Month: September 2020

This is not my first time reading the creations stories. I have read them for my FYS, my religion course I took last semester, and now this course. However, I still find them interesting to read every time due to the ability to dissect them so much.

A difference I noticed in the creation stories that I don’t think was mentioned in class is the breaking of the paragraphs. I feel as though this is significant because authors can really change the meaning and feeling of a story with different passages. I know when I am writing something I highly consider where and when I should break paragraphs up.

I wonder if a solution will ever be created when dealing with the problems of translations. It would be so cool if you could translate something completely accurate and for it to mean the same thing. However, I feel as though languages are too diverse to ever get a 100% accuracy level of translation.

In class we talked about Genesis. Genesis is the first book in the bible and one that many might think they know it. However after talking in class a few things came up that caught my attention. One of the topics being that of Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden. The other being translations of the bible. In class we talked about how In Genesis 3 it never mentions an apple, however if you google “Adam and Eve” and click on images the first ten images will show that Adam and Eve are holding Apples. I think it is depicted as an apple to simplify it from a “forbidden fruit”. However this is also apart of the mandela effect as many people in class (me included) said “apple” when asked. Could this also be apart at one time a translation error? This gets into the second key point of class and that being things lost in translation or even changing the wording to make it grammatically correct. Could it have been changed from forbidden fruit to apple at some point in time? The reason I am saying this is because when we looked at the different types of bible we noticed that the idea and meaning was the same but the wording was different. If anyone would like to respond and give your idea it would be greatly appreciated.

Something that came up during our discussion on assumptions about the Bible was that it had never occurred to me that the forbidden fruit that Adam and Eve ate was never explicitly stated to be an apple, nor was the serpent explicitly stated to be Satan. If you google “Adam and Eve” and search by image, the artwork depicting Adam and Eve had them eating a fruit that resembles an apple. And depending on which piece of art you look at; the serpent is either a regular snake or a four-legged reptile with a human head. The interpretations that show the reptile with a human head, the head has horns, which is a defining attribute to the devil. I was always told that the serpent was the devil, and the fruit Adam and Eve ate was an apple, but this is not the case (even though my parents went through a lot of trouble to make the Bible a pivotal part of my life, I’ve not read much of it, nor was my religiously based upbringing centered around actually reading the Bible). Now that I think about it, most of what I understand the Bible to be has been what other people have said (pastor, priest, parent, etc.).

A quote from Back Door Introduction to the Bible was, “So J. K. Rowling doesn’t feel it necessary to say, “Hey folks, this is fiction” at the start of every Harry Potter novel. She assumes her readers know that.” It put things into perspective for me that the Bible is a compilation of works from people of different backgrounds and from different times. Passages in the Bible are not necessarily in the order they were written, nor do the authors of each passage clearly state what they are writing is either fact or fiction. So, assuming the Bible is one genre may cause some confusion when interpreting the text for one’s self. The story of Adam and Eve speaking to a talking serpent and eating the forbidden fruit reads more like one of Aesop’s fables than a historical document. The compilation of authors in the Bible assume the reader knows the difference between a fable and reality

I found it interesting in Valiant or Virtuous? that English translations of the Bible like to use different words when describing men and women opposed to Hebrew and Greek versions of the Bible. Whether or not this is a result of differing societal gender roles imposed by each translation’s respective culture would require extensive research best suited for a project outside of this blog. Greek and Hebrew versions of the Bible use the same adjective to describe              valiant men and women (chayil in Hebrew and andreia in Greek), but the adjectives change in English translations when describing women. Changing valiant to ‘distinguished’ or ‘excellent’ when describing women.

When reading “Back Door intro to the Bible,” I appreciated the authors pointing out the common misconceptions when reading the Bible. I already had knowledge of some of these due to my previous courses, but the new ones were interesting. One thing that stuck out to me is how the Bible discusses human beings in daily life. I had never read that part of the Bible. I was pleasantly surprised when it discusses real people doing real things. The other important misconceptions are that the Bible is not a history book and that it is actually not a single book but a collection of different works.

One thing that stuck out to me when reading “Depatriarchalizing the Bible” is the discussion of gender-neutral deities. I had never read nor heard of this before today. I also found it ironic how the contrast between woman and man fades after disobedience. I feel like this is an example of why we are so misogynistic and sexist. It also says that man fails to be responsible which I find funny and to be very true in real life!

Our class discussions of what type of things are found in the Bible really expanded my knowledge. I did not know letters, poetry, proverbs, parables, gospels, songs, and prophecy are all found in the Bible. This is another reason why it should not be called a single book, but rather a collection of works.

I would consider Michael W. Holmes to be a very successful and credible source when it comes to biblical studies. As a current professor at Bethel University and former Chair of the Department of Biblical and Theological Studies. it is clear to see that he is well-sourced and informed regarding this subject area. He has a Ph.D in Theological seminary from Princeton University and specializes in the New Testament. “His primary research interests are New Testament textual criticism and the Apostolic Fathers (a collection of early Christian writings)” (Bethel University). Holmes has had a very extensive career and has plenty of publications to back up his work.

Another Credible source I have found is John Barton. He is a priest but also the former Chair of Theology also know as “The Oriel and Laing Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture” at Oxford University. He has been involved in many publications has many other credible sources backing him and travels to different universities to give his speeches on Biblical studies.

This lesson has taught me that many sources are available but until you research the authors they have no credibility. The credibility that you might be searching for is that of these men. However, it is also good to play devil’s advocate in order to interperate the whole idea.

When I searched “bible scholar” I saw a lot of information about biblical studies and about bible scholars.

I looked at the “view history” tab of the Wikipedia page about the galaxy. There was information about who updated the page and when they did it.

I can’t think of a situation where you would turn to a source where the author is anonymous besides wanting to read the Bible.

The author is a professor, and he has a PhD from Princeton Theological Seminary. He definitely has knowledge of theology. However, his degree was in 1984, so some of this knowledge could be outdated. He has special interests in New Testament textual criticism and the apostolic fathers. He went to two religious schools and teaches at another religious school, so he definitely has biases that an agnostic or atheist would not have.

The book was published in 2008 by OUP Oxford. Susan Ashbrook Harvey is a Professor of History and Religion at Brown University. David G. Hunter is a Chair of Catholic Studies and University of Kentucky. This gives me confidence that the book is legitimate because both of these people have a history and expertise in the subject.

It was fairly simple in order to find information about Michael W. Holmes, and decide whether or not he is a reliable author about the subject of the Bible Canon. Holmes began teaching Biblical and Theological Studies at Bethel College in 1982, and has received many awards and recognition for his work. He is described as a world-renowned scholar in the area of biblical studies, and has a Ph.D. in Theological Seminary from Princeton and an M.A. in New Testament from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Because of all of this information, Holmes seems to be a credible and reliable source of the Bible. One area where he may not be completely reliable, however, would be the Old Testament, since his specialization is in the New Testament. Also, he teaches currently at Bethel University, which is a Christian institution, and this might show some biases in his teachings. 

It was fairly easy to find other New Testament scholars on the internet. I found Richard B. Hays, a professor at Duke Divinity School. He is recognized worldwide for his work on the New Testament, letters of Paul, and the Gospels. He also has many books and lectures all around of world. Hays is also an ordained United Methodist minister and preaches in many different cities. This might be a source for bias.

The Oxford University Press, the largest university press in the world, published this book that includes Michael Holme’s work. I have confidence that this is a reliable source of information, because Oxford is a very reputable press and has the widest global presence.

In this lesson, I learned the importance of questioning credibility not only of the author, but of the publisher of works, too. It is critical to gain an understanding of where the information is coming from, and how certain biases may affect it. There is probably no such thing as a completely unbiased person; human beings are not perfect. It is important, however, to take into consideration how the biases will affect the information you are getting. 

Michael Holmes appears to be a reliable author. A quick Google search can help you uncover his credentials and his other works, as well as what he is involved in. He’s published a many reputable works in books and journals. In this specific chapter, it is well researched with all of its individual citations, bibliography, and footnotes. However, like most of us, his biases may show in this work. Because of his seminary studies, he obviously comes from a religious focused background. This paves the way for possible missing information, or information that comes from other biased sources. It may be an accurate picture, but it might not be a complete picture of all of the facts.

The book was published by Oxford University Press, and includes many contributors. At a quick first glance these contributors are scholars and professors, obviously experts in their field. Some of them come from religious backgrounds and others do not. It gives the book a lot of credibility, because the inclusion of different writers should help to balance out some of the biases that some of the authors have.

In The Oxford Handbook to Early Christian Studies, Michael W. Holmes discusses the difference between canon and scripture and proceeds to dive into the history.  I believe that Michael W. Holmes is very reliable when it comes to Scriptural studies.  Holmes has been a professor at Bethel University for thirty eight years, and has attained the title of Department Chair of the Biblical and Theological studies within his time there. He also continues to work on some extensive research projects as well.  It is very clear from Professor Holmes’ background that he is a very credible and reliable source.  Holmes’s specializations include the New Testament and the Founding Fathers.

Another reliable source that could be used is Professor Gary A. Anderson from the University of Notre Dame.  He received his Ph. D. from Harvard University in Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity, however much of his research is on the Tabernacle.  His specialization is actually the Old Testament, but he has many published works on early Christianity as well.  His continued interest and dedication to learning more about the Bible, along with his past studies and expertise both show that he is a credible source to be used.

After going through this lesson, I feel more informed on how to identify a reliable source.  In the past, it has never really been made clear the best way to find credible sources, and I was often told to look for the “.org” or the “.com.”  However, now I know that it is important to check the credibility of the author of the source you are using, and do a check on their credentials.  If the subject they are writing on is not within their realm of their expertise, then they are probably not reliable discussing that topic.