I just got this in my email. It looks like a fun way to spend a Friday afternoon to me!

Museum of Ancient Cultures Language Showcase Series X

A Language Colloquium

Friday, 16 October, 2009
2.00–5.00pm
Seminar Room, Museum of Ancient Cultures
Building X5B, Macquarie University

———

As part of the 40th anniversary celebration of Ancient History at Macquarie University, the 10th installment of the Museum of Ancient Cultures Language Showcase Series looks back over the history of the Language colloquium series, and onto the future of research on the ancient languages at Macquarie, with a program taking in Biblical, Classical, and Egyptological linguistic work.

PROGRAM

First Session

2.00–2.10: Welcome

2.10–2.45: Ian Young, University of Sydney
‘“Late” Language, Loanwords, and Linguistic Dating of Books of the Hebrew Bible’

2.45–3.20: Marie-Louise Craig, Charles Sturt University
‘Pioneers and No Through Roads: The Story of Early Hebrew-English Lexicons’

3.20–3.50: Afternoon Tea

Second Session

3.50–4.25: Trevor Evans, Macquarie University
‘Counting Chickens in a Third-Century BC Papyrus’

4.25–5.00: Boyo Okinga, Macquarie University
‘Topicalisation and the assassination of King Amenemhet I – The Instruction of Amenemhet to his Son §7c-d’

My semester is nearly halfway finished already and I have yet to list the classes I’m taking, so here goes:

AHPG809 – Advanced Latin Documents
Prof. Alanna Nobbs

This unit provides an advanced study of Latin for those who have previously completed an introductory unit in Latin at tertiary level at least equivalent to AHPG801.

AHPG902 – Pagans, Jews and Christians: Athens and Jerusalem
Dr. Malcolm Choat

This unit focuses on the theme embodied in Tertullian’s question ‘What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?’ It uses contemporary sources in translation as the basis for an examination of the relationship and tensions between Greeks, Jews, and Christians, especially from the perspective of the inheritors of the Classical tradition, the Romans.

AHPG806 – Greek Coins
Dr. Ken Sheedy

Teaching will be based on the important numismatic collections of the Australian Centre for Ancient Numismatic Studies. Students will be offered a very practical approach to the study of this crucial resource for the study of ancient history. The unit has two components: the theory and methodology of numismatics and case studies in Greek society. (We also study Roman coinage, so I’m not sure why this course is entitled ‘Greek Coins’.)

AHPG883 – Thesis

I’m researching ‘house/household’ language in the Gospel of John, particularly the phrase οἶκος τοῦ πατρός (‘father’s house[hold]‘) in chs. 2, 8, and 14.

I’m also sitting in on Prof. Stephen Llewelyn’s honours seminar on Ancient Israel, which I have really enjoyed so far.

Taking three units and sitting in on (and doing most of the work for!) another while, at the same time, working on my thesis is proving to be difficult. There just isn’t enough time to do it all. Thankfully, though, I have a summer break coming up—yes, summer break in December-February—in which I’ll have lots of free time to do nothing but work on my thesis. And take Aramaic. And possibly teach Koine Greek.

Getting out of theology departments, which is the only context in which I’ve studied the NT until now, and into a non-confessional Ancient History department in a large secular university has already been extremely rewarding and challenging. Here’s what I’m discovering so far:

1. Australian undergrad honours students, at least the ones in the Ancient History department here, would put a lot of American graduate students to shame. There are some of them in my classes, and they frequently make me feel completely incompetent. I think some changes probably need to be made to our education system in the US.
2. Studying the New Testament and early Christianity in a secular university is completely different from studying it at a theological seminary. Some of the faculty and students are Christians, some aren’t. It’s hard to tell who is and who isn’t. I’m also finding it difficult to separate history and theology. Until now, they’ve been one in the same. I’ve been trained to read the NT through a theological/exegetical/homiletic lens, but they don’t do theology here. It’s more challenging than it may sound, but it’s a good exercise for me.
3. I sort of considered myself something of an ancient historian until I came here. I wasn’t; I was a theologian. Of course, that isn’t a bad thing. That is, after all, what I do. But I’m finding that the knowledge I had about the ancient world—most of which, by the way, I picked up from NT scholars—was cursory, biased, sometimes used improperly, and occasionally just plain wrong. I’m here to correct all that and fill in the gaps.
4. The field of NT studies needs more scholars who are actually trained as historians. Many try, but if we’re being honest, only a handful are actually successful at it. How many exegetes are actually competent archaeologists? Philologists? Papyrologists? Numismatists? Classicists? Very few. My goal is to be one of those few in four years.

I’m glad to be here. I’m being stretched in many ways, I’m learning loads, I’m among world class scholars and top notch students, I’m meeting lots of wonderful people, and winter isn’t cold. I do wish the birds would shut up at 4am, though.

In the latest Biblical Studies Carnival (number XLV) over at “The Golden Rule,” Michael Kok links to a video (via “Biblical Paths“) of an excellent no nonsense, straight forward interview with Dr. Chris Forbes on Josephus and the issue of Christian forgery. Dr. Forbes is Professor of Early Christianity and Judaism in the Department of Ancient History here at Macquarie Uni, where I study. The interviewer, Dr. John Dickson, is the director for the Centre for Public Christianity and Senior Research Fellow of Ancient History at Macquarie—and he’s also my thesis supervisor.

Please go watch more of the videos at CPX. The videos they produce really are excellent. Recently, for example, there have been interviews with Darrell Bock and Don Hagner. The series of interviews with Prof. Edwin Judge, founder of the Department of Ancient History at Macquarie Uni and an internationally celebrated scholar, are absolutely outstanding—in my opinion, the best so far. And certainly don’t miss the extended interview with the late great Martin Hengel, one of my all time favorite scholars.

Last night as I was doing some reading for my course on ancient numismatics in the peaceful ambiance of Sydney’s Darling Harbour, I came across a bit of information that immediately aroused my curiosity—namely, that the deification of Roman emperors was typologically communicated on Imperial coinage by means of a star over the emperor’s head. “What’s so interesting about that?” you may ask. Try this:

After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem and asked, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.”

When King Herod heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him. When he had called together all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born. “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written:

“‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;
for out of you will come a ruler
who will shepherd my people Israel.’”

Then Herod called the Magi secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared. He sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and make a careful search for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him.”

After they head the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw the star, they were overjoyed. (Mt 2:1-10)

So when I got home, naturally I checked a couple numismatic databases to get a look for myself, and sure enough, I found quite a few coins with a DIVVS (“divine”) inscription and a star over, or near, the emperor’s head.

Obverse: head of Augustus, star/comet above
Reverse inscription: AVGVST DIVI F LVDOS SAE (“Augustus, Son of the Divine [Caesar], Secular Games”)

Obverse: Head of Octavian, star, inscription: DIVI F (“Son of the Divine [Caesar]“)
Reverse inscription: DIVOS IVLIVS (“Divine Julius”)

Obverse: Head of Tiberias, inscription: TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVSTVS
(“Tiberius Caesar Augustus, Son of the Divine Augustus”)
Reverse: Head of Augustus, star above, inscription: DIVOS AVGVST DIVI F
(“Divine Augustus, Son of the Divine [Caesar]“)

The star seems to have been associated initially with Julius and then adopted by subsequent emperors who claimed to be divine by association. At any rate, if this is the image to which the author of Matthew’s Gospel is referring, then his point is a profound protest against Imperial rule: There is a new King, Jesus, the only Divine Son of the True God.

What do you think?

The new Hebrew and Greek Bible by Zondervan, that is. I’ve always wished someone would make a combo Hebrew/Greek Bible to bring with me to church, but to my knowledge no one has until now. Carrying both a Hebrew OT and a Greek NT to church is both cumbersome and, well, embarrassing.

I must own it. Who wants to buy it for me?

I am. In fact, I’ve been working on switching from the (wrong) Erasmian pronunciation that I was taught in college and seminary to the HGP for quite a few months now. Erasmian is not an easy habit to break. I’ve experimented with Randall Buth’s reconstruction, as well as the modern Greek pronunciation and that set forth by Chrys Caragounis (which is, for all intents and purposes, the modern pronunciation). I’ve settled on Caragounis’ reconstruction for several reasons, not the least of which is that his is a bit less convoluted (and a bit easier for an English-speaking American to pronounce, oddly enough) than Buth’s. Also, Dr. Caragounis has created a CD entitled “How to Pronounce New Testament Greek in the Historical Greek Pronunciation” that he will send to you at a low cost if you email him and request it. (See here and click the “CD for Pronunciation” link for more info.) I’ve found it to be very helpful, since it is understandably far easier to learn how to pronounce certain sounds after hearing them than it is by reading descriptions and IPA equivalents.

Why does it matter how we pronounce Greek? For one, Erasmian sounds silly. As it turns out, Greeks have never pronounced Greek in the way in which most Westerners pronounce κοινὴ Greek today and, moreover, even Westerners didn’t pronounce Greek in this way until the mid-sixteenth century.

But there are other reasons, too—reasons which are, I think, highly important for proper and informed biblical exegesis and interpretation. Reading a text in the HGP, for example, provides additional perspective on an author’s word choice and rhetorical style (e.g. alliteration, rhyme, and assonance are more easily heard). Further, and perhaps even more importantly, I have become convinced that the HGP is indispensable for textual criticism. Indeed, many of the errors in NT manuscripts can easily be explained by the HGP, making complex explanations regarding theological agendas or scribal corrections in many cases unnecessary if not incredible. For instance, are the frequent exchanges between ἡμῖν and ὑμῖν or ἡμεῖς and ὑμεῖς the result of scribal corrections or clarifications, or worse, a scribal conspiracy to include or exclude persons or peoples in certain biblical exhortations—or might these simply be mistakes of hearing resulting from their identical (or, at least, virtually identical) pronunciation? The latter seems like a far better explanation to me in many, if not most, cases.

So, I’ve switched. And you should too. For some resources to get started, see the “History of the Greek Language and the Historical Greek Pronunciation” section on my resources page.

By the way, I’m back. I’ll try not to go nearly a year without posting again.

Καὶ εἶδον ἐπὶ τὴν δεξιὰν τοῦ καθημένου ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου βιβλίον γεγραμμένον ἔσωθεν καὶ ὄπισθεν κατεσφραγισμένον σφραγῖσιν ἑπτά. καὶ εἶδον ἄγγελον ἰσχθρὸν κηρύσσοντα ἐν φωνῇ μεγάλῃ, Τίς ἄξιος ἀνοῖξαι τὸ βιβλίον καὶ λῦσαι τὰς σφραγῖδας αὐτοῦ; καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐδύνατο ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ οὐδὲ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς οὐδὲ ὑποκάτω τῆς γῆς ἀνοῖξαι τὸ βιβλίον οὔτε βλέπειν αὐτό. καὶ ἔκλαιον¹ πολύ, ὅτι οὐδεὶς ἄξιος εὑρέθη ἀνοῖξαι τὸ βιβλίον οὔτε βλέπειν αὐτό. καὶ εἷς ἐκ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων² λέγει μοι, Μὴ κλαῖε, ἰδοὺ ἐνίκησεν ὁ λέων ὁ ἐκ τῆς φυλῆς Ἰούδα³, ἡ ῥίζα Δαυίδ, ἀνοῖξαι⁴ τὸ βιβλίον καὶ τὰς ἑπτὰ σφραγῖδας αὐτοῦ.

And I saw in the right hand of the one sitting on the throne a scroll written inside and on the back, sealed with seven seals. And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming in a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” And no one in heaven or on the earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or look at it. And I began weeping much, because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look at it. And one of the elders said to me, “Do not weep. Look, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, conquered in order to open the scroll and its seven seals.”

____________________

Vocab:

ἔσωθεν – adv.: within, inside

ὄπισθεν – adv.: behind, at the back

κατεσφραγισμένον – perf. mid./pass. ptc. nom./acc. sg. neut., from κατασφραγίζω: to seal

σφραγῖσιν – dat. pl. fem.: seal

ἐνίκησεν – aor, act. ind. 3 sg., from νικάω: to conquer

λέων – nom. sg. masc.: lion

φυλῆς – gen. sg. fem.: tribe

ῥίζα – nom. sg. fem.: root, origin

____________________

Notes:

¹ A good example of what may be the ingressive imperfect.

² Partitive use of the genitive. The preposition ἐκ makes this clear, and is also a good example of the supersession of many of the Classical nuances of the naked case by the more explicit preposition + case construction in Koinē. The preposition here need not be translated.

³ A couple things here: (1) another partitive use of the genitive, with the same ἐκ + genitive construction as above; (2) the second article nominalizes the prepositional phrase which follows it, basically turning the prepositional phrase into an adjective in the second attributive position.

⁴ Probably an infinitive of purpose; maybe an infinitive of result.

Just a quick note to say that I am now a contributor for theophilux.com, so I’ll probably be posting more there and less here from now on. I’ll use this blog for more technical posts and the NT Greek readings, which I plan to resume shortly.

If you want, check out the series I’ve started over at theophilux.com on how to choose a Bible translation (Part I and Part II). So far, it’s generated some decent discussion. More than my posts here usually generate, anyway.

The Basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth

Megiddo

This is the tunnel down into ancient Megiddo’s water system. These water systems are really pretty amazing.

A model of the ancient city at Megiddo. I forget which period this is.

Here are the remains of the stables at Megiddo. These stone feeding troughs, or mangers, are probably like what Jesus would have been laid in.

The Arbel Cliffs

This is the ancient village of Magdal, the home of Mary Magdalene, viewed from the top of the Arbel Cliffs.

Galilee

Me standing on top of the cliffs above Galilee. The view is unspeakably beautiful.

We have also visited Dan, Hazor, Arad, Lachish, Tel el Hesi, Avdat, Makhtesh Ramon, Jerusalem, and hiked the Zihn Wilderness. Too bad I broke my camera, though, so I won’t have any pictures until after I get back into the US and exchange pictures with my colleagues. Perhaps I’ll post some of them in a couple of weeks after I get them, but this is all for now.

This is Tel Rehov. As you may notice, there is an upper mound and a lower mound. We are digging in the lower mound, in the Iron IIA strata of Area C.

Classmates working on a new square.

Here is the area where I am excavating. I’m digging in the area just behind the famous beehives (which are covered). Interestingly, the area I’m excavating and the beehives seem to be in the same stratum, though they are at different levels. Hopefully as we excavate farther, we’ll figure out what is going on here.

A 3,000-year-old mud brick building in Area C excavated last season.

This is a horn from a horned altar uncovered by a classmate working in a new square. Several of these altars, including one complete one (which was featured in an article in the latest issue of BAR), have been found at Tel Rehov, particularly in Area C. This was a really exciting find.

Here is a destruction layer in which the ash from the razed city is visible in the stratigraphy.

Fallen mud bricks embedded in the balk—probably caused by an earthquake.

This is what looks to be the base of a red clay cooking pot that we began uncovering in my square just before the day ended. We’re quite sure that this area was a courtyard, and several blackened potsherds and a small bit of charred material might indicate that this was the cooking area. If this turns out to be a cooking pot when we finish uncovering it tomorrow, hopefully we’ll find an oven too.