why he always appears on sensationalized objects, but then again he always was a great businessman.  He knew how to sell a concept.  This might be why he is appearing on these otherwise fake or greatly exaggerated objects.

Camera Technology in Ancient Rome: The Surprising Facts Revealed!

Bob Cargill, in his usual way, has informed the Biblioblog community of yet another dilettante making absurd claims by abusing ancient texts and the field of history.  In light of this and recent shows like Ancient Aliens, I have decided to start my own claim: ancient Roman cinematographers.

It’s just that easy to misuse our primary sources and eisegete meanings out of context to prove anything.  And what better than prove that an ancient class of people was dedicated to filming events using camera technology?

Just look at the arch of Titus for example:

I have marked these odd objects which I have chosen not to investigate in their historical context with red boxes.  These look remarkably similar to cameras on tripods:

Clearly these bizarre objects being carried by Roman solders are archaeological evidence of movie cameras on tripods recording the looting of the second Jewish temple.   I’m sure then that if they had these large cameras on tripods, they must have had smaller hand-held cameras for detailed video-recording in tight locations.  I imagine it looked something like this:

And if I take enough ancient primary writings out of context and their socio-cultural milieux, I can prove beyond any doubt (at least, as far as I’m concerned) that there is literary evidence of cameras as well:

A wooden base is constructed, and on it is set an altar-shaped box made of bronze. Uprights, fastened together like ladders, are set up on the base, to the right and to the left (of the altar). They hold the bronze pump-cylinders, the moveable bottoms of which, carefully turned on a lathe, have iron elbows fastened to their centres and jointed to levers, and are wrapped in fleeces of wool. (Vitruvius Pollio, The Ten Books on Architecture 10.8)

Sounds like an ancient camera and camera stand to me!  Of course I don’t care about context.  It took minutes and minutes of research (re: Google searching ancient texts for key words that fit the general description for which I was looking) but I believe I can finally label myself an expert on ancient practices of cinematography.  I need a catchy title like the ‘shroudologists’ have (those who are ‘experts’ on the Shroud of Turin).  Maybe ‘Archeo-Cinematologist’!

Now don’t bother asking me for any more evidence since I’ve supplied it all and I shall eagerly expect payment for a book deal and a promotion campaign and, hopefully, a concept script for a History Channel special.  Because history is only here for people to make money off the ignorance of others, right?