Contributors this issue:
Daniel M. Gurtner
Esther Lightcap Meek
Dean G. Blevins
Ed Hird
William Shewan
Charlie Brainer
David Kasali
J. David Stark
Honoré Bunduki Kwany
Edward P. Meadors
CULTIVATING CONFIDENCE
Karen Kilby on Vocational Uncertainty and Character Development in Christian Higher Education I N T E R V I E W, PA G E 1 4
LONG-LOST GRANDPARENT TEXTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT Gary Edward Schnittjer, Cairn University C U R R E N T S , PAG E 2 6
TRAINING FOR MINISTRY IN A TEXTUAL COMMUNITY Ched Spellman, Cedarville University P E D A G O G Y, P A G E 3 6
APRIL 2022 VOLUME 5, ISSUE 4
New Textbooks from
Request an Exam Copy Today at BakerAcademic.com
New in the
Series “Will be a useful textbook and reference book.” —M. DANIEL CARROLL R., Wheaton College and Graduate School
“Tully has done the church a great service by writing this book.” —BO H. LIM,
Seattle Pacific University
“A highly readable introduction to the Old Testament Prophets.” —D. A. CARSON,
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
“Students and teachers alike will benefit from Tully’s clear guidance and excellent teaching.” —MARK S. GIGNILLIAT, Beeson Divinity School
“I will use this as a textbook in the classes I teach on the Prophets.” —DONNA PETTER,
Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
“A superb primer for those who have always wanted to understand the Prophets.” —MARK J. BODA,
McMaster Divinity College
ALSO AVAIL ABLE Request a Free Exam Copy of Reading the Prophets as Christian Scripture or Reading the New Testament as Christian Scripture Today at BakerAcademic.com
APRIL 2022
|
VOLUME 5
|
ISSUE 4
Contents I N T E R V I E W | PAG E 1 4
Cultivating Confidence Karen Kilby on Vocational Uncertainty and Character Development in Christian Higher Education
J O U R N A L O F T H E O LO G I C A L E D U C AT I O N
| di · dak · ti · kos “skillful in teaching” (2 Timothy 2:24) editor
Douglas Estes
assistant editor
John Anthony Dunne
editorial board
Joanne Jung, Michael A. Ortiz, E. Randolph Richards, Fred Sanders, Beth M. Stovell, Douglas A. Sweeney
managing editor
David Bomar
art director illustrator production manager copy editor advertising sales
Brittany Schrock Joshua Hunt Fanny Palacios Kelsey Matthews Kevin Bratcher, Michael Meiser, Ryan Yoder
C U R R E N T S | PAG E 2 6
Long-lost Grandparent Texts of the New Testament G A R Y E D WA R D S C H N I T TJ E R
published by
DidaktikosJournal.com ABOUT US
I, PROFESSOR
“How Might We?” Pausing to Listen Where Tradition and Creativity Intersect Dean G. Blevins | 8
FACULTY LOUNGE
Biblical Scholarship Is Play J. David Stark | 11
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PEDAGOGY
Working with Secondary Sources Daniel M. Gurtner | 13
Forging a Cross-Cultural Fellowship How Professors in the Congo and Indiana Are Pursuing a Shared Educational Mission Grounded in a Pedagogy of Love
Didaktikos is a peer-reviewed journal written by professors, for professors, who teach in biblical, theological, and related disciplines and who help train pastors and other ministry leaders. Published by Faithlife, the maker of Logos Bible Software, Didaktikos aims to provide a forum for encouraging and supporting professors in their academic calling and personal ministries. Didaktikos: Journal of Theological Education (ISSN 2575-0127) is published four times a year by Lexham Press, part of Faithlife Corporation, 1313 Commercial St., Bellingham, WA 98225-4357.
CONTACT US For help with your subscription: customerservice@didaktikosjournal.com To reach the editors: editor@didaktikosjournal.com For Didaktikos ad sales: advertising@didaktikosjournal.com 1-800-875-6467 Postmaster: Send address changes to Didaktikos, 1313 Commercial St., Bellingham, WA 98225-4357.
Honoré Bunduki Kwany, David Kasali, Charlie Brainer, Edward P. Meadors, and William Shewan | 32
Training for Ministry in a Textual Community Ched Spellman | 36 SAGE ADVICE
A Gift from Beyond Esther Lightcap Meek | 39
GOOD FRUIT
We use technology to equip the Church to grow in the light of the Bible. To see more of what we do, visit Faithlife.com/About
Restoration for a Broken World Ed Hird | 40
SFI-00993
Ph.D. in Biblical Studies Ph.D. in Theological Studies Ph.D. in Practical Theology Preparing Scholars to Teach the Next Generation 100% Online Columbia Biblical Seminary’s new Ph.D. degrees will equip you with the advanced knowledge and skills you need to make a scholarly contribution to the fields of Old Testament, New Testament, or Theological Studies through research, writing, and teaching.
Equipping Leaders for Great Commission Impact
Why choose Columbia Biblical Seminary for your Ph.D. studies? • Program design allows you to focus on research and writing from the beginning of your studies. • Non-residential modality allows you to pursue your degree without relocating. • Experienced faculty mentors provide individualized guidance in areas of their particular expertise. • Can be completed in three years of full-time study or five years of part-time study. • Accredited regionally by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges and nationally by the Association for Biblical Higher Education.
APPLY TODAY!
ciu.edu/apply | (800) 777-2227 Columbia International University admits students of any race, color, and national or ethnic origin and complies with Title IX regulations.
F RO M T H E ED I TO R
On Brevity
N
o matter your biblical or theological discipline or subdiscipline, there is at least one common problem we all face when we instruct students: how to teach them to communicate well. If you’re like me, I long to give students meaningful feedback on their papers in areas of theology, Bible, and philosophy. Instead, I find myself circling (at least mentally) all of the typos. Perhaps the most difficult part of teaching students communication is not grammar or mechanics. It is helping them to communicate their point concisely. Like you, over the years I have read a thousand papers in which the student heads to first base, rounds second, and then, just when my hope has arisen, meanders off into left field and never makes it back to third. Somehow, they find an old home plate in the bullpen and claim it as their own. We want them to write clearly, and with brevity, but so many students struggle with this. I start to wonder, though, whether I might be part of the problem—not that I write loquaciously on the papers I return to them. No, my concern is how I lecture: Am I as concise as I should be? Do I say more than I need to say to drive a point home? Do I myself wander into left field in class? If so, how is my teaching affecting the way my students think, reason, and write? I catch my students waxing at length; do they also catch me? Horace says it best: “Whenever you instruct, be brief, so that what is quickly said the mind may readily grasp and faithfully hold: every word in excess flows away from the full mind.”1 Teaching undergrads, it seems easy for me to fill the fifty minutes with lots of words. On the one hand, it’s good to have an attainable class goal and be able to illustrate it well rather than overload the
4 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
s tudents with too many facts. On the other hand, if I can make my main point with brevity, it allows time for me to round out my goal with additional idea(s). And this then becomes our goal: to pour as much knowledge in without overflowing, checking for spills each and every class. Welcome to the latest issue of Didaktikos! Herein we feature the newest batch of wonderfully concise essays—including handling grandfather texts, teaching in a global context, and discovering the benefit of textual communities. Finally, we would like to thank Esther Meek for her Sage Advice over the past year. For each essay in this issue, we hope you will readily grasp and faithfully hold every word—nothing more and nothing less!
D O U G LAS EST ES (PhD, University of
Nottingham) is associate professor of biblical studies and practical theology at Tabor College. His next book, coauthored with Telford Work and April Cordero, is What About Evolution? (Cascade Press, forthcoming). Email him at douglas.estes@faithlife.com, or follow him on Twitter, @DouglasEstes.
1
Horace, Ars 334–35 (Fairclough).
COUNSELING WOMEN: BIBLICAL WISDOM FOR LIFE'S BATTLES Kristin L. Kellen
$22.99 // 9781087737508 Accessible and deeply practical, Counseling Women by professor and counselor Kristen Kellen offers an up-to-date, biblically-informed resource specifically geared toward common struggles that women face. Chapters address issues such as depression, anxiety, infertility, trauma, abuse, disordered eating, and much more. Undergirded by a strong theological foundation, Kellen interweaves many practices of mainstream therapy alongside Scripture's teachings to provide a wise and balanced approach. “Kristin Kellen exemplifies the best of a biblically-centered, clinically-informed model in this volume.” —Nate Brooks, assistant professor of Christian counseling, Reformed Theological Seminary – Charlotte
LOGIC AND THE WAY OF JESUS: Thinking Critically and Christianly Travis Dickinson $29.99 // 9781535983273
NAVIGATING STUDENT MINISTRY: Charting Your Course for the Journey Tim McKnight, editor $39.99 // 9781462773367
This book not only teaches the fundamentals of logic with practical application, but also demonstrates how critical thinking is essential for following in the way of Jesus.
Ten veteran student ministers provide a comprehensive manual for those in the fun, exhausting, and eternally rewarding realm of student ministry.
ORTHODOXY With Annotations and Guided Reading by Trevin Wax G. K. Chesterton $17.99 // 9781535995672 This beautiful new hardcover edition will make this Christian classic more accessible and insightful, both for new readers and for longtime admirers of Chesterton's work.
Contributors D E A N G. B L E VIN S (PhD, Claremont) is professor of practical theology and Christian discipleship at Nazarene Theological Seminary. He also serves as editor of Didache: Faithful Teaching. He advises in the fields of Christian formation, innovation, science integration, Wesleyan studies, and missional theology. PAGE 8: I, PRO F E SSO R
ED H I RD (DMin, Carey Theolical College) is a speaker and writer who serves on the leadership team of All Saints Community Church in Crescent Beach, British Columbia. Previously, he served for thirty-one years as the rector of St. Simon’s Church in North Vancouver. He also was national chair for Anglican Renewal Ministries of Canada and president of Alpha Canada. PAG E 4 0: G O O D F RU I T
C H A R L IE B R A IN E R (PhD, Michigan State University) is dean of international programs and director of the Spencer Center for Global Engagement at Taylor University. Throughout his career, he has served in various roles in international and cross-cultural education, including creating strategic initiatives to improve education and teacher training in China and other parts of Asia.
J OA N N E J U N G (PhD, Fuller Seminary) is an associate dean of online education and faculty development and professor of biblical and theological studies at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, California. Her books include Character Formation in Online Education. ED I TO RI A L B OA RD MEMB ER
PAGE 32: PEDAGO GY
H O N O R É B UN D UK I KWA N Y
(PhD, University of South Africa) is rector of Université Chrétienne Bilingue du Congo (UCBC). After serving in Bible translation, he joined the Congo Initiative in 2004 and served as the academic dean of UCBC from its inception in 2007 to February 2015. PAGE 32: PEDAGO GY
DAV I D KASA L I is cofounder and president of the Congo Initiative and rector emeritus of Université Chrétienne Bilingue du Congo. After serving as president of Nairobi Evangelical Graduate School of Theology, he and his wife returned to the Democratic Republic of Congo to help his people and the church address the horrors of war. From this, the Congo Initiative was born. PAG E 32 : PEDAG O GY
J O H N A N T H O N Y D UN N E
(PhD, University of St. Andrews) is assistant professor of New Testament and director of the Doctor of Ministry program at Bethel Seminary in St. Paul, Minnesota. He is the author of two books, including Persecution and Participation in Galatians (Mohr Siebeck). ASSISTA NT EDITO R
EDWA RD P. MEA D O RS
(PhD, University of Aberdeen) has taught New Testament at Taylor University since 1995. His books include Idolatry and the Hardening of the Heart ; Creation, Sin, Covenant, and Salvation ; and Where Wisdom May Be Found: The Eternal Purpose of Christian Higher Education (coauthor and editor). PAG E 32 : PEDAG O GY
DA N IE L M . GURT N E R
(PhD, University of St. Andrews) has taught at seminaries for fifteen years. His research and writing focuses on the Gospels— especially Matthew— and Second Temple Judaism. PAGE 13: RESE A R C H & D E VE LO P M E N T
EST H ER L I G H TC A P MEEK
is professor emeritus of philosophy at Geneva College in western Pennsylvania. An author and public speaker, her books and talks offer innovative philosophizing “for all of us” and are used in high schools, colleges, and seminaries. PAG E 39 : SAG E A DV I C E
6 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
M IC H A E L A . O RT IZ (PhD, Seminario Teológico Centroamericano) chairs the Department of World Missions and Intercultural Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. He also serves as international director for the International Council for Evangelical Theological Education.
C H ED S PEL L MA N is associate professor of biblical and theological studies at Cedarville University, in Cedarville, Ohio. He is the author of Toward a Canon-Conscious Reading of the Bible: Exploring the History and Hermeneutics of the Canon (Sheffield-Phoenix, 2014).
ED ITORIAL BOA R D M E M B E R
PAG E 3 6: PEDAG O GY
E . R A N D O L P H R IC H A R DS is provost and professor of biblical studies at Palm Beach Atlantic University. His recent books include Misreading Scripture with Individualist Eyes: Patronage, Honor, and Shame in the Biblical World (coauthor with Richard James; IVP Academic, 2020).
J. DAV I D STA RK is the Winnie and Cecil May Jr. Biblical Research Fellow at Faulkner University, where he teaches for the institution’s fully online, face-to-face, and ATS-accredited MA, ThM, and PhD programs in biblical studies. PAG E 1 1 : FAC U LTY LO U N G E
ED ITORIAL BOA R D M E M B E R F R E D SA N D E R S is a systematic
theologian who teaches in the Torrey Honors Institute at Biola University. He is the author of The Deep Things of God: How the Trinity Changes Everything (Crossway, 2017) and The Triune God (Zondervan Academic, 2016). ED ITORIAL BOA R D M E M B E R
GA RY E DWA R D SC H N IT TJ E R
(PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) is professor of Old Testament in the Divinity School at Cairn University in Langhorne, Pennsylvania. He is author of Old Testament Use of Old Testament and Torah Story. PAGE 26: CU R R E N TS W IL L IA M SH E WA N serves as senior ambassador for Congo Initiative USA, developing individual and corporate partners. He previously served in executive leadership with Youth for Christ for forty-five years. He is ordained with a master’s degree in religious education from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.
B ET H M. STOV EL L is associate professor of Old Testament at Ambrose University in Calgary, Alberta. Her works include Mapping Metaphorical Discourse in the Fourth Gospel (Brill). ED I TO RI A L B OA RD MEMB ER D O U G LAS A . SWEEN EY is dean and professor of divinity at Beeson Divinity School, Samford University. He has published widely on the history of Christianity, early modern Protestant thought, and the history of e vangelicalism. His books include two volumes in the Works of Jonathan Edwards series (Yale, 1999, 2004) and Edwards the Exegete: Biblical Interpretation and Anglo-Protestant Culture on the Edge of the Enlightenment (Oxford University Press, 2016). ED I TO RI A L B OA RD MEMB ER
PAGE 32: PEDAGO GY
WRITE FOR DIDAKTIKOS We welcome unsolicited queries for essays that align with our journal’s objectives. Visit DidaktikosJournal.com/Write.
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 7
I , PRO F ESSO R
“How Might We?” Pausing to Listen Where Tradition and Creativity Intersect D E A N G. B L E VIN S | N A Z A REN E T H EO LO G I C A L S EMI N A RY
A
s a teacher in theological education for more than thirty years, I must admit I have long rejected the vision of a professor as a stodgy academic specialist, particularly one resistant to change. That vision reflects neither my journey nor that of many of my colleagues. If anything, the past two years bear witness to just how creative we in theological education can be, particuarly in the face of a difficult public health crisis. However, I also believe the adaptations required during the past two years reflect an ongoing shift in theological education, where innovation sacramentally serves both our craft and our students’ ministry for a new day. Many changes emerge through pedagogical shifts, both in the face of disruptive technology and through practiced theological imagination in the midst of a diverse, and sometimes divisive, culture. Are we faithful to the gospel? Yes, but as we engage a global Christianity, I think we realize that we serve a gospel far larger than what is represented in any one tradition. Can sacramental imagination and innovation serve our craft? Throughout the years I have found two prac tices that center me in the classroom. The first occurs in the lighting of a candle at the beginning of each class session. The candle represents a physical acknowledgement of the presence of the Holy Spirit, one that beckons us to follow God’s rhythms of, in, and through our class, recognizing that any “enlightenment” ultimately emerges through the Spirit’s enlivening class interaction. The second practice follows in a greeting I exchange with my students. After lighting the candle, I repeat the
following words and invite students to reply: Myself: “The Lord be with you.” Students: “And also with you.” Myself: “Lift up your hearts.” Students: “We lift them to the Lord.” Myself: “Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.” Students, with me joining: “It is right to give God thanks and praise.” Some might recognize this greeting, the Sursum Corda, which prefaces the eucharistic prayer in liturgical traditions. Many of my students, often from a free church tradition, rarely recognize this call and response of the early church. The practice signals a transformative moment in the movement from Word to Table, so that all of us in the class might see education as a sacramental process. Through a sequence of greeting, heartfelt blessing, and grateful response, a sacramental moment occurs when Christ might be made manifest by the creative work of the selfsame Holy Spirit. Each gathering and greeting reminds teacher and students alike that the class might be more than an exchange in information, but a very means of grace for us all, and for those we serve in ministry. During recent years, these practices took on new meaning in a world of both asynchronous online engagement, and classrooms linked through video conference sessions. I began to see how the Holy Spirit might do amazing things through the interactions of my students, online and in video conference settings. Often these students, separated by time zones
Innovation invites us to realize that responses might take different forms and remain faithful.
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 9
and cultures, brought the very fabric of their context to the conversation to be transformed through their open interactions with each other. Students might disagree with each other, but I was fascinated in their willingness to hear diverse voices and bring insights from their reading, and their life, if I merely changed one small posture in the class via a question. I often invite students to find elements in their reading that most engaged them and to trust the process of classroom interaction to reveal the full meaning of the subjects at hand. Rather than ask each student to demonstrate mastery of the subject, I ask: How might we, in our interaction together, learn from each other and from the subject? Given permission to engage the reading in a more constructive manner, students often draw deeper into the subject, and into each other’s lives, than a normal review of the material might allow. When I first began to teach, I admit, I was often shaped by the shoulds and oughts of theological education. We are, after all, bearers of tradition, and tradition often includes expectations that anticipate a response. However, over the years, I learned that innovation invites us to realize that responses might take different forms and remain faithful. L. Gregory
Jones calls this approach “traditioned innovation,” where faithfulness and creative action need not be separated.1 Recently, while appropriating design thinking into coursework, I discovered that this “how might we?” posture reflects much of the innovation of design. Rather than being bogged down by shoulds and oughts, designers learned to explore options and possibilities, trusting the answer to emerge in the process. For all of us in theological education, the invitation to see where tradition and creativity intersect offers a daily pedagogical decision. Our embrace of the simple question “how might we?” often invites us into our students’ collaborative learning. We enter a space where, by the power of the Holy Spirit, we might truly become means of grace for the sake of God’s mission and ministry. 1 L. Gregory Jones, Christian Social Innovation: Renewing Wesleyan Witness (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2016).
D EA N G . B L EV I N S’ S current research includes
explorations in ministerial entrepreneurship, design thinking, and the relationship between moral psychology and clergy formation.
EVERY PAGE IS THE LONG STORY SHORT
“Paul would like this commentary!” —Simon Gathercole, University of Cambridge (on Psalms)
Learn more and pre-order at lexhampress.com/ebtc-did.
FAC U LTY LO U N G E
BIBLICAL SCHOLARSHIP IS PLAY J. DAVID STA RK | FAU L KN ER U N I V ERS I TY
O
n the surface, biblical scholarship may appear to have little to do with play. Play happens when a child spontaneously creates a game. Biblical scholarship is a thing for crusty academics who forget play or regard it as an unproductive distraction. Yet the to-and-fro movement of play is characteristic of health and vitality.1 Such is no less true of healthy and vital biblical scholarship, because play is central to each of the biblical scholar’s primary habitats—the broader guild, the institution, the classroom, the church and society, and the home.2 In the broader guild, biblical scholars—whether confessional or not—relate to each other as scholars. And “the decisive function of the scholar” is an “imagination [that] has a hermeneutical function and serves the sense for what is questionable.”3 Biblical scholarship done among biblical scholars is inevitably dialectical. It everywhere shows the play, or the to-and-fro motion, of question, answer, and the renewal of the question. Beyond biblical scholars’ relations to each other, play also occurs between these scholars and the texts that constitute their discipline as biblical. And it occurs within individual biblical scholars as they relate to themselves, their own perceptions of the biblical text, and the evidentiary bases for these perceptions. In an institutional context, play—and the lack of it—also makes its importance felt. Administrative mandates, committee assignments, and other less-than-essential responsibilities easily accumulate. Yet passive acquiescence to such accumulation amounts not to a sense of being at play but of getting played—of being put upon in ways that prevent the
“real work” from getting done. Peripheral work may need doing, but this need does not inevitably require biblical scholars’ subservience to one-way demands that prohibit play. Even in such cases, biblical scholars retain the ability to choose how they address peripheral work.4 And this choice will do much to determine how peripheral work plays out and what impacts it makes in the long term.5 In the classroom, as well, good teaching involves play. Between the instructor and the students, play embodies a creative and connecting to-and-fro tension. That is to say, “tension” is a kind of play that facilitates still more play. On the analogy of a guitar string, the to-and-fro tension of the string between the head and the bridge is what allows the string to have its proper play in a different orientation across the sound hole. The classroom is a pedagogical space faculty construct collaboratively with students. In this collaboration, the faculty member’s role is to discover, maintain, and make the most out of the class’s pedagogical tension— whether the classroom is in person or online.6 If there is too little tension, the demands on students too small, or the effort required too meager, the class will clearly fall “flat.” Or if there is too much tension, the demands too stringent, or the effort required too great, there will be a similarly “sharp” reduction in the dynamism that characterizes play. In and with the church and broader society too, biblical scholars ought to be “in play”—that is, not “on the bench.” Biblical scholars certainly need not limit themselves to being in play in ways particular to their vocation or to being in play in the gathered church and not as the church extends its mission
Biblical scholars are whole people, and those who practice the craft well learn to live as such in a full range of play.
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 11
into the broader society. But within the scope of these scholars’ vocation, the to-and-fro movement of being in play has to do with both giving and receiving in the word.7 Biblical scholars can bring to bear the resources of their specialization in affirmation of the church’s deeply cherished orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Biblical scholars can also give the gift of openness to considering afresh whether church’s beliefs and practices reflect the biblical text. On the other hand, being in play in the church allows biblical scholars to receive from the church the much- needed freedom to affirm and celebrate this text’s testimony—which these scholars’ academic work may require them to treat more clinically. And not least, biblical scholars need to receive from the
Within the scope of these scholars’ vocation, the to-and-fro movement of being in play has to do with both giving and receiving in the word. church the precious reminder that it is not only biblical scholars who can have genuine and spiritually nurturing insights into the biblical text. The eightyyear-old grandmother across the Sunday School room may, at times, be precisely the professor at whose feet the biblical scholar needs to sit. Finally, in the home, good, holistic biblical scholarship involves play. Here, the fro movement of play moves away from the professional, the public, the academic. It involves shifting attention to one’s family. It means giving a rest to the shop-talk and shopthought and instead enjoying kids’ soccer games, spending time with neighbors, going on dates with one’s spouse, and making memories over family vacations. Of course, all this play takes away from time getting back to students or working on the next publication. Biblical scholars are whole people, and those who practice the craft well learn to live as such in a full range of play. Those who try to do otherwise eventually pay a price accordingly.8 In sum, biblical scholars do not, stereotypically, evoke thoughts of playfulness. But across biblical scholars’ primary habitats, an abundance or dearth
12 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
of play respectively shows when biblical scholars are behaving in healthy ways or not. So, cultivating lively play turns out to be a key, defining trait of what makes for vital, wholesome, and holistic biblical scholarship.9 For more about the role of play in biblical scholarship, see jdavidstark.com/play. 1 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (New York: Lane, 1909), 31; Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, ed. and trans. Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall, 2nd ed., Bloomsbury Revelations (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013), 108. 2 This taxonomy is adapted from George H. Guthrie, “The Study of Holy Scripture and the Work of Christian Higher Education,” in Christian Higher Education: Faith, Teaching, and Learning in the Evangelical Tradition, ed. David S. Dockery and Christopher W. Morgan (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2018), 81–100. 3 Hans-Georg Gadamer, “The Universality of the Hermeneutical Problem,” in Philosophical Hermeneutics, ed. and trans. David E. Ligne, 1st paperback ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977), 12. 4 Greg McKeown, Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less (New York: Crown Business, 2014), 33–40; Cal Newport, A World without Email: Find Focus and Transform the Way You Work Forever (New York: Portfolio Penguin, 2021), 97–134. 5 Stephen R. Covey, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change, 25th anniversary ed. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2013), 73–101; Adam Grant, Give and Take: Why Helping Others Drives Our Success (New York: Penguin Books, 2013). With their colleagues from other disciplines and departments, biblical scholars in confessional institutions also have a responsibility to consider, clarify, and communicate a Christian worldview. Cf. Guthrie, “Holy Scripture,” 83, 85, 88–90. But for the sake of space, this kind of play is subsumed under that of play within the church. 6 Either mode supports the “incarnational principle” in its own way. See J. David Stark, “Gaming the System: Online Spiritual Formation in Christian Higher Education,” TEd 52.2 (2019): 43–53. 7 Cf. Ernst Käsemann, New Testament Questions of Today, trans. W. J. Montague and Wilfred F. Bunge (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969), 261. 8 E.g., John A. D’Elia, A Place at the Table: George Eldon Ladd and the Rehabilitation of Evangelical Scholarship in America (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). 9 Cf. Roald Dahl, Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator (New York: Puffin, 2016), 88.
J. DAV I D STA RK’ S current research interests include
1 Corinthians 15:29, the audience of Romans, and theological interpretation of Scripture.
R E SE ARC H & D EV ELO PMEN T
WORKING WITH SECONDARY SOURCES DA N IE L M . GURT N E R | ST. MA RY ’ S U N I V ERS I TY ( EXT ERN A L A F F I L I AT E)
W
hen I recently began writing a commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, I was confronted by an enormous amount of secondary scholarship on the subject. There is so much written on Matthew that the exegete could easily get lost simply assessing the available scholarship. Many exegetical tools go into writing a commentary of this nature—textual criticism, grammar, syntax, lexicography, literary sources, intrabiblical allusions, geopolitical contexts of first-century Judea and Galilee, the relation of Matthew to Second Temple Judaism and its sources—to say nothing about the thousands of secondary works (commentaries, monographs, articles, etc.), which one cannot possibly survey in a single commentary. Having worked in the Greek text of Matthew for just over eighteen months now, and presently working in chapter 4, I have found that the best approach is to consult secondary sources last in the process, only after doing my own extensive exegesis. The reason for this is straightforward: by the time one has examined the text from all different angles, mastered its contents and understood its issues, one is better able to allow the secondary sources to help fill in what remains uncertain. After studying the text thoroughly for oneself, one is more readily able to recognize where secondary sources broach into conjecture rather than allow the text to set the agenda for key discussions. For example, many interpreters read Matthew’s Βίβλος γενέσεως (Matt 1:1) and explain that the presence of a form of γένεσις at the beginning of the Gospel evokes the idea of a new “genesis”—a creation story of sorts analogous to the first book of the Hebrew Bible. Yet I have found no interpreter who recognized that this Greek noun is not utilized as the title of the biblical book until Justin Martyr (d. 165 CE; Dial. 20.1). While Matthew may be evoking the idea of a new genesis, the mere use of the
noun itself may not be as recognizable as some interpreters think. There is an additional benefit to doing exhaustive exegesis prior to consulting secondary works: rather than serving as sources from which to lift ideas, commentaries become dialogue partners from whom one can learn to hone one’s own exegetical skills. In this manner, I prefer to work with technical commentaries with which I know at the outset I will disagree on any number of issues, including theological positions. They become thoughtful dialogue partners who assess the same evidence as I do yet come to different conclusions or weigh the evidence differently. I find this, for example, when examining accounts parallel to Matthew discussed in Mark, where Adela Yarboro Collins’s Hermeneia commentary is incomparably astute. I may disagree with how she interprets a particular passage, but her mastery of the Greco-Roman material for insights into exegesis requires me as an interpreter to improve my own capacities with those skills and bring them to bear in my own work on Matthew. She makes me think about the text precisely because we disagree, and in that there is tremendous value. The benefit is that my explanation of a passage has a great deal more clarity than it otherwise would have had, simply because I was forced to think about things in a manner I had not before. Learning how best to use secondary sources has greatly enhanced my ability to understand Matthew’s Gospel and communicate its meaning with clarity. DA N I EL M. G U RT N ER is currently writing the Word Biblical Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew.
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 13
I N T ERV I EW
Cultivating Confidence Karen Kilby on Vocational Uncertainty and Character Development in Christian Higher Education
P
rofessors of Bible and theology might be strongest when they are at their weakest. Contrary to popular perception, the life of the theological educator is often one of anxiety and suffering. Realizing our human limits within our profession is critical to our success, argues Karen E. Kilby, the Bede Professor of Catholic Theology at Durham University. Kilby’s latest book is God, Evil and the Limits of Theology (Bloomsbury, 2020). Before teaching at Durham, Kilby taught at the universities at St. Andrews, Birmingham, and Nottingham. Kilby recently spoke with Didaktikos editor Douglas Estes about various facets of theological education, including the need for healthy balance between hubris and humility, committee meetings and contemplation.
ESTES: What does teaching well mean to you? KILBY: The first thing I have to say in response to that question is that I’m not sure that I think of myself as having a specially distinguished teaching record, although I guess I’ve been teaching for a while, and I certainly have valued knowing my students and getting to know them. And I’m a little worried about this “distinguished” word. But anyway, I will nevertheless have a go. I suppose a mark of feeling that I’ve taught well is when I see a certain energy in an individual student or in a group of students where the level of thought and conversation is lifted to somewhere that it wasn’t before. So I’ve taught well if I’ve set the context in some way where that can
14 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
happen, and more particularly, I think, where I see students come across things they didn’t previously know—concepts they didn’t previously have, forms of analysis, or ways of thinking that wouldn’t previously be available to them—so something new. But also, where something that they already thought or felt or experienced or believed becomes clearer, they become more articulate about it, they can connect to it better, they can explore it better. So at its very best, I think teaching is going well when both those things are happening. Students have come across new things, but they are also somehow deepening what was already there in some way for them.
ESTES: It’s exciting for the educator as well as the student when that happens.
KILBY: Yes, it is exciting for me as well as them, and it gives energy and satisfaction. It’s one of the interesting things about teaching by Zoom: you can think that the students had good insight, that something good happened, and yet not get that energy. So somehow, the shared embodied experience with the students is necessary for the best version of that kind of satisfaction and excitement as an educator — which doesn’t mean that teaching by Zoom isn’t still important and valuable. Here’s another way to think about teaching well. On the one hand, you want to free your students to think critically and to think differently. But on the other hand, they need a starting point. They need something to think with. And so I eventually came up for myself with a kind of threefold pattern of what you need to do to teach well, especially if you’re lecturing. And one thing is that you need to provide a framework—a way of seeing the topic you’re lecturing on, a way of holding it and structuring it, so the students have a sense that this is the way we’re looking at modern theology or the doctrine of the Trinity or the history of this development or whatever. The second thing is that you need to model good ways of thinking theologically and interacting and dealing with ideas and dealing with other people’s thoughts. And then thirdly, you need to open up spaces for questions that are not already answered by your framework—and the ability to question the framework itself. So you have to get the right balance between enough structure and framework that the students aren’t completely lost and enough prompt and openness that they know they’re not just going to get all the answers from you, but they’re being led to think and wrestle by themselves.
16 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
ESTES: I sometimes hear from faculty that the amount of energy it takes to build that kind of framework today is much more difficult or much more challenging than it was many years ago. Do you find that to be true? KILBY: I’m teaching different groups of students at
different times and different levels, and so it depends. But I think what I find difficult is if I’m teaching students who are in my class because they need to do it, and there’s no component of them seeking something that matters to them—something to do with their faith or with the deepest questions of life. Then it’s hard work to build the framework, because you also have to motivate the framework. Why should students care about these things? And I find that to be harder than working with students who already know how to care, even if they’re a bit lost. Some students may not have as much framework—the historical framework or the linguistic framework or other building blocks. But I’ve grown more confident over the years, so in some ways it’s easier for me, because I now think “What do I need to do?” and I have a better sense of it. But I do still find lack of motivation on the part of the students, lack of deep interest, difficult. I think some people are so charismatic as a teacher that they can create the interest when the students don’t bring an initial interest. And this is why I question the description of me as the distinguished teacher. I don’t think I have that particular kind of charisma, or at least I struggle to do that.
ESTES: It’s interesting that you find you are better at building frameworks today. So clearly, as a teacher, as a theological educator, one can become better at their profession over time, because one sees the variety of frameworks that need to be built. And over the years, we get better at building them. What do you think? KILBY: I think so. Certainly over time as a research-
er, I’ve learned more from my students, from teaching different things, from reading and writing, and that means I’m drawing on a slightly different bank than I would have been when I was straight out of a PhD. But for teaching, the biggest thing that has helped me is that when I started, I had my own teachers looking over my shoulder, and in my mind they were telling me, “That’s disgraceful. You have to include this figure. You have to include this theme. How could you call this a course on systematic theology or modern theology if you haven’t done this and you haven’t done that?” And because I had multiple
On Balance, It’s the Best
Discover how partnering with Logos will help your students balance the pressures of seminary with the priority of ministry. Contact us to learn how to get Logos for all your students.
Seminary
Ministry
Join dozens of seminaries that are already partnering with Logos.
Partner with us to bring balance to your students. Visit logos.com/balance
teachers, each of whom in my mind had slightly different things they were whispering in my ear, I was very stressed about how to cover everything that one ought to cover for a particular subject in the amount of time I had. I eventually got better when I realized I shouldn’t be trying to do that. I should banish my old teachers. I mean, I learned great things from them, so they’ve had their input. But I should actually say I can never do everything that I should do, so I’ll do the thing that I’m most interested in, because I’ll be able to convey the interest in that. And so I can take a more selective way through. If I build a framework, I know it’s not the only framework, but I’m more confident. I’m more confident to go ahead with the framework that I built.
ESTES: Yes, this is what I hear over and over again
from the folks I interview, like Richard Hays (Didaktikos 4.2, 2020). He talked about how important it is to know what specifically to teach on, rather than trying to get all the information possible. That’s an art, if you will. So it seems like building that framework is a bit of an art then.
KILBY: Yes, it’s an art, and it’s important to have the confidence to know that it could be done otherwise, but one is doing it in one’s own way, so you don’t have to erase yourself from the teaching. ESTES: What advice would you give a young professor about teaching well?
KILBY: You can never do everything. You can nev-
er cover everything that should be covered. There’s never enough time. You never know everything that one should know. Being selective and shaping your teaching according to the questions which most interest you is likely to make you the best teacher. That’s one thought. Here’s another one, which I found quite comforting when I began to teach. It’s a huge transition to go from being a TA, let’s say, to teaching a whole course that you have to design. At the time when I began, I also had a couple of small children and a long commute, and I just found the whole thing quite overwhelming. And what I found quite helpful was that I decided that I would try to be teaching well by the end of five years, rather than saying I have to get it right the first time. Just accept that you’re going to learn a lot as you go. To think in terms of the goal is to try and to improve, rather than to be perfect. I never think I know a lot, and my students never spot that. And I think that’s helpful to know—that
18 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
your students care about your enthusiasm and they care about your concern for them. But they will generally trust that you’re an expert as long as you don’t undermine that trust too radically. I once knew of somebody who was doing a temporary replacement teaching post for me who told the students that he had just learned about something the night before he lectured on it. And I thought that’s a normal thing to do, but you really shouldn’t tell the students that you only just learned it.
ESTES: Yes, agreed. And going back to your previous
point, one of the things that I’m interested in is the struggle with perfectionism that academics have. I wrote an essay in Didaktikos (2.4, 2019) on this topic, and Sean McGever wrote a great follow-up piece on imposter syndrome (Didaktikos 2.5, 2019). That can be a struggle for new faculty. What do you think?
KILBY: I think it is—and I think imposter syndrome is very widespread. We often notice what other people know or can do that we don’t know or we can’t do, and we don’t notice the things they can’t do because they don’t talk about them. They don’t say, “Ooh, I’ve never read Kant.” They just say, “You have to have read War and Peace” or whatever it is. So academics all go around hiding their anxiety about what they don’t know, what they can’t do, what they haven’t read, or why they’re not a real theologian very often. A number of my colleagues in Durham have said to me, “I’m not a real theologian because …” Noticing that everyone else is uncertain is very helpful over the years to deal with one’s own uncertainties. ESTES: Let’s change gears and talk about ministry.
How does your teaching intersect with involvement in the church?
KILBY: My current role, the Bede chair, has desig-
nated twenty percent of its time as outreach to the diocese that I’m in, so there’s a kind of church-facing role built in. I’ve never been in ministry, but I’m really delighted of being in the unusual situation at the moment of having a job that’s a straightforward academic post, teaching and doing research, but that also has a fairly formal aspect that’s connected to the church—that as a lay Catholic woman, I’m officially the theological advisor to the local bishop, and I’m called upon by the diocese in various ways. For me, that feels like a more holistic way to be a theologian, to also have direct encounters with people in parishes and people in ministry. I’ve also done a fair bit with people in Anglican ministry over the years,
and I’ve been involved with a Catholic development charity, the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development (cafod.org.uk). All of that has played a role in my work.
ESTES: Has there been any situation, maybe a
meeting at the diocese level, that has sparked your thinking about how you teach or how you even do research?
KILBY: The work with the Catholic development
agency has broadened my thinking, in the sense that it has forced me to pay more attention to Catholic social teaching and to political issues than I otherwise would have. I remember one time when the little advisory group I was part of was putting together a popular-level book for people interested in issues of social justice. We were each assigned a verse from the Our Father or the Hail Mary and had to write something, and my verse was “Hail Mary full of grace.” I was trying to think of what to do with this
of the church external to me help guide the direction of my work and inspire it.
ESTES: Yes, being on the ground and around people spurs your writing and teaching in new ways.
KILBY: Yes, it’s a real privilege. If you compare Christian theological academic work to, say, literature or analytic philosophy or history, it’s much harder to get bored with theology because you keep being put in touch with why it matters and being given new directions by interacting with people and their concerns. ESTES: I couldn’t agree more. But given the challenges of higher education today, how should professors fit personal ministry into their teaching duties? KILBY: Well, another angle to approach this from
would be a sense of one’s distinctive vocation. The institution I’m in makes a set of demands on what
Being selective and shaping your teaching according to the questions which most interest you is likely to make you the best teacher. verse in the context of social justice considerations, and it actually triggered a whole academic paper and changed the way I think about grace and the Holy Spirit. I don’t know that I could say it influenced my teaching directly, but it has triggered other writings. Something that is interesting about the outreach I do in the diocese is that other people are telling me the theological questions they want to hear about, rather than me setting the agenda quite so much for my students. For instance, the first year or two I was doing this, everyone was asking me to talk about women in the church, which wasn’t my preferred topic normally, but it forced me to decide where I stood on some issues. I really appreciate when parts
I have to do, and I have professional obligations. But also, it leaves me quite a bit of space for how I fulfill those and what I do more of and less of. I assume that all Christians have a vocation, not just those called to ordained ministry, and that part of the career of a theologian is constantly discerning “What’s the shape of my own vocation?” There’s a famous line about vocation—something like “One’s vocation is where one’s deepest desires meet the greatest needs of the world,” which is a very happy way of seeing vocation. It’s one possible way of seeing vocation. I wouldn’t always subscribe to that, because sometimes you have to do things that aren’t your deepest desires, but it really is your vocation
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 19
in some other way. Vocation involves asking “What are my gifts that I should be using?” So the personal ministry within a teaching career means discerning answers to questions like: In what way should I be interacting with students? In what way should I be pursuing my research? How should I be building up other people’s careers? And I often think about the kind of classical, medieval pattern of Mary and Martha representing contemplation and service. And I ask myself “Am I going too far toward Martha? Am I doing too many things for other people and neglecting my research in a way?” So that’s the way I frame an ongoing discussion with myself about how to carry out my professional teaching and research career.
ESTES: That’s fascinating. I’ve never thought about
that from the perspective of the medieval idea, nor did I ever apply it to myself and the balance between teaching and student mentoring. But that’s a fascinating metaphor for the struggle that we all have in academia between those two poles.
KILBY: Yes, crudely, the medieval thing is the ac-
tive versus the contemplative life—not that one is unspiritual and the other is more spiritual. Service to others is valuable, but then maybe so too is doing your research or thinking more. So I sort of struggle with that. But the Martha side can also be when your colleague says we really need someone to run this part of the department or to sit on that committee. It’s a kind of Martha response to say, “Of course, I’ll help out. I’ll be a good colleague.” And then when do you do too much of that and short change your research side? Early in my career, a colleague said to me, “Ah, as an academic, you have to cultivate”—and then he said this phrase in Latin, something that amounted to “sacred selfishness.” But I never found that attractive. I could understand what he meant— that if you were too conscientious for everybody else, you couldn’t do your research—but I found it very unattractive to think you have to choose to be a selfish person in order to pursue research. So I’m looking for a way to get the right balance between Mary and Martha.
ESTES: That is so true, I think, for all of us. Let’s
shift gears a little bit again. Why is it important for younger scholars to publish?
KILBY: First of all, obviously, in some instances,
there’s simple institutional pressure for younger scholars to publish. This is what they have to do to
20 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
survive in their institutions. But there are several more intrinsic reasons why publication is important, and the first is that it’s actually good for our characters. In the classroom, especially after you get over the panic of the first couple of years, you’re the expert. You’re the one that judges others. You’re the one that gets to say and always knows more. To publish and give papers is to put yourself before the judgment of your peers so that you have to be the one who has to meet levels of standards and be evaluated and risk being shown to be wrong. I think it’s good for us to do that and not simply have our little fiefdom of our students who admire us and never could question us, but to put ourselves out there for colleagues to judge us. I think that’s good for us. The second thing—for me, at least—is that my thought develops best when I have to write something. In order to continue to move, to develop, to grow, publishing is a good exercise. The third thing is that you never know when you’re writing and publishing if it will ever be of any value to anybody, but sometimes it is. So writing is good to do for the first two reasons I mentioned, and then it could be you have the satisfaction that people actually can use it and learn from it and benefit from it. I think there’s possibly a fourth reason, back to the issue of the academic’s character. This is a little bit of a leap for me to say this, but publishing and going to conferences is actually a form of attention seeking— but it’s an appropriate form of attention seeking: “Here are my ideas. I want you to look at them.” If an academic who should be publishing doesn’t, they might have to assert themselves in other ways. I’ve sometimes felt that, for someone who should have published and stopped, the lack of attention almost curdles their character a little bit.
ESTES: Yes, character development is essential,
and I was just thinking about how that topic doesn’t frequently come up in interviews. Could you speak to that a little more?
KILBY: One thing I think about quite a bit for young scholars—especially PhD students, but also for quite a few years after that—is the role of anxiety in their life and their work. I remember it for myself very intensely, the kind of the anxiety that used to flow around the group of PhD students that I was part of and that continued for me for a number of years after I finished my PhD. I’ve seen it with other groups of PhD students and young scholars, and obviously, classically, in the American system, the tenure period is such a pressure cooker of anxiety.
Vocation involves asking “What are my gifts that I should be using?”
Anxiety is a form of suffering that is part of the price we pay for our particular vocation early in the career—and then the vocation of the theologian is partly to endure that suffering without letting it overtake them.
I think it’s worth naming that as a form of suffering. Feeling anxious isn’t stupid; it’s actually a normal, human, appropriate response to the situation you’re in as a young scholar and to the level of uncertainty, the complexity, the pressures you’re under, and so on. Anxiety is a form of suffering that is part of the price we pay for our particular vocation early in the career—and then the vocation of the theologian is partly to endure that suffering without letting it overtake them and misshape the work they do. So can you find a way to live with this anxiety without it stopping you from doing your best work by making you over-anxious in the wrong ways? I think that’s the challenge.
ESTES: That’s so helpful, because popular culture
may see the theological educator’s vocation as tied into the university, and thus see it as an ivory-tower, cushy, golden chair kind of work, but in so many ways it is not. And if I also may tie into your earlier remarks about ministry, being involved with regular people, answering their questions at your diocese level, that is extra work you take on yourself to know more about the faith and to communicate the faith better.
KILBY: I agree that there’s extra work—that if you’re
serious about this vocation, then usually you feel obliged to do that. And so that means you’re more stressed than you might be. I also think it’s a fair enough point that most people might think “OK, you’re in the university; that’s pretty cushy.” And if
22 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
I say “Yes, but you’re uncertain about your job future,” people might think “Oh well, there’s plenty of people who are uncertain about their jobs. So what’s the big complaint?” But the fact is that a young scholar invests so many years of their life preparing for a particular path that the threat they might fail at it is the source of very reasonable anxiety. It’s not quite like losing a job you happened to start a year ago. If you’re in fear that you won’t get a job after spending five or six or seven years doing a PhD, or after spending ten years doing a PhD and starting on a job—the fact that we have to live with anxiety in the early parts of our career, it’s a real problem. It’s not an overwhelming problem; it’s not one of the world’s worst problems, but it is a form of suffering built into this particular path in life which we then have to negotiate, as I say, so that it doesn’t corrupt us. I think the anxiety can be corrupting at times, if it so overtakes a person that it shapes the whole way they interact with everyone, and the whole way they write, and so on.
ESTES: Yes, we all know people who have suffered
as a result of spending all this time, energy, effort, and then not being able to get a teaching position— and sometimes maybe not even being able to get a good position at all, even if the time spent studying and reflecting was very beneficial personally. How we navigate those situations is definitely one area that needs more attention. Are there other things that Christian faculty in higher education could do better or pay more attention to?
powered by Faithlife
YEARS IN THE CLASSROOM DISTILLED IN A BOOK
“A WORTHY GUIDE TO THESE CRUCIAL FIRST FIVE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.” Ideal for professors, seminarians, and Bible school students, Discovering the New Testament is a new 3-volume introduction to the New Testament.
— Darrell Bock, Senior Research Professor of New Testament Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary
Get volume 1 at LexhamPress.com/NT-Intro-DID.
KILBY: One thing is that, to a young scholar, it can
sometimes look like you have to make a choice between doing theology in a way that respects traditional sources—which goes deeply into that, which learns from it, which finds with it—or doing theology in a way that takes seriously the contemporary critical strands of thought around race and sex and postcolonial thinking and so on. It can seem that you’re just in one camp or the other. And I think we could do better at finding ways to gracefully do both
dinary Christian practices. One ordinary practice that we should be living out, even if we don’t very much, is turning the other cheek (Matt 5:38–40). The academic version of this is when you have to read lengthy or difficult sources—Rahner or Barth or Heidegger or whoever—and then you write with clarity and simplicity and not quite so lengthily. So you can’t say “I’m not going to read anything that’s not wonderfully clear.” You have to deal with it. But then you don’t try to reproduce that and impose on your readers the same difficulty you got from your sources. So turning the other cheek in the ways of writing and communicating is one thing that I think is important.
It takes real skill at the moment to navigate so that neither camp wants to attack you. at once. I do see a few people who manage that, and they give me hope about the younger generation coming along. But I think it’s really unfortunate if you either say “I take these social issues seriously, and therefore I want nothing to do with that terrible tradition; I’m just going to reinvent it all from scratch, and I’m going to learn everything from my secular colleagues and other disciplines,” or you say “I do care about the tradition, and therefore I’m going to close my ear off to any critical angles that might come in from anybody; I’m just going to keep doing it the way I would have done it before I ever heard of these problems.” So that’s one thing.
ESTES: Yes, there’s often a great deal of pressure to be in one camp or the other and not really explore all that’s out there. KILBY: Yes, you’re right. I think it will get easier in
time. It takes real skill at the moment to navigate so that neither camp wants to attack you. I sometimes see it done, and I hope there will be more and more examples so it will be easier for young scholars to find that they don’t have to choose to go one way or the other, but can be doing both at the same time. There are a couple of other things that I sometimes think could be done better, and I think of them in terms of the academic version of very or-
24 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
ESTES: This is a very interesting insight. Yes, we don’t have to torture our readers the same way Heidegger tortures us.
KILBY: Exactly. But I think there’s a risk that somebody says, “Oh, the people who most impress me are the ones I can’t quite understand. So I’m going to try to do it in a way that other people won’t quite understand me.” Here’s the other thought I’ve had. You say to your students, “Oh well, I’ll have a go. But I’m not really a theologian. I’m only a biblical scholar.” We need to take the practice of the forgiveness of sins and move it into an academic register, which is that the biblical scholar needs not to say to me as a systematic theologian, “That’s a disgrace if you haven’t read the last two hundred years’ worth of commentary, and you’re not allowed anywhere near the Bible if you’re not a complete expert in biblical studies.” They have to be more forgiving and say, “Of course, you won’t have read all this, and let me help you.” And I, as a systematic theologian, have to similarly be gentle with a colleague from biblical studies or something else when they aren’t straight away precise with concepts that I might be used to as a systematic theologian, or they don’t see all the connections between certain ideas. We need to be open and generous between sub disciplines so that we’re not so scared of each other and we can learn from each other better.
A GROUNDBREAKING WORK PUBLISHED IN ENGLISH FOR THE FIRST TIME.
To learn more and order, visit lexhampress.com
C UR R E N TS I N B I B L I C A L ST U D I ES
Long-lost Grandparent Texts of the New Testament Exploring Deeper Contexts in Connections across the Canon GA RY E DWA R D SC H N I T TJ ER | C A I RN U N I V ERS I TY
T
hose of us who teach Scripture and theology can benefit by greater attention to the connections between the two testaments of the Christian Bible. Much has been accomplished by careful study of New Testament use of Old Testament “parent texts.” But stopping with parent texts often leaves dangling disconnections. This is one of the reasons for the deep confusion that surrounds many cases of the New Testament use of scripture. Why trace back the genealogy of the New Testament only one interpretive generation? The Old Testament parent texts that New Testament authors use to teach the gospel and righteousness do not appear ex nihilo. At least eighty Old Testament parent texts cited in the New Testament feature interpretive allusions to earlier scriptural contexts that can be thought of as “grandparent texts.” The present study invites consideration of the deeper context of the scriptures that New Testament authors turn to when they explain the gospel of Messiah. The next two sections identify and illustrate this deeper and interconnected context. These are followed by a brief conclusion.
LONG-LOST GRANDPARENT TEXTS
The Bible’s use of the Bible characterizes both testaments of the Christian Bible. Israel’s scriptures house many hundreds of exegetical uses of earlier scriptures as well as thousands of lesser allusions and echoes. It is entirely natural that authors of the
New Testament use the scriptures of Israel in accord with its own use of earlier scriptures. Over the past several years I have researched and written a reference work titled Old Testament Use of Old Testament.1 This book features chapters on the use of earlier scriptures in every scroll of Israel’s scriptures. Near the end, one chapter (“Toward the New Testament”) shines a light on the tendencies of New Testament authors who use scriptural texts including many that either cite or are cited by other texts within Israel’s scriptures. In the present study, attention will be restricted to texts of Israel’s scriptures that make exegetical allusion to earlier scriptures and are also cited by New Testament authors. These can be thought of as grandparent, parent, and offspring texts. grandparent
←
OT text
parent
←
OT text
offspring NT text
Scholarship of New Testament use of scripture has been rightly concerned with the context of Old Testament parent texts. Scholars sharply debate how much of the surrounding context should be considered when trying to figure out what New Testament authors are trying to do. In spite of protracted debate, this scholarship has almost entirely ignored the deeper context of grandparent texts.2 It simply has not been an area of concern. The failure of scholars of New Testament use of scripture to attend to deep context in the case of grandparent texts is confirmed by Arthur Keefer’s
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 27
research. Keefer evaluates the place of “Old Testament context” in three leading methodologies for interpreting New Testament use of scripture—those of Craig Evans, Klyne Snodgrass, and Greg Beale. Keefer identifies eight aspects of context for which these scholars advocate.3 The importance of this list of contexts cannot be pursued here except for what is missing: the Old Testament use of earlier scriptures is glaringly absent. In fairness, Beale does refer to the importance of the Old Testament use of the Old Testament in three places in the book with which Keefer works, and I gladly affirm Beale’s statements to this effect here and elsewhere.4 In spite of Beale’s stated concerns, the use of scripture within Israel’s scriptures does not find a place in the method of study he presents (which Keefer summarizes well). Context cannot be restricted to the passage itself and the surrounding verses.5 The scriptures of Israel are too interconnected and too dynamic for onestop investigation. Here is a tiny fraction of the large number of passages cited by the New Testament that include within them exegetical allusions to still earlier passages of Israel’s scriptures:6 Blessing of Judah
Gen 49:8–12
Ten Commandments
Exod 20 // Deut 5
Love thy neighbor
Lev 19:18
Song of Moses
Deut 32
Prophet like Moses
Deut 34:10–12
Davidic covenant
2 Sam 7 // 1 Chr 17
New exodus
Isa 40:3–5
Last servant song in Isaiah’s new exodus
Isa 53
Temple as house of prayer for all peoples
Isa 56:7
New covenant
Jer 31:31–37
Psalms of the Davidic covenant
Pss 2; 89; 110; 132
Resurrection
Dan 12:2–3
All of these passages are parent texts used in the New Testament. All of these contexts also feature exegetical allusions to still earlier grandparent texts that have not played an adequate role in figuring out what the authors of the New Testament have in mind. But allusions to grandparent texts are part of the parent texts themselves.
28 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
The concerns with the Torah everywhere in the letter to the Hebrews corroborates the point at hand, since it almost never cites Torah itself. The author to the Hebrews tends to access Torah as it is refracted through the prophets and psalms. He refers to human creational dominion by citing Psalm 8, to the rebellion in the wilderness by citing Psalm 95, to Melchizedek by citing Psalm 110, to the sacrificial system by citing Psalm 40, and to the Mosaic covenant by citing Jeremiah’s new covenant.7 The contexts listed above and many others are not peripheral. The importance of these teachings of Israel’s scriptures for the New Testament underscores the need to investigate the way grandparent texts bear on the parent texts of New Testament scripture usage. In sum, scholarship on the New Testament use of scripture has not adequately attended to deep context in many cases. Very frequently, New Testament authors cite parent texts within Israel’s scriptures that themselves depend on earlier texts.
CASE STUDIES
The present study argues that those who teach Scripture and theology can benefit by attending to Old Testament use of scripture, since New Testament passages often depend on it. Case studies can illustrate the benefits of focusing on Old Testament grandparent texts of the New Testament. The following cases illustrate three of the ways New Testament authors use Old Testament grandparent texts: exegetical blending, theological continuity, and exegetical extrapolation and extension. First, in Mark 11:1–10, the exegetical blending of allusions to Zechariah 9:9 and Genesis 49:11 illustrates one way New Testament authors use scripture in accord with the use of scripture within Israel’s scriptures. The expression “exegetical blends” refers to biblical texts that interpret one earlier scriptural text in the light of another.8 Exegetical blends are exceedingly common across both testaments of the Christian Bible. The distinct donkey language in Genesis 49:11 and Zechariah 9:9 virtually requires an intentional relationship to explain it.9 If Jacob foretells what the Judah-king does when he rides a donkey into the vineyard, then Zechariah speaks of what happens before. The oracle of the coming of the righteous, delivered, and humble king provides a prequel to the arrival of the Judah-king in the vineyard.10 Zechariah’s oracle does not replace or diminish the expectational force of the blessing of Judah. Mark goes out of his way to integrate allusion
to the blessing of Judah by the fivefold use of “binding”/“unbinding” of the donkey (Mark 11:2, 4, 5; cf. Gen 49:11 LXX). Messiah’s coming into J erusalem in Mark 11 takes on tremendous irony by means of allusions to both the coming of the J udah-king and the oracle of the coming humble king upon a donkey. These ironic allusions connect to the riddle of the vine growers who kill the vineyard owner’s son with the citations of Psalm 118:25–26 and 118:22–23 in Mark 11:9–11 and 12:10–11, respectively. Zechariah 9:9 as Prequel and Mark 11:1–10 as Set-Up to Ironic Sequel 11 Prequel Humble king comes riding on a donkey (Zech 9:9)
Blessing of Judah Judah-king enters his vineyard with his donkey (Gen 49:11)
Triumphal entry Messiah comes riding on a donkey (Mark 11:1–10)
Sequel Son of vineyard owner executed as king of the Jews (Mark 12:1–11; 15:26)
When Old Testament prophets advance revelation by exegetical allusion to earlier scriptural traditions, it does not exhaust or replace the expectations of the earlier contexts. Exegetical allusions increase the generative capacities of expectational grandparent contexts, inviting ongoing exegetical allusion. In this way exegetical allusions activate and advance the progressive revelation of God’s redemptive will. Second, the theological continuity between the use of scripture in Amos 9:11–12 and Acts 15:16–17 illustrates kindred tendencies of the use of scripture in the Old and New Testaments versus the discontinuity between the use of Amos 9:11 by the sectarian text of Qumran 4QFlorigium (4Q174). Steve Moyise infers that the use of Amos 9:11 by both James in Acts 15:16 and 4Q174 suggests a shared interpretive outlook.12 The evidence points in the opposite direction. Zeal for finding connections between New Testament and Second Temple Judaic interpretation may lead to false positives. In the context where 4Q174 cites Amos 9:11, the sectarian scribes make an extremist move of
FEEL FREE TO JUDGE THEM BY THEIR COVERS For once, a monograph series that’s as pleasing to look at as it is to read. Make some room on your shelves for Studies in Historical and Systematic Theology. Preferably somewhere front and center.
Complete your set at LexhamPress.com/Beautiful
e nhancing the law of the assembly to exclude even proselytes. No one born of an illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of Yahweh. … No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of Yahweh … forever. (Deut 23:2–3 lit.)13 [T]hey shall not enter ever: Ammonite, Moabite, one born of illegitimate birth, foreigner, or proselyte, forever. (4Q174 1:3b–4a lit., emphasis added)14 Meanwhile, James cites Amos 9:11–12 as part of his ruling that converted uncircumcised gentiles are welcome into the assembly (Acts 15:16–18a).15 The use of scriptural traditions in Amos 9:11–12 offers help. Amos interprets that the Davidic promise includes “all the nations that bear my name” (Amos 9:12b lit.).16 The ethnically inclusive expectations of the exegetical allusions to scriptural traditions by Amos and James stand in continuity. The exegetical outcomes of Amos and James oppose the kind of exclusionist ethnocentricity undergirding the radical sectarian exegesis in 4Q174. In this case the use of the same scriptural context by 4Q174 and James underlines diametrically opposed exegetical programs. Third, Old Testament texts cited by the New Testament sometimes exegetically extrapolate and extend earlier biblical teachings. Interconnections between Old Testament parent, grandparent, and great-grandparent texts show how a series of exegetical advances culminate in the command to love thy neighbor in Leviticus 19:18b. Messiah extends the exegetical advancements by asking who acted as a neighbor in Luke 10:36. This example shows how the New Testament further extends exegetical use of scripture already appearing within Israel’s scriptures. In spite of intense study, the deep context within Leviticus 19:18b has been widely neglected. A series of unique constructions show that the law to love the residing foreigner (Lev 19:33–34) features an exegetical blend of the legal standards for circumcised residing foreigners to participate in Passover like any Israelite (Exod 12:48) combined with the protections of residing foreigners (22:21).17 Step 1, extrapolation: If Israel has been redeemed from their mistreatment when they were residing foreigners in Egypt, and if residing foreigners participate in Passover like any Israelite, then positively Israel shall love the residing foreigners like any fellow c itizen.
30 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
Step 2, extension: If Israel shall love them, then they must certainly love thy neighbor. The logic of step 1 extrapolates the positive admonition from the prohibition, while step 2 extends from the lesser to the greater. Notice the interpretive progression (underlining and bold text signify verbal parallels in Hebrew). When a residing foreigner residing among you wants to celebrate Passover to Yahweh, he must have all the males in his household circumcised; then he may take part as a native-born of the land. No uncircumcised male may eat it. (Exod 12:48 lit.) Do not mistreat or oppress a residing foreigner, for you were residing foreigners in the land of Egypt. (22:21 lit.) When a residing foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The residing foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were residing foreigners in Egypt. I am Yahweh your God. (Lev 19:33–34 lit.) Love your neighbor as yourself. I am Yahweh. (19:18b lit.) The command to love thy neighbor does not drop from the heavens all at once. “Love thy neighbor” represents a penultimate culmination of a series of exegetical advances of revelation within Israel’s scriptures. For the moment, it is enough to observe that the deep context of love thy neighbor demonstrates that love of neighbor grows out of the redemptive work of Yahweh. Redemption gives rise to command—not the other way around. Messiah advances “love thy neighbor” to a new exegetical culmination by the riddle of the good Samaritan and its question: “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor?” (Luke 10:36 NIV). Messiah’s torah further extrapolates and further extends “love thy neighbor” based on the deep context of the grandparent and great-grandparent contexts of “love thy neighbor.”
CONCLUSION
Greater attention to connections between the testaments of the Christian Bible and their deep contexts can benefit Scripture and theology professors. The present study is not exhaustive. Instead, it scratches the surface of a long-neglected resource
for interpreting the New Testament use of scripture—the Old Testament. The illustrations above show how the Old Testament use of scripture offers insight for studying the New Testament, including exegetical blends, theological continuity, and extrapolation and extension. The Old Testament use of scripture also sets the course for the New Testament use of scripture in many other ways, like synoptic contexts, extended echo effect, backward-looking and forward-looking typological/figural patterns, fulfillment formulas, overt citation marking, unmarked quotation, marked and unmarked interpretive paraphrase, legal adjustments, homiletical exegesis, ironic expansions, interpretive networks, and more. The evidence favors that New Testament authors cherished and carefully studied the scriptures of Israel. They pored over the scriptures and frequently built their own teachings on scriptural parent texts that exegetically allude to grandparent texts. The presentation of the teaching, death, and resurrection of Messiah in the New Testament overflows with exegetical allusions to Israel’s scriptures. This situation invites teachers and scholars to take the next step in cases where parent texts feature interpretive allusions to earlier contexts within Israel’s scriptures. It is not adequate to merely work back to the parent texts within Israel’s scriptures and stop. Grandparent texts need to be taken seriously. Rediscovering the grandparent texts of the New Testament offers one means of recovering a sense of the coherence and deep continuity of God’s redemptive will that interconnects the entire Christian Bible. Commitment to uncovering biblical continuity offers one part of an antidote to the widespread tendency today to view Scripture as fragmented and disjointed. Attending to the scriptural grandparent texts of the New Testament can offer renewed insight into the spectacular exegetical moves that proclaim the gospel of Messiah in the New Testament. 1 Gary Edward Schnittjer, Old Testament Use of Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2021). Also see Beth M. Stovell, review of Old Testament Use of Old Testament by Gary Edward Schnittjer, Didaktikos 2021 Fall Books Preview (2021): 14, 16–17. 2 See Schnittjer, Old Testament Use, 851n27. 3 See Arthur Keefer, “The Meaning and Place of Old Testament Context in OT/NT Methodology,” in Methodology in the Use of the Old Testament in the New: Context and Criteria, ed. David Allen and Steve Smith (New York: T&T Clark, 2020), 73–85, esp. list on 84. 4 See G. K. Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Exegesis and Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 47, 97, 98. Also see G. K. Beale and
D. A. Carson, “Introduction,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), xxiv. 5 The long debate on how much surrounding context of cited passages New Testament authors had in mind is very important but cannot be taken up here. See, e.g., C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures: The Substructure of New Testament Theology (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1953), 126; Beale, Handbook, 1–5; G. K. Beale, “The Cognitive Peripheral Vision of Biblical Authors,” WTJ 76 (2014): 263–93; Ian Turner, “Going Beyond What Is Written or Learning to Read?: Discovering OT/NT Broad Reference,” JETS 61.3 (2018): 577–94. 6 For these and other Old Testament contexts that both use earlier scriptures and are used by New Testament authors, see Schnittjer, OT Use of OT, 866–67; cf. lists at the beginning of the main chapters. Eighty of these have been collated in “Instructor Resources for Old Testament Use of Old Testament,” 30–32, posted in TextbookPlus, ZondervanAcademic.com (available exclusively to professors). 7 See Heb 2:6–8; 3:7–11, 15; 4:3, 5, 7, 8; 7:17, 21; 8:8–12; 10:5–7, 16–17; and see Gary Edward Schnittjer, “Blessing of Judah as Generative Expectation,” Bibliotheca Sacra 177 (2020): 36 [15–39]. 8 The expression “exegetical blends” is based on—but broader than—Fishbane’s expression “legal blends.” See Michael Fishbane, Interpretation in Ancient Israel (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 110–19, 134–36. Legal blends are actually a subset of the commonplace phenomenon of biblical texts that interpret one earlier context in the light of another. Such texts appear in every genre of the Christian Bible. 9 See Kenneth C. Way, “Donkey Domain: Zechariah 9:9 and Lexical Semantics,” JBL 129.1 (2010): 105–14. 10 For a detailed evaluation of Zechariah’s use of the blessing of Judah, see Schnittjer, “Blessing of Judah,” 27–30. 11 Table adapted from Schnittjer, “Blessing of Judah,” 29–30; Schnittjer, Old Testament Use, 453. These are based on Schnittjer, Torah Story Video Lectures (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2017), DVD, 10.3. 12 See Steve Moyise, The Old Testament in the New: An Introduction, 2nd ed. (New York: Bloomsbury, 2015), 205. 13 All literal (lit.) translations mine. Only English Bible verse references are provided. 14 See Florentino García Martínez and Eibert J. C. Tigche laar, eds., The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 1:352. The term ben nechar ( )בן נכרis rendered as “foreigner” and ger ( )גרas “proselyte,” as was commonplace already in the LXX. 15 The broad point being made here stands, however the difficult textual issues of Amos 9:11–12 MT and LXX are worked out in relation to Acts 15:16–18. 16 See detailed analysis in Schnittjer, Old Testament Use, 391–94; and see 858–59. 17 See Schnittjer, Old Testament Use, 42–44. Also see Gary Edward Schnittjer, “Surprises of Old Testament Use of Old Testament: Part 5,” Credo, 22 July 2020, https://credo mag.com/2020/07/surprises-of-old-testament-use-of-oldtestament-part-5/. G A RY EDWA RD SC H N I T TJ ER recently submitted the
revised and updated second edition of Torah Story, and he is researching projects under contract with Baker Academic, B&H Academic, and Zondervan Academic.
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 31
PEDAG O GY
FORGING A CROSS-CULTURAL FELLOWSHIP How Professors in the Congo and Indiana Are Pursuing a Shared Educational Mission Grounded in a Pedagogy of Love HONORÉ B UN D UK I KWA N Y & DAVID KASA L I
| U N I V ERS I T É C H RÉT I EN N E B I L I N G U E D U CO N G O
C H A R L IE B R A IN E R & E DWA RD P. MEA D O RS | TAY LO R U N I V ERS I TY W IL L IA M SH EWA N | CO N G O I N I T I AT I V E
T
he global spread of Christianity necessitates a proportional global expansion in collaborative Christian education. With precedents in the New Testament, the Apostolic Fathers, and the Seven Ecumenical Councils, today’s cross- cultural global fellowships have historic identity and purpose. It is with this awareness that Congo Initiative–Université Chrétienne Bilingue du Congo and Taylor University are engaging in educational dialogue. Relevant to all global cultures, we believe Christian education has a pedagogical teleology that inspires, unites, and defines the Christian mission for us all: “But the goal (telos) of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith” (1 Tim 1:5).1 “We proclaim Him, admonishing everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, so that we may present everyone complete (teleion) in Christ” (Col 1:28). These admonitions of Paul replicate Jesus’s charges to “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” and to “be perfect (teleios), as your heavenly Father is perfect (teleios)” (Matt 5:44, 48). The teleology Jesus and Paul envision is the consummation of God’s comprehensive love foreseen in the maturation of his global people unified in eternal worship (Rev 7:9). As a community of Christian teachers agonizing through complex times, how do we educate students to value the love of God as our signature virtue (John 13:34–35)—an attainment more valuable than knowledge itself (1 Cor 13:8)? How do we cultivate intelligent, orthodox, capable, and responsible students of authentic love—genuine agents of reconciliation and peace (2 Cor 5:14-21)? And
32 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
how do we cultivate such character from students beleaguered by sociopolitical divisions on the one hand and hardened by dogmatic predispositions on the other? The challenges are foreboding but are certain to be overcome through collaborative Christian education intent on unity in honor of the will of Christ (John 17:21), confronting threats as one body of many complementary parts (1 Cor 12:12–30). The vision begins and ends with God’s abiding promise to do something new—initially for his suffering people on earth and consummately for his resurrected people in heaven: “Do not call to mind the former things, or ponder things of the past. Behold, I will do something new” (Isa 43:18–19); “He who sits on the throne said, ‘Behold, I am making all things new” (Rev 21:5). Founded in 2007, Université Chrétienne Bilingue du Congo (UCBC) has yet to know a prolonged time without suffering. Located in the town of Beni in the northeast of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), UCBC has persevered through poverty, Ebola, terrorist incursions, widespread rape, government unrest, pervasive corruption, Covid-19, and the failure of European-style, lecture-based education. Founded in 1846, Taylor University in Upland, Indiana, has yet to know a prolonged time with severe suffering. Yet, increasingly, we relate. Fear, anxiety, and depression are debilitating our students from within, while inflation, high discount rates, Covid-19, combative social media, racial confusion, pressures to secularize, decreasing class sizes, and the demographic cliff’s arrival have all combined to threaten our mission from without.
Harder to Decline Than Οὖς You don’t want to pass up our savings program for students and scholars. It takes less than a minute to apply, and with it you’ll save 30% on Logos packages.
Apply for the Academic Discount program at Logos.com/Academic Or Take the quiz at Logos.com/Quiz to find the perfect package.
Yet from the darkness of Covid-19 and uncertain economic times, God has started a new fellowship—a new global “we” that is lifting our heads to enact now a foreshadowing of the consummation we anticipate in Revelation 7:9–10. A pedagogy of love is emerging that is educational, intimately relational, patient, demonstrative, and visionary. As all relationships begin, so too we are growing closer to one another through learning one another’s stories. As we’ve learned our partners’ stories, the new “we” has taken form. The formation is strengthening through readings of strategic scripture passages, Emmanuel Katongole’s Born from Lament, Sharon Sheehan’s This is For You: The Story of David Kasali and Congo Initiative, Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Adam Hochschild’s King Leopold’s Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa, Jason Stearns’s Dancing in the Glory of Monsters: The Collapse of the Congo and The Great War of Africa, and Eugene Habecker’s Rediscovering the Soul of Leadership. Awakening us to the stark realities of history and politics, these corporate readings are cultivating relational depth and human understanding. Agonizing through challenging times, we are also learning the biblical theology of lament. Lament makes acute our hope for the consolidation of a new people of God in a new heaven and a new earth governed by a law of love (Rom 13:10). The new “we” is realized eschatology—the light of the not yet emerging from the darkness of the already—hope emerging from lament. Against the backdrop of Congolese history, we’re discerning with Emmanuel Katongole “that even in the midst of inscrutable violence, God is always planting seeds of hope (Isa 43:19), seeds that bear the promise and evidence of God’s re- creation.”2 Grafted into Congo Initiative’s motto, Tuko Pamoja (Swahili; “We are Together!”), the Taylor mission to develop Christlike servant leaders is interfacing with UCBC’s aspiration to be a
able vibrant Congolese society. Together we are being transformed to transform.” Disadvantaged by a geographical separation of 12,043 kilometers, our relationship began with a series of meetings on Taylor’s campus, followed by a strategic planning retreat in Entebbe, Uganda, followed by recurrent Zoom meetings throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, and most recently through the enrollment at Taylor of UCBC representative Kizito Mayao. The relationship is not one of patron/client dependency but one of mutual prayer support, continual rededication to a shared educational mission, and carefully planned strategic educational dialogue. On the Taylor side, we’re humbled by the gritty resilience of UCBC, its innovative implementation of service requisites, its leadership vision for women, and its members’ abilities to speak three, four, and five languages. With each deliberate step, we’re learning the truth of 1 Corinthians 13:4—that love is patient. When Covid-19 disrupted travel plans, the pivot to Zoom was remarkable but imperfect. Indeed, frozen screens, static audio, and complete disconnections continue to frustrate. But awareness that the goal is constructive relationship—not projects, productions, or transactions— has cultivated perseverance while eliminating fear of breakup. Inspiring us is an educational teleology that is relational, not entrepreneurial. In practice, our pedagogy at this point is primarily demonstrative — as “God demonstrates His own love” (Rom 5:8), so we are attempting to do the same. Our students have heard lots of sermons, sung lots of sweet choruses, and endured many a lecture on diplomacy and reconciliation—all wonderful. But how many have witnessed academically intelligent global demonstrations of authentic cross-cultural agape love? Where are they witnessing that in today’s global culture? Yet love is the true charge of authentic Christian discipleship (John 13:34–35). Emanating from the Lord himself (Rom 5:5), love informs, inspires, sustains, and is the projected end of Christian instruction (1 Tim 1:5). Training our students to become capable and persevering disciples of God’s invincible love is thus our shared raison d’être, giving relevance to our teaching, coherence to
A pedagogy of love is emerging that is educational, intimately relational, patient, demonstrative, and visionary.
community of Christ-centered Congolese leaders and global partners united to transform the lives and society of the DRC by educating a new generation of ethical leaders to foster a sustain-
34 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
our curricula, and confidence in the permanent value of our learning outcomes. We aspire for discipline-specific professorial relationships with global partners for the enhancement of courses in TESOL, business/economics, literature, psychology/counseling, sociology, social work, history, political science, epidemiology, global theology, art, music, environmental science, and all health-related fields. Through video conferences, we envision students benefitting affordably from global experts within their majors, while collaborating with global peers of refreshing and challenging perspectives. The great German theologian Jürgen Moltmann has stated that he does not think of himself “as a German Christian, but as a Christian who lives in Germany.”3 We applaud that corrective with respect to our own self-understandings as citizens of heaven (Phil 3:20), who share the biblical call to teach hope in contexts of despair. The opportunities are great. For all of us, the responsibility of the hour is Christian education that participates now in the realization of global Christian fellowship—the new “we” of God’s eternal kingdom (Rev 7:9; 21:5).
THINK DEEPLY ABOUT EVANGELICALISM & CULTURE WITH J. I. PACKER “Delightful devotional gems!” —Carl R. Trueman To learn more and order, visit lexhampress.com
Scripture quotations are adapted from the New American Standard Bible 1995. 2 Emmanuel Katongole, Born from Lament: The Theology and Politics of Hope in Africa (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2017), 19. 3 Oral comment at the Logos Conference, “Reconciliation, Divine and Human,” University of St. Andrews, Scotland (June 7, 2018). 1
H O N O RÉ B U N D U KI KWA N Y is rector of Université
Chrétienne Bilingue du Congo.
DAV I D KASA L I serves as president of the Congo Initiative, helping his people and the church address the horrors of war. C H A RL I E B RA I N ER is dean of international programs and director of the Spencer Centre for Global Engagement at Taylor University. EDWA RD P. MEA D O RS teaches New Testament at
Taylor University. His theological interests include global theology, the fatherhood of God in the teachings of Jesus, and the global sufficiency of the cross.
WI L L I A M S H EWA N is senior ambassador for the Congo Initiative. His passion is leader development.
PEDAG O GY
TRAINING FOR MINISTRY IN A TEXTUAL COMMUNITY C H E D SP E L L M A N | C EDA RV I L L E U N I V ERS I TY
W
hat is the purpose of a seminary? Because of financial pressures and the shifting mores of higher education, those training for ministry today have become less tolerant of lengthy degree programs and loosely connected coursework. A prevailing question among potential students continues to be: “Is a seminary education worth the cost?” In this scenario, the coherence of a seminary’s vision for theological education and the integrated nature of their course of study is a paramount concern. In light of this pressing and perennial need, I examine here a recently published proposal about the nature of theological education and reflect on the enduring concerns it surfaces for those teaching and training for ministry today.
PURSUING THE COHERENCE OF A THEOLOGICAL CURRICULUM
John Sailhamer (1946–2017) is known for his careful scholarship on the Hebrew Bible and his focus on the compositional strategies found in the text of Scripture. Perhaps less well-known is his vision for theological education. In the spring and summer of 1993, Sailhamer prepared for a possible role of provost at Dallas Theological Seminary by articulating a detailed proposal for theological education and its possible implementation in a seminary curriculum. In an address titled “The Nature, Purpose, and Tasks of a Theological Seminary,” Sailhamer articulates a series of core commitments to be pursued when training students for ministry, and his insights are worth considering. Though he ended up not taking the provost position, his address represents what he saw as an ideal arrangement of a school’s faculty, curriculum, and institutional priorities.1 From Sailhamer’s perspective, “present seminary programs at best often lack a cohesive center and are otherwise often incoherent or, in some cases, irrational.” His purpose is to “provide a theoretical
36 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
and reflective basis for designing a coherent and cohesive curriculum (both explicit and implicit).” This abstract and theoretical discussion is necessary for Christians because the purpose of theological education is rooted in revealed truth. Ensuring that each aspect of ministry training is explicitly or implicitly grounded in the Scriptures and undertaken for the sake of the churches is an urgent and necessary endeavor. For Sailhamer, this practical and theoretical requirement warrants an extended reflection on the nature, purpose, and tasks of a theological seminary. In a confessional institution, one must think carefully about the relationship of the seminary to the Christian churches and also to the Christian Scriptures. Accordingly, the purpose of a seminary is “to glorify the living Word of God who is known in the written Word of God,” and it does this “specifically by preparing ministers of the Word.” Having established this all-important theological and hermeneutical foundation, Sailhamer then discusses the relationship between the seminary and the academy. Carefully distinguishing and relating the church and the academy enables the seminary to maintain its distinctive role in relation to both domains. Because of its non-negotiable theological commitments and curricular focus, the seminary or divinity school offers something that other academic institutions are not able to provide. “As a matter of fact,” Sailhamer explains, “a proper study of the Bible as an object within the [academy] can only be appreciated and carried out within the context of a text-community such as a theological seminary.” Having established the necessity of both the academy and the church, Sailhamer next discusses the academic tasks that are necessary for a seminary to function properly. These include achieving and maintaining accreditation, producing scholarly publications, and contributing to academic disciplines with an integrated faculty structure.
ENVISIONING THE SEMINARY AS A TEXTUAL COMMUNITY
Perhaps one of the most distinctive aspects of Sailhamer’s address is his identification of the seminary as a textual community. The seminary’s purposes and spheres of ministry are established by its core identity as a text-community and the nature of the biblical text that produces and guides it. In his address, Sailhamer characterizes a “textual community” as one that “conceptualizes its own existence in terms of authoritative texts.”2 Here he also draws upon Kevin Vanhoozer’s definition of a textual community as a “community united by, indeed constituted by, a foundational text—the Christian Scriptures.”3 Sailhamer develops this notion by arguing that “the role of the Scriptures as texts in the seminary community is more than a means of conceptualizing its Christian identity[;] it is, as well, constitutive of the seminary community itself.” He reflects further, “As a biblical text-community, the seminary is a domain that has embedded within it yet another domain, that is, the world of the biblical text” meaning that “both the seminary and the world of the biblical text share the same set of rules and values.” Recognizing the biblical canon as an authoritative text will shape the makeup of the faculty, the student body, and the curriculum. Both the seminary’s vision and its activities will be guided by its commitment to being a biblical text-community. As the text-community of a seminary is of first importance to Sailhamer’s vision, the execution of such a vision requires a dynamic reading of the biblical text “in its ongoing context ... the seminary community.” This version of communal reading puts a “clear emphasis on the importance of the seminary itself as a text-community and the responsibility of the seminary to itself.” For students and faculty alike, this recognition of the seminary as a text-community creates the atmosphere of communal submission to the authoritative biblical text. The formative features of this text-community not only affect a student’s future ministry but also shape his or her present ministry within the seminary context. This vision means that the current seminary context should enable and encourage ministry that is centered on the Scriptures and that nourishes the faith of believing readers within this intellectual environment. Sailhamer contends that viewing the seminary as a text-community is essential because the “reservoir from which a life of ministry draws is filled and nourished by the prayerful study of God’s Word.” This theological vision for seminary education repurposes the core activities of the seminary curriculum as the guidance of the Scriptures shapes the life of the community. The seminary that is also a textual community is necessarily a worshipping community that engages its current culture in accordance with the script of the biblical text. The disposition required for this vision is a high view of Scripture’s authority and a commitment to reading it with trained eyes and softened hearts. Accordingly, the seminary is a fitting place for an academic study of the Scriptures, not simply because of its status as an academic community but also because of its status as a confessional text-community. As this kind of textual community, the seminary is a qualitatively different academic setting than a secular university that does not
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 37
Get a Free Christian Ebook Every Month! Get this month’s free book at logos.com/getfreebooks
Jesus and the Witness of th Outsiders
Craig A. Evans
NT 313
i nclude training for ministry. In this intellectual and theological setting, interpreters study the meaning of biblical texts in light of core commitments to the authority and divinely inspired origin of these Scriptures. In this regard, Sailhamer argues that the seminary uniquely meets the “necessity of a sympathetic text-context for a proper exegesis of the Bible.” For Sailhamer, the hermeneutical concept of a text-in-context and of a text’s effective history complement this basic understanding of the theological educational institution.4 Because the seminary is situated within the larger domain of the Christian church (unlike the secular university), it is able to function as “a text-community shaped by the Bible within a context of an effective history that lies unbroken from the time of its composition.” In other words, the seminary, like the church, is a “living key to the Bible’s meaning.” As such, the seminary is equipped in a unique way to apply the Scriptures to the needs of the church. The seminary is a community of faith that maintains the intellectual and spiritual resources that are necessary for a proper understanding of the Bible. Sailhamer’s contention at this point is that the seminary is thus “an instance of the Bible in context.” Because the seminary is also embedded in the broader domain of the church, it becomes a socially effective reality or “an instance of the Bible in culture.” Serving as a realization of the Bible both in context and in culture allows the seminary to be “a test case for understanding texts in situations.” In this way, the seminary becomes primarily a community of faith that wrestles with both the meaning and the meaningfulness of biblical texts. The element that connects the modern biblical reader to the textual intention of the ancient biblical author is the medium of the text and the affinity of faith. Maintaining the focus and stability of the textual community will also allow a seminary to adapt to changing circumstances and address whatever new challenges may arise. As Sailhamer reflects, Viewing the seminary as a textual community can also assist in the task of projecting goals and ideals for the seminary into the future. Simply put, whatever the future may hold, the central task of the seminary always remains the same—the interpretation of Scripture.
CLOSING REFLECTION
For theological educators who are seeking to uphold a strong theology of the Scriptures and prepare students for ministry in dialogue with the highest
38 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
level of academic rigor, Sailhamer’s understanding of the nature, purpose, and tasks of a seminary remains encouraging and instructive. Encouraging because it represents a compelling vision of the organic integration of careful study of Scripture and faithful ministry among the churches. Instructive because the task of envisioning and articulating a coherent seminary curriculum is still an ever-present responsibility of those involved in the academic study of the Bible in every generation. For the full text of Sailhamer’s address and an account of this transitional time at DTS, see The Seminary as a Textual Community: Exploring John Sailhamer’s Vision for Theological Education, ed. Ched Spellman and Jason K. Lee (Dallas: Fontes, 2021), 3–50. All quotations from Sailhamer are drawn from this source. While unpublished, the address is a completed work that was intended for public delivery. This document therefore stands as an important historical artifact from a transitional time in the history of DTS—and as a developed blueprint for the teaching philosophy that Sailhamer worked out across his career as an educator. 2 On the use of this concept from a different angle in the study of literacy and manuscript cultures in the ancient and medieval eras, see Jane Heath, “‘Textual Communities’: Brian Stock’s Concept and Recent Scholarship on Antiquity,” in Scriptural Interpretation at the Interface between Education and Religion, ed. Florian Wilk, TBN 22 (Leiden: Brill, 2018), 5–35. Heath broadly characterizes a textual community as “a community whose life, thought, sense of identity and relations with outsiders are organized around an authoritative text” (5). 3 For this quotation, see Spellman and Lee, Seminary as a Textual Community, 10n25. Cf. Vanhoozer’s discussion of the relationship between the biblical canon and the covenant community in Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), 133–50. 4 On the notion of effective history, Sailhamer interacts with Hans-Georg Gadamer’s work in Wahrheit und Methode (Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1975) and draws upon the critique of Gadamer by E. D. Hirsch in Validity in Interpretation (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967). For examples, see Spellman and Lee, Seminary as a Textual Community, 5–6; John H. Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology: A Canonical Approach (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 93–96, 168– 169, 218–220; and John H. Sailhamer The Meaning of the Pentateuch: Revelation, Composition and Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2009), 68–98. 1
C H ED S PEL L MA N teaches biblical and theological studies, researches the biblical canon, and is usually looking for dank memes.
SAG E A DV I C E
A GIFT FROM BEYOND Where Can Wisdom Be Found? (Part 4 of 4) E ST H E R L IGH TCA P MEEK | G EN EVA CO L L EG E
W
here can wisdom be found? How do theological education and wisdom relate? And how might we improve that relatedness? The modern age has spawned a defective epistemic: the “knowledge as information” mindset. The modern age effectively hinders wisdom, not to mention knowing, because it disavows its essential subsidiary root. Knowing involves a from-to orientation: the “to,” the lively real beyond us, draws and shapes the “from” of our dynamically creative but subsidiary scrabbling. Wisdom is found, wisdom grows, not in the focal, but in the subsidiary. Modernity has spawned a defective metaphysic as well: we moderns have a really hard time even believing that the real is there, let alone trusting ourselves to it in love. This also blocks knowing and wisdom, for it denies that these come in submission to the real objectively beyond us. It is significant that the question above suggests that wisdom is found—not achieved. It may be found. Wisdom is a gift, in grace bestowed from beyond. Indeed, the vision of the real which draws our knowing is itself a gift. Modernity would have us believe that we master the information, and we’re finished, expert, in control. But the “loving to know mindset” makes far better sense of any course of study, especially of theological education. We seek skilled subsidiary understanding that alone opens reality to us. It is significant that a course of study gets us not to an end, but to a beginning—commencement. All that effort places us in a position where, with a reverent view to the real, understanding graces us, and in time wisdom may also be found. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. What does all this mean for how theological education is carried out? Teachers and students alike must be alert to the dominant and skewed presumption that knowledge is information, vigilant to dispel it by underscoring the ordinary and natural way we
know (which I have described here). Teachers must underscore that what we are doing is developing a skilled orientation to the real, within a posture of love. Yes, students temporarily, uncomfortably, focus on what one is doing with one’s body (pronounce YHWH this way)—but the end goal is to hone subsidiary skill, honoring it as subsidiary, in submission to the beckoning real. All must see that the knowledge is not completed focal content, but rather the content artfully and bodily indwelled to invite the real. The student must cultivate rigor in the information as expression of devoted love of God, never allowing it to revert to love of the information as information. That’s idolatry, isn’t it? Students must consent to trust and to submit to their teachers as authoritative guides—no different, really, from athletes and musicians with their coaches. Teachers speak maximically, uttering sentences that body forth their own subsidiary savvy and shape the student’s lived feel of the thing. The “content” teachers convey is secondary to the maxims—or best understood as (some) tools for developing the student’s skilled grasp. Above all, the job of the teacher is to cultivate lovers—lovers of the real. Cultivating such love requires centrally the teacher’s own lived, eye-twinkling posture of love. The teacher—and the pastor—must say and body forth utterly authentically, “Look! Here is the real!” In theological education, the teacher shows the irresistibly lovable Lord. It takes epistemological therapy to dispel the thrall of modernist epistemology. But when we do that, our love of God returns to its proper epistemic centrality. And in a life lived out of this love, within and beyond even the lengthiest course of study, in grace wisdom may be found. EST H ER L I G H TC A P MEEK is currently writing Doorway to Artistry, in a series relating her philosophical proposals to different areas of life.
April 2022 | DidaktikosJournal.com | 39
G O O D F RU I T
Restoration for a Broken World E D H IR D | A L L SA I N TS CO MMU N I TY C H U RC H
“S
omeday I would like to marry Lloyd again.” That’s what Linda told her priest as she knelt at the Communion rail, side by side with her ex-husband. They had been divorced for six years, but on several occasions Linda had expressed a desire to remarry, and Lloyd had said the same. “Why not now?” the priest asked. “Sure, why not?” Linda replied. Everyone was thrilled that the Communion sacrament unexpectedly concluded with a romantic marriage service! I will never forget that wedding celebration (I was the priest). Linda and Lloyd later took part in a marriage workshop that was part of my doctoral research, and they discovered new ways to improve their relationship. I learned extensively about family systems theory through my DMin program at Carey Theological College. My doctoral thesis was later rewritten and published as a paperback, For Better, for Worse, in which my wife and I pulled back the veil on our imperfect marriage, sharing some of our embarrassing and often humorous moments. Too many marriages nowadays crash and burn. To say “for better, for worse” sounds very romantic on the wedding day. To live it out “’til death do us part” is much more challenging. Many couples naively think that because of their loving feelings toward each other, they won’t face the “for worse” part. Marital joy is a deep joy that spills over into every corner of a family. Marital pain, likewise, is a deep family pain. We know of few families who have not experienced both joy and deep pain. Theological education renews our mind in Christ. It gives us fresh eyes to see God’s love for the hurting world around us. Through my doctoral studies, I rediscovered that God is good, faithful, and kind. God as covenant-maker rescues, renews, forgives, and heals marriages, taking what is broken and making it whole. -
Theological education renews our mind in Christ. It gives us fresh eyes to see God’s love.
E D H IR D ’S ministry focus is writing books and speaking on marriage and renewal. He is on
the leadership team at All Saints Community Church in Crescent Beach, British Columbia.
40 | DidaktikosJournal.com | April 2022
Are You Using the Tools of the Past to Build the Future of the Church?
Today’s seminary students are tomorrow’s pastors and scholars. Shouldn’t they have the most advanced tools available to advance in their callings? We think so. That’s why Logos has partnered with seminaries to provide Bible software to every student. The future of the Church depends on it.
Dozens of seminaries are already partnering with Logos.
Discover how Logos can equip your students for the future. Visit logos.com/academic-solutions
40
QUESTIONS SERIES
Answers to common & difficult questions about theology
“Dr. Allison does justice to Roman Catholicism, presenting a fair and accurate portrait, continually using the Roman Catholic Church’s own words to do this, while also offering thoughtful, biblical, theological, and historical assessment along the way.” —R acheL ciano, Lecturer in Christianity in History at Sydney Missionary and Bible College
AVAILABLE JUNE 21, 2022
AVAILABLE APRIL 19, 2022
“Joe Harrod’s 40 Questions About Prayer is faithful to Scripture, clearly written, and extremely helpful for Christians seeking to grow in their understanding and practice of prayer. I think many churches and ministry groups will find this book perfectly formatted for group discussions. Highly recommended!”
“Rather than dividing Christians into theological camps, Pinson conveys a beautiful irenic tone, helping inform fellow brothers and sisters in Christ about many of the frequently misunderstood features of the great tapestry which makes up Christian theology.”
—RobeRT L. P LummeR , Collin and Evelyn Aikman Professor of Biblical Studies, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
—T imoThy TennenT, President and Professor of World Christianity, Asbury Theological Seminary
Learn more about our 40 Questions series at 40Questions.net or by scanning the QR code!
FAITHFUL BOOKS ENGAGED WITH THE ACADEMY AND CULTURE www.kregel.com/academic