| PaleoJudaica.com A weblog on ancient Judaism and its context E-mail: paleojudaica-at-talktalk-dot-net ("-at-" = "@", "-dot-" = ".") |
|
Saturday, July 02, 2005 WHAT DOES "ISCARIOT" MEAN? More good Aramaic philology from Ed Cook and a good example of why Jastrow's Dictionary must be used with caution. posted by Jim Davila | 8:38 AM HOW DO YOU SAY "BLOG" IN LATIN? Find out here. posted by Jim Davila | 8:27 AM THE AFTERLIFE OF THE TEMPLE: Here's an interview with Simon Goldhill, author of The Temple of Jerusalem (Wonders of the World; Harvard University Press, 2005): Construction Site There are also some cool pictures of artistic representations of the Temple throughout the ages. I hope the last paragraph of the interview is wrong. posted by Jim Davila | 8:16 AM Friday, July 01, 2005 "HOW MANY CONSONANTS DID HEBREW HAVE? This is a trick question." -- Seth Sanders at Serving the Word. posted by Jim Davila | 2:47 PM HISTORY CARNIVAL XI is up at the Siris blog. Both PaleoJudaica and Ralph the Sacred River are featured. posted by Jim Davila | 12:32 PM THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECOND ENOCH SEMINAR have been published by Eerdmans: Enoch and Qumran Origins: New Light on a Forgotten Connectionposted by Jim Davila | 11:37 AM MESSIANIC WOES FOR THE LUBAVITCHERS: Lubavitch�s Open Wound At 770 For more on this movement see here and here. This passage from the article is interesting from a history of religions perspective: �I describe the rebbe as alive,� Rabbi Sokolovsky said in an interview. �The body of moshiach does not die, even if it appears to be so. A tzaddik [righteous person] can materialize himself in the world if he needs to. �Concealment does not mean that the rebbe has an invisible body,� he said. �It has to do with people�s readiness to see it. It�s people�s perception.� Messianic resurrection appearances in the twenty-first century. posted by Jim Davila | 11:01 AM NEPHILIM IN THE NEWS: Here's a review of The Fallen Ones a made-for-TV movies that was shown on the Sci-Fi Channel in May. Excerpt: The Fallen Ones The reviewer, Stephanie Star Smith, seems to think this one is a better-than-usual horror movie, "a notch or six above the formulaic." Plus, there are good explosions. Given that it doesn't pretend to be real, it gets more points in my book than this. posted by Jim Davila | 10:28 AM SOME GOOD NEWS on the Israeli/Palestinian archaeology front. The US Department of State has posted the following article: Palestinian, Israeli Scholarly Teams Preserve Shared Heritage Sites More please! posted by Jim Davila | 10:17 AM THE DISCOVERY OF THE CHESTER BEATTY PAPYRI: On the Textual Criticism list, Wieland Willker has posted a contemporary account of the discovery of these New Testament and Septuagint manuscripts in Egypt in the 1930s. posted by Jim Davila | 9:36 AM ELECTRONIC GREEK PHILO: Daniel Foster and Rick Brannan have e-mailed to alert me that Logos Software is offering the Greek text of Philo in a searchable electronic text. There's a special deal for pre-publication orders. Details here. The announcement begins: Imagine being able to ask questions of a first-century Hellenistic Jewish philosopher, a contemporary of Jesus and Paul who worked to understand Mosaic thought in light of Greek ideals. What kinds of questions would you ask to better understand the theology, interpretive strategies, and historical context of the biblical writers, who often wrestled with the same task?posted by Jim Davila | 9:26 AM Thursday, June 30, 2005 A "BIBLICAL THEME PARK" has just opened in Eilat. posted by Jim Davila | 10:15 AM MORE ON THE RUSSIAN "INVESTIGATION" of Jewish literature as incitement to religious hatred. This week's Forward has a different version of the story: After World Pressure, Russia Abandons Investigation Denounced as 'Blood Libel' My emphasis. I think there must be a mix-up here. The earlier articles said that the text in question was the Kitzar Shulhan Arukh, which is a nineteenth-century compendium of material from the Shulhan Arukh. The point remains the same, but someone is confused about which document was being accused. posted by Jim Davila | 9:26 AM ANOTHER SARNA OBITUARY, this one by his son, Jonathan, in the Forward: Biblical Scholar Nahum Sarna, 'Understanding Genesis' Authorposted by Jim Davila | 9:12 AM Wednesday, June 29, 2005 BLOG WATCH: Ed Cook critiques one of Maurice Casey's Aramaic retroversions over at Ralph, and at Mystical Politics Rebecca Lesses alerts us to some modern-day Jewish amulets written by a soferet -- a female Jewish scribe. Cool. posted by Jim Davila | 3:48 PM PHILIP DAVIES: "DO WE NEED BIBLICAL SCHOLARS?" An interesting essay on the Bible and Intepretation website. Personally, I think Philip is treating the problem too much as though it applies only to biblical studies. Educating university administrators and the public is something all academics have to do, and frequently this involves clearing up common misunderstandings, whatever the field. My friends who are physicists, biologists, classicists, economists, etc. have to do this too. Granted, biblical studies has its own set of problems, but so do other fields. And in general nonspecialists (usually including me!) have only the vaguest idea of what these specialists do and why it matters, and often what nonspecialists think that they (we) know about an academic field is full of misconceptions. This is the price we pay for the necessity of narrow specializations. Indeed, specialists within a field often have little understanding of what some other specialists in the same general field are doing. I think it's to the credit of the public (and university administrators) that they understand the value of supporting what we do, even if they don't understand exactly what it is. And, of course, that makes it all the more crucial that we explain the main points to them in nontechnical language that makes sense to them. In blogs, for instance. UPDATE: Helenann Hartley corrects a quotation in the essay. posted by Jim Davila | 12:46 PM CORRECTIONS TO NYT SARNA OBITUARY: A post on the H-JUDAIC list by Ellen Frankel, CEO and Editor-in-Chief of the Jewish Publication Society, includes the following: On June 25, The New York Times ran an obituary for Nahum Sarna that contained several errors. Both Jonathan Sarna and I alerted the writer, Wolfgang Saxon, that Dr. Sarna served as Chair of the JPS Committee for the Translation of Kethuvim, the Writings, not the Torah; and that the JPS book, JPS: The Americanization of Jewish Culture, was written by Jonathan, not Nahum Sarna. The Times has promised to run a correction.posted by Jim Davila | 9:18 AM Tuesday, June 28, 2005 THE KITZUR SHULHAN ARUKH -- INCITEMENT TO RELIGIOUS HATRED? Here's an example of what laws against incitement to religious hatred lead to: Russia examines Jewish religious texts The Kitzur Shulhan Arukh is a nineteenth-century compendium from the centrally important sixteenth-century law code the Shulhan Arukh. I've not read it, but evidently it has highly stringent tendencies and is not everyone's cup of tea. But attempting to ban it is blatant anti-Semitism. This is the sort of mess we could end up in here in Britain if the law against inciting religious hatred is passed. UPDATE: Ha'aretz sums the story up: "A dark reminder of the Dark Ages." UPDATE (29 June): Apparently the investigation has been dropped. This time. But the fact that there had to be an investigation at all -- the fact that a ridiculous and openly anti-Semitic charge like this was taken that seriously -- shows why this sort of law should never be on the books. Russian prosecutors drop investigation into ancient Jewish textposted by Jim Davila | 9:44 AM Monday, June 27, 2005 SBL BLOGGING: Jeffery Hodges and Tim Bulkeley are in Singapore, blogging the International Society of Biblical Literature conference. Tim has discovered my principle that "a paper handout doesn't crash and have to be rebooted just as you're supposed to be starting your presentation." Remember, PowerPoint is evil! I hope they get to see those Dead Sea Scrolls at the Vatican exhibit (see immediately preceding post). UPDATE (28 June): Mark Cheesman is there too and is posting on Deinde (as noted by Michael Pahl). posted by Jim Davila | 8:45 PM DEAD SEA SCROLLS IN SINGAPORE UPDATE: Reader Coleman Yee e-mails: I just came back from the museum exhibition and am able to confirm that they do have the 2 tiny DSS fragments. The info in the g-Megillot list is more or less accurate, except that the first fragment is not actually from Daniel, but the Hebrew word found in the fragment (described in g-Megillot) can only be found in Daniel 11:36. According to the exhibition catalog, "it is possible to imagine that the fragment belongs to a non-biblical book..." Interesting. Now the question is, how is the Vatican connected with the fragments? posted by Jim Davila | 2:20 PM ARMENIAN LANGUAGE RESOURCES: Rick Brannan has the low-down over at Ricoblog. Ancient Armenian was an important translation language not only for the New Testament, but also for Philo of Alexandria (some of whose works survive only in Armenian) and for some Old Testament pseudepigrapha. Bet you didn't know that there was an Armeniapedia. posted by Jim Davila | 10:35 AM ON INCITING RELIGIOUS HATRED: The bill to make illegal the incitement of religious hatred in Britain passed its second reading in the House of Commons last Tuesday. It now "goes to committee" for further review and then to the House of Lords. You can read the British Government's case for it here. This is what the bill is about, according to the Goverment website FAQ: * The Government is extending protection to prevent hatred being stirred up against people targeted because of their religious beliefs, or lack of religious beliefs, as well as people targeted because of their race. Here are a couple of passages from this FAQ that should be underlined: In keeping with similar legislation, the proposals do not define the meaning of religion. �Religious hatred� is defined as �hatred against a group of people defined by their religious beliefs or lack of religious belief�. Explanatory notes have been published which provide a non-exhaustive list of widely practised religions and clearly explain that the protection also covers people identified with a particular branch of a religion. They also stress that the protection of the offence covers Atheists, Humanists and Agnostics. When the circumstances are unclear, the courts will decide whether a particular group of people is protected, in the wider context of the criminal behaviour being considered. If the courts ruled that a new religious movement qualified as a religion for the purposes of the new offence, that would not prevent criticism of the practices of that movement. And this: The proposed and existing offences both carry a high threshold in order to protect freedom of speech. Words, behaviour or material used must be threatening, abusive or insulting and must either be intended to or likely to stir up hatred. The hatred must be aimed at people who are members of that group, not ideologies. Hatred is a strong term; which goes beyond ridicule, prejudice, dislike, contempt, anger or offence. A further safeguard in the legislation is that a person who does not intend to stir up hatred is not guilty of an offence if they did not know that their words, behaviour, written material, recording or programmes were threatening, abusive or insulting. Furthermore the offences do not apply to anything that takes place in one�s own home. All prosecutions require the consent of the Attorney General, which will prevent the offences being misused through private prosecutions. We believe the wording of the offences, the public interest test applied by the CPS, and the veto of the Attorney General are sufficient to safeguard freedom of speech. There are some points about this proposed law which I would like to make. I'm not the first to make any of them, but they are worth belaboring. First, there is no need for it. There are already laws that protect people from religious persecution (i.e., violence against one's person or property, or threats of or incitement of others to violence). People do not need to be protected from having someone hate their religion or express that hatred in words that fall short of threat of or incitement to violence. Sticks and stones, etc. Second, even if this law results in only a few prosecutions (and I'll believe that when I see it), it will have a chilling effect on free speech. People will censor themselves when talking about religion, which is not good. It will push actual religious hatred underground without diminishing it, and at the same time will stifle legitimate debate about religious issues. In both cases, problems that might benefit from open discussion will fester rather than having a chance to come to any resolution. Third, ultimately the legislation assumes, indeed requires, the goodwill of the government. The term "religion" is explicitly not defined, and probably couldn't be defined for a purpose like this. That means there's never any way to be quite sure what the law is about. The Attorney General is given tremendous latitude, and therefore tremendous power, to interpret this law, since no one actually knows what it means. It may be that this power will be used wisely and justly. But it may not be, even in the short term. Once the government has the power, it can do whatever it wants with it, whatever promises it may have made. It is not unheard-of for politicians to break their promises. And in the long run, there is serious danger that mission creep and growing distance from its original context will lead to this law being misused to criminalize legitimate free speech. There is a larger problem here that should be mentioned: the danger of "positive rights." The point of the Bill of Rights of the American Constitution is to lay out a broad range of areas in which the government does not have the right to interfere in the life of the individual. These are "negative rights" and they are the foundation of any free society. Positive rights, that is rights to particular things which the government has to enforce, are necessary in some cases (see above for examples), but are carry serious risks of abuse and need to be strictly circumscribed. The "rights" to, say, education or "access to placement services" or -- the issue in question here -- freedom from hatred being directed toward your religion by other citizens (again, short of violence or threat of/incitement to violence) increase the power of government to interfere with individuals and the last in particular increases it in an open-ended, unpredictable and uncontrollable way. The preoccupation with positive rights is a central failing of EU legislation and is one of the problems with the (now hopefully defunct) European Constitution and one of the reasons it was the size of a telephone directory. Obviously, this legislation against inciting religious hatred could have profound implications for academics who specialize in religion and for bloggers who write about it. If the law passes, it can scarcely be doubted that there will be people who test it by trying to bring charges against others even on specious or frivolous grounds, and it is scant comfort that the Sword of Damocles will be restrained only by the thread of the Attorney General's goodwill and good sense. This is no way to govern. We can only hope that the mounting backlash against this bill will stop it before it is made into law. UPDATE: Greetings Daily Dish readers. While you're here, please have a look at the "Memorable PaleoJudaica Posts" link and my recent article "Assimilated to the Blogosphere: Blogging Ancient Judaism." UPDATE (28 June): Here's a concrete example of what such laws lead to. UPDATE (3 July): Welcome also to readers of Britblog #20. posted by Jim Davila | 9:42 AM Sunday, June 26, 2005 THE SUDOKU CRAZE leads the Jerusalem Post ("Crazy about numbers") into an excursus on numbers in Judaism, especially gematria. The Jewish people are no newcomers to numbers, or even to doing mental gymnastics with them. We find numbers in ancient Jewish sources: Starting off in the Bible with the days of the creation, there are the dimensions of Noah's Ark, the numbers of its inhabitants, and so forth (or fifth). Indeed, a whole book of the Pentateuch is entitled "Numbers" in English, because of the census of the Jewish people in the desert. Numbers featuring in the Bible's text range from one to 100 million (Daniel 7:10). Examples follow. The craze (Sudoku, not gematria) has hit Britain too. My wife and son are working on Sudoku puzzles here even as I write. posted by Jim Davila | 8:47 AM THOUGHTS ON ANTIQUITY is a newish blog by Chris Weimer, a student at the University of Memphis, Tennessee. The blurb for the blog is as follows: This weblog focuses on Ancient Cultures of the world, from the Ancient Mesopotamian world to Egyptian pyramids, from Greek mysteries to Roman commissatio, from China to the Aztec, all things in antiquity. See also his website called Neonostalgia. posted by Jim Davila | 8:38 AM |
|
|||