(In)stability of Oral Tradition

I'm currently reading for my comprehensive exams that will take place in the Fall, and that means wading through a ton of books having to do with topics ranging from historical Jesus research, to Pauline theology, to the Synoptic Problem, critical introductions, NTT, history of interpretation, etc. etc. etc. Right now I'm working through a couple different books and one of them is Bart Ehrman's The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (5th ed.) and in chapter 5, he discusses the issue of the Jesus tradition (particularly oral) and writes the following (p. 70):

"No one knows for certain when Jesus died, but scholars agree that it was sometime around 30 C.E. In addition, most historians think that Mark was the first of our Gospels to be written, sometime between the mid-60s to early 70s. Matthew and Luke were probably produced some ten or fifteen years later, perhaps around 80 or 85. John was written perhaps ten years after that, in 90 or 95. These are necessarily rough estimates, but almost all scholars agree within a few years. Perhaps the most striking thing about these dates for the historian is the long interval between Jesus' death and the earliest accounts of his life. Our first written narratives of Jesus (i.e., the Gospels) appear to date from thirty-five to sixty-five years after the fact. This may not seem like a long time, but think about it in modern terms. For the shortest interval (the gap between Jesus and Mark), this would be like having the first written record of Richard Nixon's presidency appear today."

Now, most of this is fairly bland and nothing surprising from a critical standpoint, but what got me scratching my head are the last two sentences of this quotation. Why should I think about this in modern terms? Is the modern sociocultural milieu even remotely close to that of first century Palestine? Was Richard Nixon ever venerated as a miracle worker, exemplary moral figure, much less a divine being (and does that make a difference in how the memory of a person is transmitted?) I take his point that it is not as if some news reporter followed Jesus around and wrote everything down the minute he said them, but to use "modern terms" to highlight the apparent gap between the event and the written narrative seems rather unconvincing. I can't say I have read a whole lot on 'orality' in antiquity, but if my memory serves me right, plenty of scholars have already shown that our current paradigm in which events, memory, knowledge, etc. are passed down and how that occurred in the past are certainly not the same. I don't know if Ehrman is right or wrong entirely on this point, though he could nuance his argument without appealing to 'modern' sensitivities. Yes 5 years in modern terms is certainly a lot; these days not many can even recall with great clarity about events/people from 15 years ago (much less 50 years), but what I am wondering is if that was exactly the same in antiquity.

QOTD: Samuel Sandmel

"It can be set down as something destined to endure eternally that the usual Christian commentators will disparage Judaism and its supposed legalism, and Jewish scholars will reply, usually fruitlessly. I have addressed myself to this topic in three or four essays, and do not intend to pursue this any more beyond this one time, preferring to conclude that with those Christians who persist in deluding themselves about Jewish legalism, no academic communication is possible. The issue is not to bring these interpreters to love Judaism, but only to bring them to a responsible, elementary comprehension of it."

- Samuel Sandmel, The First Christian Century in Judaism and Christianity: Certainties and Uncertainties, 98n10

Harvard Commencement Speeches: Politics and Comedy

It's that time of the year when commencement speeches are given all over the nation, and two given at Harvard recently came to my attention. One by Michael Bloomberg and the other by Mindy Kaling for Harvard Universty and Harvard Law School respectively.

One quote from each person that sum up their agenda for the day, one a platform for politics and another a platform for humor.

Bloomberg: "Great universities must not become predictably partisan. And a liberal arts education must not be an education in the art of liberalism."

Kaling: "You will help a cable company acquire a telecom company. You will defend BP from birds. You will spend hours arguing that the well water was contaminated before the fracking occurred. One of you will sort out the details of my prenup."

One stage finished, new stage begins

Happy to say I've finished the coursework phase of my PhD program and now reading for preliminary exams. Hope you will all enjoy a productive summer!

Interview (Markschies @ Marginalia)

I recently read through Jens Schröter's From Jesus to the New Testament and provided a book review for a seminar here at Emory. It seems to me that German scholarship is once again coming up more and more on the horizon of Anglophone speakers, and Schröter is just one of the many German scholars that I think should be read by American students of NT. 

Another figure who would be considered in this group is Christoph Markschies, professor (and previous president[!]) of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and I have heard some of my teachers here at Emory speak very very highly of him (and that does not happen often). His CV is ridiculous and he works quite broadly it seems like beyond maybe what is traditional "NT studies" (though I don't think this is a knock on his scholarship, more a positive thing).

Anyway, I saw that Marginalia conducted an interview with him and it's really interesting to hear him speak about issues in scholarship.

Check it out here.

EDIT: I suppose I should make it clear that Markschies is not actually a "NT scholar" in the traditional sense, his Dr. theol and Habilitation were earned by working in Gnosticism and Arianism respectively. However, as you can tell from the audio, he proposes a more broader expansion of one's area of research and maybe a softening of the walls between "NT studies" and "Patristics"/"Ancient Christianity". A very learned man but seems to be very friendly and interesting to listen to.

QOTD: Molly Worthen

As my final semester of coursework is winding down (finally!) this week, I had some more time to resume other random readings that interested me. I've been slowly reading through books on Roosevelt/Taft, the news, economics, and American religious history. The last book on this list is a book by an Americanist at UNC (Worthen) who recently published that book with the title Apostles of Reason: The Crisis of Authority in American Evangelicalism. I'm not that far into the book, but I'll just leave you with a quick quote from her introduction:

"The evolution of the evangelical community—and whether, and why, it might be called anti-intellectual—is best traced through the lives of elites: the preachers, teachers, writers, and institution-builders in the business of creation disseminating ideas. When critics describe evangelicalism as anti-intellectual, usually they are not blaming ordinary laypeople. A casual glance at the latest Amazon.com best-seller list, chock full of celebrity memoirs and puppy novels, or the amateur talent shows and dating competitions that top the television ratings, demonstrates that when it comes to intellectual shallowness evangelicals have no advantage on the rest of America."

Douglas Campbell (new book + video)

One of my former teachers at Duke Divinity School, Douglas Campbell, is coming out with a new book titled Framing Paul: An Epistolary Account (see here). He's been teaching a course on the life of Paul at Duke for a few years now I think and I remember him describing to us about working on a book about the chronology of Paul's letters, and this seems to be the working out of that project. His Deliverance of God certainly made some waves in Pauline scholarship and I have no doubt that this book will also do the same on discussions about Paul and his letters. He is certainly a provocative thinker and you can love him or hate him but I don't think you can ignore his work. The book should be out late this year, but for now, check out this video: