St. Andrews Symposium for Biblical and Early Christian Studies

October 3, 2015

I received an email asking me if I could call people’s attention to the St. Andrews Symposium for Biblical and Early Christian Studies on June 6-8, 2016 and addressing the topic Son of God: Divine Sonship in Jewish and Christian Antiquity. This looks like an excellent conference and will cover what divine sonship means in the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, Pseudepigrapha, New Testament, Rabbinic Judaism, and early Christianity. It has lined up a list of top scholars including Menahem Kister (Hebrew University), Reinhard Kratz (Göttingen), Jan Joosten (University of Oxford), Philip Alexander (University of Manchester), George Brooke (University of Manchester), Richard Bauckham (University of Cambridge), Michael Peppard (Fordham University), Matthew Novenson (University of Edinburgh), N. T. Wright (University of St Andrews), William Tooman (University of St Andrews), Madhavi Nevader (University of St Andrews), and David Moffitt (University of St Andrews).

Moreover, they have issued a call for papers from faculty and postgraduates on the following related subjects: ancient Israelite religion, angelology or heavenly mediators, royal ideologies, political ideologies in the Second Temple period, corporate sonship, messianism, Christology, ancient scriptural interpretation, early mystical traditions, and other related topics. If you are interested, send an abstract of around 250 words to (Paul Sloan, PhD candidate) to be considered by February 15, 2016. See for more information. Registration for the symposium will be open on December 1, 2015 and will close on May 1, 2016. You will be able to register at and there is an early-bird fee at £50 until March 1, 2016 (£75 thereafter).

St. Andrews is a beautiful town and I enjoyed the chance to visit when they hosted an international SBL. I would love to attend the conference, or even submit a proposal on this topic, though my schedule is a little uncertain as I am currently an adjunct lecturer in Canada. However, I have written some thoughts on the term “Son of God” for a lay Christian audience at the blog Bible Study and the Christian Life and I think Mark has Jewish messianism and royal ideologies in the background when affirming Jesus as God’s son. Other New Testament authors may develop divine sonship in other directions, such as portraying the pre-existent sending of the Son of God from heaven to earth.

Introducing New Testament Textual Criticism

September 30, 2015

This is part of my handouts for undergraduate students

Introducing New Testament Textual Criticism

Textual Criticism: critically examining and comparing the New Testament manuscript witnesses to try to determine the earliest reading of a text on the basis of external and internal evidence.

External Evidence:

  • None of the original manuscripts or “autographs” survived.
  • There are over 5800 Greek manuscripts that are extant and catalogued. The oldest Greek fragmentary texts date from the second and third centuries CE, while the first complete copies of the New Testament are in the Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus in the fourth century.
  • The NT texts were copied on papyrus or vellum and bound together in codices (note: the Christian use of the codex to preserve their sacred texts, as opposed to the general use of scrolls for refined literary works, paved the way for the book format). The earliest Greek manuscripts are on papyri, followed by “uncials” (a type of Greek script in all capitals and written on parchment), “minuscules” (a type of Greek cursive script), and “lectionaries” (church readings for catechetical purposes). There is further evidence in the “versions” translated in different language and in Christian citations of NT writings in the Patristic period.
  • Hypothetical Textual Families: the Alexandrian, Western, Byzantine, and Caesarean Text Types.

Internal Evidence

  • Dittography (dittos and graphos): a scribe unintentionally repeats a word/words twice.
  • Haplography (haplos and graphos) a scribe unintentionally skipped over a word/words.
  • Homoioteleuton (homoi and telos): a scribe unintentionally skips over a word/words due to similar endings.
  • Homoioarcton (homoi and archē): a scribe unintentionally skips from a word/words to other words on the page that begin in a similar way.
  • Other accidental errors: spelling mistakes, confusing two similar sounding words, confusing similar looking letters, accidentally substituting a closely related synonym for the original word, etc.
  • Shorter reading (lectio brevior): scribes tended to expand upon passages, so the shorter reading is to be preferred.
  • More difficult reading (lectio difficilior): scribes tended to eliminate inconsistencies (i.e. harmonization) and correct perceived grammatical, stylistic, historical, or theological problems than create further problems, so the more difficult reading is to be preferred.


Mark 1:1 “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ [Son of God]”

  • The longer reading is supported by the majority of the textual and Patristic witnesses, including texts from all four traditional textual families, though there are some important and diverse early witnesses for the shorter reading as well.
  • The Greek reads archē tou euangeliou iēsou christou huiou theou. You may notice all of the “genitive” ou endings, so it is possible that the last two words (huiou theou or “Son of God”) were accidentally omitted through the phenomenon of homoioteleuton. That such a mistake could happen may be evident in the correction of Codex Sinaiticus which initially omitted the last two words.
  • It is possible that a scribe was not satisfied that Mark introduced Jesus solely as the “Christ” and chose to elaborate that Jesus is also the “Son of God”, perhaps even to counter rival adoptionist interpretations of Mark’s baptism narrative.
  • Since Jesus’ divine sonship is central to Mark’s understanding of Jesus’ identity (see Mark 1:11; 3:11; 5:7; 9:7; 12:6; 15:39), the shorter reading may be the more difficult one.
  • Tommy Wasserman has created an online handout that summarizes the evidence in greater detail and leans towards the longer reading. Added note: Tommy Wasserman has written a larger article on this entitled “The Son of God was in the Beginning (Mark 1:1)” The Journal of Theological Studies 62 (2011): 20-50.

The Petrine Epistles

September 9, 2015

This post is part of my classroom lectures

First Peter


  • “To the exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia” (1 Peter 1:1)
  • Should the term “exiles” be taken to mean that the Christian audience is metaphorically depicted as strangers on earth whose true homeland is in heaven or as literally marginalized and socially displaced persons (cf. John Elliott)?

Author: the Apostle Peter or a later follower writing in his name

  • “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:1)
  • Could a Galilean fisherman who was judged to be “without letters” (ἀγράμματος) (Acts 4:13) attain the literacy skills to write in polished Greek, demonstrate fine rhetorical skills, and extensively engage with the Septuagint? This leads to larger questions about the extent of Hellenization and the use of the Greek language in Galilee, the literacy rates in the ancient world and first-century Palestine specifically, and the question of whether Acts 4:13 implies that Peter was illiterate or merely an untrained religious layperson (ἰδιώτης).
  • Some scholars appeal to the use of a scribal assistant in composing the letter and 1 Peter 5:12 notes that διὰ Σιλουανοῦ . . . ἔγραφα (through Silvanus . . . I wrote). However, this may be an idiomatic expression to identify Silvanus as the mail-carrier who delivers the letter (cf. Ignatius’s Epistles to the Smyrnaeans 12:1, Philadelphians 11:1, Magnesians 15:1, and Romans 10:1).
  • The use of his Greek nickname “Peter” (Πέτρος) rather than the Aramaic Cephas, along with the lack of personal memories of his time with Jesus or discussion about the debates over Torah-observance (cf. Galatians 2:9-14), is striking.
  • The arguments for a later date count against Petrine authorship. However, this may be mitigated if one does not accept the tradition of Peter’s martyrdom in Rome around 64 CE as part of Nero’s persecution of Roman Christians as a scapegoat to blame for the fire in Rome (John 21:18-19 [?]; 2 Peter 1:14 [?]; 1 Clement 5:4 [?]; Ignatius, Epistle to the Romans 4.2-3; Dionysius of Corinth in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.26; Acts of Peter 36-39; Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.3).

Date: between 60-110 CE based on the decisions on the points below

  • 1 Peter is referenced in 2 Peter 3:1, Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians (1:3; 2:1; 8:1), and the lost text of Papias of Hierapolis (in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 2.15.2; 3.39.17).
  • The Christian movement has spread throughout Asia Minor (cf. 1 Peter 1:1) and the label “Christian” (Χριστιανός) is now applied to the group in distinction from the Jews (4:16; cf. Acts 11:26; 26:28).
  • The coded reference to “Babylon” (=Rome) may presuppose the Roman destruction of the temple in 70 CE. Alternatively, “Babylon” may be part of the metaphorical imagery of living in exile.
  • Past commentators correlated the “fiery trial” that the Christians were undergoing with the correspondence between the governor of Bithynia-Pontus Pliny the Younger and the Roman emperor Trajan on how to deal with the Christians. More recently, scholars have pointed out that the persecution in 2 Peter largely involves local harassment and social ostracism rather than official state suppression.
  • 1 Peter appears to have access to a variety of sources including creeds, sayings of Jesus, extended scriptural exegesis (cf. Isaiah 53), parenetic material (similarities with Paul and James), and possibly some Pauline Epistles (e.g., Romans [?]) (cf. David G. Horrell).


  • To encourage Christians in the midst of their persecution and loss of social ties for their abandonment of their traditional gods and cultic practices, since they are following in Christ’s example of suffering.
  • To reinforce a new collective identity as a “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, [and] God’s own people” (1 Peter 2:9).
  • To implore Christians to be otherwise law-abiding citizens who honor the emperor and obey household codes.
  • To model a united front against opposition, the epistle itself harmonizes diverse streams of tradition.

Second Peter


  • Uncertain. This “second letter” seems to be familiar with the earlier epistle in Peter’s name, unless this is a reference to some other unknown Petrine writing (cf. 2 Pet 3:1), and may imply that the audience is the same as 1 Peter.

Author: Peter or a later follower writing in his name

  • “Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:1). The use of the Semitic “Simeon” is paralleled in Acts 15:14 where it is places on the lips of Jesus’ brother and the Jerusalem leader James.
  • 2 Peter faces the same questions about whether the author’s facility in Greek and rhetorical skill matches the Galilean preacher Cephas. Further, the grandiose “Asiatic” Greek style and the allusions to Old Testament narratives rather than direct citations is quite different from the style of the author of 1 Peter. The Church Fathers recognized the different style of the two epistles, leading to debates over the apostolic authorship and canonicity of 2 Peter (cf. Ecclesiastical History 3.25.3).
  • 2 Peter 1:12-15 has elements that characterize other fictional “testaments” or farewell speeches including the protagonist’s predictions of his/her death and of what the future holds along with other ethical exhortations to the survivors (cf. Richard Bauckham). For example, check out The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs.

Date: between 64-150 CE based on scholarly decisions on these points.

  • 2 Peter 1:14 presupposes Peter’s death unless it is a prediction of the author. There also seems to be a tense shift in which the implied author’s predictions of future false teachers becomes a present reality for the community.
  • The “fathers” have died (2 Peter 3:4); either the past Christian generation or the patriarchs in Genesis are the referent.
  • 2 Peter 2:1:22 extensively parallels Jude 3-19 in wording and order, though it adds a few examples (Noah, Lot) and drops others (1 Enoch, Assumption of Moses). Although a few scholars have argued that Jude borrowed from 2 Peter or that both writings have a common source, the majority view is that the epistle of Jude has been almost totally incorporated into the later epistle of 2 Peter.
  • 2 Peter 3:1 shows that the letter must date after 1 Peter and depends on the dating of the latter.
  • Certain doubters criticize the expectation of Christ’s imminent “coming” (παρουσία) (2 Peter 3:4) and the author responds that a thousand years is like a day to the Lord (3:8), so the reader must not give up hope for the second coming even if it seems to have been delayed.
  • 2 Peter 3:15-16 appears to know a collection of Pauline Epistles that have been placed on par with the other “scriptures.”
  • 2 Peter may have access to the Gospel of Matthew (cf. 2 Peter 1:17-18; 2:20), while the references to the other canonical Gospels are more debatable [note: I have a chapter in a edited Mohr Siebeck volume on the relationship of 2 Peter to the Synoptic Gospels forthcoming].
  • The scholar Origen of Alexandria (ca. 185-254) offers the earliest explicit reference to 2 Peter (Homilies on Joshua 7.1; Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.25.8), though other commentators argue for allusions to 2 Peter in earlier church authorities. The literary relationship of 2 Peter with the Apocalypse of Peter and the Acts of Peter is also debated.


  • The text wishes to defend the apostolically “Petrine” witness that Jesus will return against certain antinomian “scoffers” who both deny that Christ will return in the final judgment and are accused by the author of using this as an excuse to lead immoral lives.
  • The text combines Jewish apocalyptic with a Hellenistic ethos from its list of virtues that enable the reader to take on the “divine nature” or immortality (2 Peter 1:3-11) to its possible contacts with Epicurean philosophy (cf. Jerome H. Neyrey).

Matthew Ferguson Reviews my Book

September 3, 2015

Matthew Ferguson has written a thorough and fair review of my book The Gospel on the Margins: The Reception of Mark in the Second Century over at his blog Κέλσος (his blog’s name alludes to a philosopher who composed one of the earliest learned critiques of Christianity, but I do not think my work has to be controversial in that I am contesting second century traditions about the evangelist rather than the main content of the Gospel itself). I left a few clarifications in his comments section, but I am pleased with how well he has summarized and engaged with the heart of my argument. I also appreciate his feedback since his PhD research interests are in the authorship of the Gospels from the perspective of a classicist. Check out his review and leave some feedback over at his blog if you are interested.

The Criteria for the New Testament Canon

August 16, 2015

This is part of my classroom lectures handouts

Key Terms

  • Biblia (βιβλία): the plural Greek term for “books”
  • kanōn (κανών)/canon: a reed used as a measuring standard; the criterion used to make a judgment (“rule of faith”); a list of authoritative or canonical writings

Quotations of the New Testament as Scripture

  • References/Allusions to the Gospels or Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers, but it is difficult to tell whether they cited NT texts or oral traditions.
  • … but as the Lord commanded in his Gospel, pray thus: “Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy Name, thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, as in Heaven so also upon earth; give us to-day our daily bread, and forgive us our debt as we forgive our debtors, and lead us not into trial, but deliver us from the Evil One, for thine is the power and the glory for ever.” (Didache 8:2)
  • …as it is said in these Scriptures, “Be ye angry and sin not,” and “Let not the sun go down upon your wrath [Ephesians 4:26].” (Polycarp, Philippians 12.1)
  • So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. (2 Peter 3:15-16)
  • …on the day called Sunday… the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read…. (Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 67.3)

Competing Christian Movements

  • “Gnostics”: an ignorant or evil Demiurge (craftsman) created matter rather than the highest divine being in the divine realm (pleroma). Salvation is liberation from the material world through knowledge (gnōsis) of one’s divine origins. The Gnostics composed texts or decoded the New Testament ones to expound upon their pleromatic myth and interpret Jesus as a revealer of esoteric teachings. Some famous Gnostic teachers include Basilides and Valentinus.
  • Marcion of Sinope: a rich ship owner who believed that the loving Father of Jesus was a different god from the Old Testament god of justice (the Demiurge). He accepted only 10 letters of Paul and a single Gospel most akin to Luke’s Gospel as authoritative and composed a text entitled Antithesis. According to tradition, he was excommunicated from the Roman church in 144 CE.
  • Some Jewish Christians (the “Ebionites”, from ebionim or poor ones) believed in Jesus as the Messiah, though they denied Jesus’ divinity and some rejected reports of his Virgin birth, and remained Torah observant. They preferred the Gospel of Matthew (or a “Gospel according to the Hebrews”) and despised the apostle Paul as an apostate from the Law. Epiphanius and Jerome describe another group of Torah observant Jewish Christians (“Nazoraeans”) whose Christology was more aligned with the larger fourth century Church.

Apocryphal (“Hidden”) Gospels

  • The Gospel of the Hebrews/Ebionites/Nazoraeans, The Gospel of the Egyptians, Papyrus Egerton 2 Unknown Gospel, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Philip, the Gospel of Truth, the Gospel of the Saviour, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Infancy Gospel of James, the Epistle of the Apostles, the Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, the Second Treatise of the Great Seth, the Secret Gospel of Mark (cf. Bart D. Ehrman, Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make it into the New Testament [Oxford University Press, 2003], v).
  • These Gospels may be harmonies of the NT Gospels, expansions on the events of Jesus’ birth/childhood/death, or revelatory discourses that depict Jesus as a gnostic revealer figure.
  • The Gospel of Thomas Movie
  • Cartoons of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas

Irenaeus of Lyons on the Four Gospel Canon

“For the Ebionites, who use Matthew’s Gospel only, are confuted out of this very same, making false suppositions with regard to the Lord. But Marcion, mutilating that according to Luke, is proved to be a blasphemer of the only existing God, from those [passages] which he still retains. Those, again, who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, preferring the Gospel by Mark, if they read it with a love of truth, may have their errors rectified. Those, moreover, who follow Valentinus, making copious use of that according to John, to illustrate their conjunctions, shall be proved to be totally in error by means of this very Gospel… It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the Church is scattered throughout all the world, and the “pillar and ground” of the Church is the Gospel and the spirit of life; it is fitting that she should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh.” (Against Heresies 3.11.7-8)

Criteria for Canonicity

  • Council of Carthage (397 AD)
  • Affirmed the current NT Canon of Scripture
  • Criteria for Canonicity
    • Apostolic Origin (written by one of Jesus’ chosen apostles or a close associate of an apostle)
    • Catholicity (i.e. widespread Christian usage of the text)
    • Antiquity (i.e., long history of use by ancient authorities)
    • The Rule of Faith (theological content)

Canon Lists

Muratorian (late 2nd cent) Eusebius (ca. 265-340) Athanasius (ca. 298-373)





1/2 Corinthians





1/2 Thessalonians




1 & 2 Timothy


1 & 2 John

Apocalypse of John

Apocalypse of Peter

Wisdom of Solomon

Shepherd of Hermas



Most of NT



Hebrews [?]



2 Peter

2 & 3 John

Revelation [?]

Hebrew Gospel






Acts of Paul

Apoc. Peter





Introducing the Book of Revelation and Apocalyptic Literature

August 9, 2015

This is part of my classroom lectures handouts

The impact of apocalyptic thought in popular culture: Left Behind Series

  • The origins of the pre-tribulation rapture in the dispensationalist system of John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) and popularized by the Scofield Reference Bible. A scholarly form of progressive dispensationalism is best represented at Dallas Theological Seminary. The rapture doctrine is a corollary of the theological distinction between two covenant peoples, Israel and the church, and the belief that the church must be raptured so that all the biblical promises pertaining to Israel can be “literally” fulfilled in an earthly millennial kingdom.
  • Check out Matthew 24:40-41/Luke 17:34-35, 1 Thessalonians 4:17, and Revelation 3:10 in their literary context.
  • Is dispensationalism an adequate hermeneutical lens for interpreting ancient apocalyptic literature? What might be the social and ideological/theological implications of a dispensationalist worldview?

What is an “apocalypse”?

  • apokalypsis (ἀποκάλυψις): uncovering, unveiling, revelation
  • The revelation of Jesus Christ [is Jesus doing the revealing or is he the content of the revelation?], which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place” (Revelation 1:1).
  • Distinct from Eschatology: from the Greek term eschatos (ἔσχατος, last, final) and having to do with the end of the present age.
  • “‘Apocalypse’ is a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world.” (SBL’s ‘Apocalypse Group’ published by J. J. Collins, Semeia 14 [1979], 9).

Characteristics of the Apocalyptic Genre (see further Aune, “Understanding Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic”)

  • Form: a record of visionary experiences often mediated by a heavenly messenger.
  • Content: visionary tours of the heavens/hell or eschatological prophecies about the end of the age. It is also often characterized by cosmic dualism in which the current age is ruled by hostile spiritual forces and, instead of hoping for a resolution through ordinary historical processes, expects a dramatic divine intervention and transformation of the social order as the only solution to the author’s plight.
  • Function: to encourage a minority group under (or perceived to be under) oppression and implore the audience to modify their behaviour.
  • Authorship: often ascribed to ancient authorities pseudonymously (Enoch, Abraham, Daniel, Ezra, Peter, Paul), with the exception of Revelation and the Shepherd of Hermas. This genre of writings seems to have been popular between 200 BCE and 200 CE.
  • Example: The apocalyptic section of Daniel 6-12 seem to be composed around 167-164 BCE, though the visionary is set in the Babylonian and Persian periods. Antiochus IV “Epiphanies” (manifest) came to power in 175 BCE and enforced an aggressive program of Hellenization (i.e. spreading Greek culture), transforming Jerusalem into a Hellenistic city (“Antiochia”) with a gymnasium. He forbade Jews from practicing their native customs (cf. 2 Maccabees 7) and attempted to profane the temple by offering a pig on the altar, which was prevented by the priest Matthias. Matthias’s sons, led by Judas “Maccabeus” (hammerer), revolted. Daniel 7 envisions four beasts (=Babylon, Persia, Media, Greece), with the last beast having 10 horns (=rulers) and a particularly arrogant horn (=Antiochus IV), and the eschatological vindication of a human-like figure (=the saints of Israel or their angelic representative).

The Book of Revelation: Introduction

  • “John”, a seer who was exiled to the island of Patmos for his testimony about Jesus (Rev 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). There was debate in the early church about whether the author was the apostle John (cf. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.1-7; 7.25.1-16), but the book seems to refer to the twelve apostles as figures of the past (Rev 21:14).
  • There are some parallels with the Gospel of John (“Lamb”, “Word of God”), but the author’s facility in Greek is very different.
  • “Moreover also among us a man named John, one of the apostles of Christ, prophesied in a revelation made to him that those who have believed on our Christ will spend a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that hereafter the general and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all will likewise take place.” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue 81.4)„
  • “For that [vision] was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.30.3). Other scholars date it earlier to the reign of Nero or propose that there might have been an earlier or later edition of the book.
  • Directed towards seven historic churches in Asia Minor (Rev 2-3)

Guidelines for interpretation:

  • The book had to effectively communicate to its earliest audience or else it would not have been preserved.
  • Apocalyptic texts use coded symbolism to speak about political powers in the author’s time. For instance, the condemnation of “Babylon” in Revelation 17-18 (cf. 1 Peter 5:13) seems to be a cipher for Rome as the city of seven hills (cf. Rev 17:9). The beast with a mortal wound in Revelation 13 may be an allusion to the Nero redivivus myth and the number of 666 may stand for Nerōn Kaisar (cf. Ian Boxall, “Gematria“)

Interpretive schemes:

  • Preterist: most/all of the events in the book took place in the first century CE.
  • Historicist: Revelation covers events throughout Christian history.
  • Futurist: Revelation foretells a yet future eschatological scenario.
  • Idealist: Revelation symbolically represents the battle of good versus evil in a way that is timelessly true.

Interpretations of the millennium (Revelation 20:1-6):

  • Pre-Millennialism: there will be a future 1000 year rule of Christ on earth before the final judgment. Whether the Church or Israel will be the primary participants in the millennial kingdom is the major difference between the historic and dispensationalist view.
  • Post-Millennialism: there will be a future time when Christians will experience unprecedented success in their missionary expansion and Christianization of the world.
  • Amillenialism: the prefix “a” stands for “no” and this view interprets the millennium as symbolic of the church age as the devil has been bound due to what Christ has already accomplished.

„„Further resources:

Classroom Lectures

August 5, 2015

As an update on my current status, I have the privilege of teaching three courses this Fall as an adjunct lecturer at The King’s University in Edmonton. Two of the courses are an introduction to the whole Bible, focusing on its main contents and different scholarly methods of analysis, and an advanced course on the problem of evil in various biblical texts. I have posted some of my introductory materials for a New Testament course under “student resources“, but I want to go back and revise some of my notes as well as add some new ones. Feel free to use them if they are of benefit to you as you explore the world of the New Testament and Christian origins.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 129 other followers