Notes Along the Way -- Durham 2.3 New Faces in Durham

Continued from the last post
_______________________
12. I don't remember much specifically about the fall of 1994 (Michelmas term). Perhaps that was the term we went through Martinez's newly published The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated. I failed to mention that the third term of each year (Easter term), we graduate students presented papers, if I remember correctly. During that third term, students didn't take courses but studied to take their end of the year exams, which meant everything for advancement (see Harry Potter).

I taught beginning Greek again for the Department of Theology that fall. My German friend Christoph Lorenz had returned to Tübingen, and a new German exchange student had arrived, Alex Jensen. He was quite unlike any German I had met so far. He was from Hamburg, and far from the stereotypical German, he was quite the jolly old soul.

He was also studying at Tübingen. He liked to poke fun at the Schwäbishe accent: "I muss schaffe gange." Believe it or not, his very first higher ed degree was a PhD from Durham. The German theology undergraduate degree took 7 years. With at least 3 years under his belt, he was able to come to Durham on exchange. He would then transfer as an MTh student and upgrade to a PhD under Stephen Barton. And that was his first degree.

His English was not perfect. He would say, "Hmmm" as if to assent, but I think it meant, "I didn't get a word of that." Of course, it was amazingly better than my German. Alex knew how to bluff his way through this world. I suspected that invention could come from a desire not to exert more effort than necessary, and he was clever.

We would have many good conversations over the next two years. I remember him trying to explain Luther on free will. I didn't get it. In retrospect, I don't think I got it because Luther basically doesn't believe in free will (De servo arbitrio). That was a surprise. 

I think Alex was trying to explain compatibilism to me. I would sum it up as, "You're not really free, but you think you are." To me, it's a farce, which I suspect is why Alex couldn't explain Luther to me to my satisfaction. The language barrier may also have been a factor.

He would become a residential tutor, and we often spent our allowance for students together on end of the term gatherings. When I told him I didn't like drinking, he would say one must do it as a matter of duty: Pflicherfühlung.

13. Sandy Wedderburn had returned to Germany, so my second year saw a newcomer to the teaching faculty of Durham: Loren Stuckenbruck. He had studied with Johann Christiaan Beker at Princeton.

Stuckenbruck is clearly a genius. A nearly photographic memory for intellectual things. His interview was very memorable. The other finalist was Dale Allison. I enjoyed Allison's presentation in the spring of 1994. Bob Hayward was quite unfairly critical of it, I thought.

Nevertheless, Loren was a fantastic hire. One of the best academic mentors out there. Very attentive to material you gave him to read. A great cheerleader. He would be the external examiner for my dissertation. I was delighted to see him and Lois in Rome this month for the Enoch Seminar.

That fall semester, Loren and some other students met in Dr. Hayward's office to look at some early rabbinic texts. I was not good enough at Hebrew to make much sense of them (targums, I think). They were unpointed too. I remember Loren lighting up when we came across a reference to the watchers. The core book of 1 Enoch is the Book of the Watchers. 

(I have to think it is no coincidence that Marvel comics has a group called "the Watchers." These comic book writers are scary people indeed. Former philosophy majors and such)

14. Bruce Longenecker had also moved on from Cranmer Hall. So the spring of 1994 also saw interviews for his position. By the way, have I mentioned that he had a computer program that helped him write music? I tell you, these top level academics are scary smart beyond what most people can imagine. Sometimes I think people have to put them down because of how intimidating they can be. No one puts Bruce down, of course. He's such a kind soul.

Have I mentioned a couple John's meetings some of us did? We read through the Apostolic Fathers, as I recall. On another occasion, I presented a paper arguing that evangelicals should be focused on the good news since that's the root word. Root fallacy, of course. I had not yet taken Wittgenstein fully to heart.

I remember one fellow who interviewed talked about how only one of the "7 last words" of Jesus was probably historical ("My God, my God..."). Principal David Day was not impressed. Made some snide remark and that was that.

In the end, they hired Mark Bonnington, who was there for the remainder of my time.

15. I think I was in Romeo and Juliet that fall as Mercutio. I had been in Much Ado about Nothing the previous year. Still sang in the choir. The rowing crew was mostly gone now -- Juan, Christoph, Helen. Still cantored for the Tuesday worship service. Still attended the Claypath United Reformed church. Preached there once or twice during my time in Durham.

I suspect I had written a draft of the methodology part of my dissertation by this point. I was going to use Richard Hays' structuralist approach to Galatians but apply it to the narrative substructure of Hebrews. I would focus on the settings of that narrative world: space and time. I was probably reading books like Susanne Lehne's The New Covenant in Hebrews and Mary D'Angelo's Sacred Space.

My memory is that I really buckled down in writing my third year. I gave Dunn at least one paper or two a term to read those first two.

16. I think I've already mentioned that I managed to meet Kingsley Barrett at some point. I remember the first time I spotted Charles Cranfield walking across town. He was incredibly hunched over. Very unfortunate for him. Still, he lived to be 100, dying in 2015. 

Perhaps I've mentioned that he wrote his ICC Romans commentary just before the new perspective on Paul exploded. He was like the last of the old generation. I would meet him formally either at a John's dinner or, more likely, during the Paul and the Law conference.

Friday Review: David Capes' "YHWH Texts..."

This morning I read through David Capes' "YHWH Texts and Monotheism in Paul's Christology," which is in Early Jewish and Christian Monotheism, edited by Loren Stuckenbruck and Wendy North.

By the way, Stuckenbruck is a genius among geniuses and one of the best doctoral advisors you could ever wish for. He's tireless, has an exhaustive knowledge of second temple Judaism, and is one of the most personable scholars I know. At Durham, he is like an unofficial advisor to everyone, even those like me who weren't actually his advisees. He's quick to write a reference--I attribute my Fulbright in large part to his reference. Many a scholar is better known because they can write in a more popular style, but few a scholar can come close to this man's intellect or mentoring ability.

If you're looking for a place to do a PhD in New Testament or Second Temple Judaism, you can't go wrong with Stuckenbruck at Durham. But back to Capes...

Capes' first section surveys how the divine name, YHWH, was written in manuscripts at the time of Paul. What he finds is a variety of practices. Sometimes it was written as any other word. But he agrees that there was an archaizing tendency at the time as well, where some were making it distinct by writing it in an archaic Hebrew script. He does not see this as the older practice but as a new trend.

Similarly, Greek manuscripts seem to have had some variety as well. Sometimes it was simply translated with the Greek kyrios for Lord. But at other times other ways of writing it appeared too. His conclusion is that Paul would have been aware of the divine name standing behind the kyrios of various Old Testament texts.

Capes then launches into the thirteen texts where Paul quotes OT YHWH texts (by the way, did you see that the Roman Catholic Church will no longer vocalize Yahweh in worship. The Christian Reformed Church has similarly stopped singing Jehovah in "Guide me, O Thou Great Redeemer"). He engages with the prior work of Lucian Cerfaux, which he then critiques. In general, "Unless otherwise specified, kyrios in Paul's quotations refers to Christ" (126). The rest of the paper examines Paul's use of two important YHWH texts he uses of Christ: Joel 2:32 and Isaiah 45:23.

1. Romans 10:13
As Capes looks at the use of Joel 2:32 in Paul, he notes the cultic context of "calling on the name of the Lord," as well as other uses. This seems potentially very significant to me. Capes believes that "The application of Joel 2:32 to Christ with its attendant cultic associations appears to imply the worship of Jesus by Paul and his churches" (128).

2. Romans 14:11 and Philippians 2:10-11
Now you see some of the reason I'm reading this paper this morning. We're almost to the Philippian "hymn" in my Prison Epistles class.

Capes' first suggestion for how Isaiah 45:23 is clever, but uncertain. He suggests that Paul takes the first half of the quote in relation to Jesus and the second half in relation to God: "the text should be understood as follows: 'As I live (again by the resurrection), says the Lord (Jesus), every knee will bow to me, and every tongue will confess to God (at the judgment seat)'" (129).

I don't think I will end up going with Capes here. The most likely reading of the text is "all will stand before the judgment seat of God," and from this point Paul launches into the quote of Isaiah. Yes, this reading thus contrasts with comments by Paul elsewhere about the judgment seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10) and his use of this verse in relation to Christ (Phil. 2:10-11). So sue him. If your interpretive scheme does not allow Paul this room to wind through interpretations of Scripture, you are bound to skew Paul.

I agree, however, with this comment Capes quotes from L. J. Kreitzer: "It is difficult to imagine any first-century Jew or Christian even remotely familiar with Isa. 45 hearing this final stanza of Phil. 2.9-11 without recognizing that words of theistic import have now been applied to Christ." Thus, Capes concludes, "the universal worship of Jesus as Lord by creatures inhabiting the heavenly, earthly, and subterranean realms" (131).

So Capes begins his conclusion. He sees the understanding that Jesus bears the Name of God explains many aspects of early Christian faith and practice, not least the application of theos to Jesus. At the same time, Paul never confuses Jesus with God or rejects monotheism.

In this final section, he discusses the positions of Larry Hurtado, Crispin Fletcher-Louis, and James Dunn on the worship of Jesus. Hurtado sees precedents in Jewish ideas of divine agency but sees a distinct mutation in the cultic worship of Jesus. Fletcher-Louis finds distinctiveness in the worship of a specific person rather than an office, but sees precedents in the earlier worship of individuals who are in one way or another the image of God. Dunn largely agrees that the worship of Jesus became distinctive but only after a long process, that Jesus was not yet worshiped in this way at the time of Paul.

Of these, Capes sides more with Hurtado than with Fletcher-Louis or Dunn. He disagrees with Dunn on the timing. He disagrees with Fletcher-Louis on the question of precedent. So he raises what is a crucial question: what exactly "should be regarded as 'cultic' worship that contravenes the uniqueness of God" (134). Unfortunately, he never answers the question.

The remainder of the paper disappoints in that Capes simply presents and endorses Richard Bauckham's sense of divine identity as the right path toward proper understanding of the worship of Jesus. He affirms Bauckham's idea that "the catalyst for this innovation [the worship of Jesus within monotheistic faith] emerges in scriptural exegesis" (136).

So the paper starts out strong, but fades into Hurtado and Bauckham at the point where we expect the real contribution. No offense.