Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry
  • Home
  • Calendar
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Recording Archives
  • Resources
    • Bible Study - Matthew's Gospel
    • Bible Study - John's Gospel
    • Bible Study - Ephesians
    • Greek Tutorials
  • About
    • About Wittenberg CoMo
    • Support Us
    • Contact Us
  • Position Papers
  • Sandbox

The Verbal Art of the Pauline Letters

10/16/2023

0 Comments

 
10/16/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Eleven: Aspects of the Verbal Art of the Pauline Letters." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 245-260.

In this chapter, Botha makes a deliberate attempt to highlight the oral aspects of Paul's letters and to show the importance of orality as the context of ancient rhetoric (Botha 2013, 245). He sees orality as the frame of reference in which all aspects of Paul's rhetoric would fit.

In Botha's view, our bias toward modern literacy inhibits our ability to understand the nature of the composition and delivery of ancient rhetoric. Modern studies which are based on "charts, diagrams, structural analyses and tables" (Botha 2013, 246) encourage an understanding by means of analysis. The pursuit of what is visible and can be counted may separate communication from the human situations in which it happened. The manner of composition, writing, correcting, sending, reading, and receiving a letter is a much more important factor than most of us would realize. Though there is a clear logic in rhetorical messages, it is mediated through the entirety of the situation (Botha 2013, 248). Botha thinks this can be lost in our desire to find the precise arrangement and order of material to be analyzed.

Botha goes on to reiterate the oral/aural environment of give and take which would have existed in all Greco-Roman societies. This, coupled with the very real possibility of someone being considered educated and influential without actually engaging in the practice of reading and writing should make us look at communication differently than we normally do today (Botha 2013, 248). Speech, rhetoric, and oral performance were inseparable.

Botha considers that, based on the oral environment of the time, we underestimate the importance of Paul's collaborators and secretaries (Botha 2013, 249). Various settings can place different expectations on those who assist in the production of a written work. It is altogether possible that Paul's "secretaries" ranged from taking letters slowly, one syllable at a time, to taking a topic and filling in the details (Botha 2013, 250). On the other end of the communication as well, there could be substantial variation, as a letter carrier would attempt to interpret the letter as Paul desired. The goal would be that the hearer of the letter should receive the message in the way Paul intended. The letter carrier would also bring news and information which was not included in the letter (Botha 2013, 251). This could be as important, or at times more important, to the relationship than the actual letter. Furthermore, the oral delivery of the letter was of great importance. Ancient rhetoricians write in detail about the need for proper expression of ideas and emotions through pacing, tone, expression, and gesture (Botha 2013, 252).

Through the oral performance of the text, the audience could experience the power and authority of its composer, in this case, Paul (Botha 2013, 253). The people would use the public reading as an opportunity to have Paul himself speak to them, even though Paul was not physically present. The group gathered had an opportunity to have their collective identity shaped by the experience. The rhetoric would focus on memorable statements, both for the benefit of the performer and the listener (Botha 2013, 255). The statements in Paul tend to summarize doctrine in such a way not only to signal an outline but also to be remembered and applied.

​
0 Comments

Paul and Gossip

10/13/2023

0 Comments

 
10/13/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Ten: Paul and Gossip." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 222-244.

Botha, observing that many of the conflicts in which the apostle Paul found himself could be related to communication issues, suggests that the contextual framework through which to view these communication events may be that of gossip (Botha 2013, 222). A focus solely on the doctrinal issues involved in disputes may obscure the nature of interactional and relational tension.

The Pauline letters regularly address conflicts, often portraying the conflict as existing between the views of Paul and his "opponents" (Botha 2013, 223). Botha considers the ways in which tension was manifested, as well as its purpose, to be of significance. He considers the underlying informal discussions which we would normally consider as gossip to have contributed to the attitudes of people on both sides of the divide. We recall that while gossip is normally considered in negative terms, it is in fact merely an informal communicative process in which a report can be escalated or diffused.

Botha illustrates the caution with which we approach gossip by way of numerous biblical references to the negative type of gossip (Botha 2013, 224). While rumor can elevate a person's reputation, it is not often used for that purpose. The world, throwing caution to the wind, tends to be full of gossip, often of the negative sort (Botha 2013, 225). Particularly in a society attuned to oral communication, the stories people tell about others are easily passed on. This was widely criticized, but remained a significant issue throughout the culture (Botha 2013, 226).

The process of news in the form of possibly unsubstantiated reports reaching Paul, and being responded to by him, suggests that, though he condemned gossip, he became involved in it at times (Botha 2013, 226). A definition of gossip, however, may be helpful. "The implicit definition of gossip seems to be the repetition of hearsay with some moral connotation" (Botha 2013, 227). In essence, it is done personally, and it makes an evaluation about the person about whom it happens. The motivation may be positive. The same method is used as businesses evaluate competitors, customers, and business plans, as politicians learn about opponents or supporters, etc. (Botha 2013, 228). In these functions, the dynamic social interactions may be positive.

Botha suggests that the people involved in the conflict situations reflected in Paul's letters may well have known one another. Disputes, after all, most often occur between people who are acquainted with each other (Botha 2013, 228). He also notes that children are very effective at spreading information about their friends and the families of their friends (Botha 2013, 229). Servants also are privy to a great deal of information which is not normally considered public in nature. Loyalties to various people we care for can often move us to disclose information which will be of value.

Botha notes that Paul's activities, family history, and alliances would all serve to create curiosity and likely discussion (Botha 2013, 230).

Again, Botha observes that the oral nature of the society would have facilitated all sorts of gossip, and would increase its power in society, as those with stories to tell would be readily heard (Botha 2013, 232).

Paul's work, though often focused on a synagogue, would have largely taken place within household contexts, rather than in more neutral, "public" settings (Botha 2013, 233). Further, a traveler such as Paul would often be in the home of someone prepared to provide some level of patronage. The home of a wealthy person would normally serve as a place for lectures and other intellectual activity. Because these events were, at least on some levels, private, others would have a tendency to ask questions (Botha 2013, 234). This facilitates various types of gossip.

Because Paul often held employment to care for his needs, and because of his itinerant lifestyle, he could easily be looked down on both as a servile artisan and as someone who did not have a positive established reputation among local artisans (Botha 2013, 235). 

Paul himself uses reports about others and their situations to build his case for his own point of view (Botha 2013, 236). Sometimes this would work to his advantage, but at other times it would provoke more opposition. Group cohesiveness could increase in his favor or in the favor of his opponents (Botha 2013, 237). The community cohesiveness and loyalty, while a great asset, may also be fragile, if, as Botha suggests of Paul, it is pushed too far and too fast by its participants. The moral assessment may be applied to all members of the group, and can result in expulsion of some.

Botha concludes that the dynamic of informal communication we identify as gossip is an important aspect of understanding the various conflicts which are evident in Paul's letters (Botha 2013, 238).

​
0 Comments

Galatians as Oral Communication in a Letter

10/12/2023

0 Comments

 
10/12/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Nine: Letter Writing and Oral Communication: Galatians." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 203-221.

A letter in antiquity could have many functions, just as one can today. However, Botha notes that our concept of the letter in a biblical context may tend to obscure some of the purposes intended by the author (Botha 2013, 203). The relationship of the composer to specific situational and cultural context is not always clear, though it is certainly important. The structure of Paul's letters is significant. Botha observes that the overall context is of importance.

Botha again notes the oral compositional context of Paul's letters (Botha 2013, 204). Intelligent discourse and composition is not necessarily based on extensive use of and creation of written documents, reviewed by one's own eyes and written with one's own hand (Botha 2013, 205). The mechanical customs of writing could make learning to read fluently a very challenging task, which would often hinder economic productivity. Though there are suggestions that literacy was higher in Jewish circles, Botha does not find significant investigation of those claims (Botha 2013, 206).

Botha notes that, even though the people in the Hellenistic world may have been familiar with books and writing, they would generally depend on the use of the writing skills of other people (Botha 2013, 207). The letters of Paul would have included collaboration of one or more scribes (possibly including Timothy and Silas), who may have had a significant role in the composition as well (Botha 2013, 208). Among the letters in the Pauline corpus, Botha notes that Galatians stands out by having unspecified authors 1(1:1) and by the strongly personal nature of address with extensive use of the first person singular (Botha 2013, 208). There would be an expectation, regardless, that Paul's work involved other people as well.

Delivery of letters was its own challenge. In general, a wealthy individual could send a messenger, normally briefing that person on the content of a message (Botha 2013, 210). The choice of someone to bear a letter was a matter of considerable importance, as that person would normally bring other details along as well. Though a carrier is not mentioned in Galatians, Botha observes the person chosen would likely not only have delivered the letter, but read it aloud at the destination (Botha 2013, 211). Furthermore, Botha observes that the reading of a letter, a public event, would be done using appropriate tone, gesture, and pacing, as if the composer of the letter were there communicating (Botha 2013, 212). Botha goes on to illustrate the process with statements from ancient sources, describing appropriate reading.

Galatians makes significant statements about Paul's apostolic authority (Botha 2013, 214). Through his letter, his intention is to show himself actually present with the Galatians. His emissary, who brought and read the letter, was to be taken as if Paul were there in person. In the case of Galatians, other teachers with another message had presented their message, which Paul considered to endanger the Galatian Christians (Botha 2013, 215). To counteract this, Paul needed to provide his message with sufficient force and eloquence. The messenger would have been extremely important to achieving the goal. While Paul's doctrine undergirds the letter, the doctrine apart from the forceful delivery would be to little or no avail (Botha 2013, 216). Through a variety of emotional appeals, Paul seeks to turn his Galatian audience back in the direction of the doctrine he has previously delivered to them.

​
0 Comments

Mark as Oral Traditional Literature

10/11/2023

0 Comments

 
10/11/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Eight: Mark's Story as Oral Traditional Literature." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 174-201.

Modern scholarship is nearly unanimous in understanding Mark as traditional material (Botha 2013, 174). Mark took material about Jesus, at least largely received from others, to construct his Gospel account. He engaged in some level of redaction, assembling and making narrative emendations, to create the actual composition he would consider final. As with other portions of the New Testament, the significant question is the extent of his interpretation and creativity.

Gerhardsson, among others, takes Mark to have maintained a high level of continuity with the actual events and statements documented (Botha 2013, 174), taking the development to have a relatively linear process from notes to larger narrative blocks, to selection and assembly. The Twelve would then have been a group of eyewitnesses who served as an authoritative source of a particular tradition, delivered to them by Jesus and passed on to others, including Mark.

Others posit a tradition, but the composer of the Gospel account as one who bears a greater role in making interpretations, thus turning the evangelist into a person engaged in criticism of the tradition (Botha 2013, 175). An important question in Botha's opinion is whether the view of the evangelist as a creative critic removes the work from its appropriate historical and cultural context. In essence, the role of the evangelist as interpreter may require that we be able to distinguish what existed as tradition from the inventive work of the composer. While we can make plausible conclusions, proof evades us (Botha 2013, 175).

Botha suggests we make an attempt to consider Mark as "oral traditional literature" (Botha 2013, 176). This allows the work to be a matter of composition and recitation including some variation in the material presented, and for the version of Mark which we have to represent one of multiple "performances." This coheres with the formulation of Parry and Lord of folklore traditions. Botha moves on to describe the process by summarizing Lord's formulation.

In Lord's formulation, oral traditional material is not simply memorized, but consists of a dynamic reconstruction of the material (Botha 2013, 177). The structure and phraseology fits into a known, authoritative pattern. In the performance, the performer is actively trading a version of the material to an audience. However, it is "re-composed" each time it is told. The audience, with its specific background context, will influence the presentation of material as well (Botha 2013, 178). The narrator uses particular formulas and themes, drawing them in as appropriate to the setting and audience. This is especially pronounced in the case of poetry, but it can be found in other materials as well. Motion through the content can be adjusted at will, using more or fewer episodes for illustrations, descriptions which are more or less dense in their arrangement, etc. This same pattern may be relevant in our understanding of the composition of a Gospel account (Botha 2013, 179).

Botha observes that rather than being a means by which tradition would develop, the oral traditional narrator would see himself as one who preserves content (Botha 2013, 180). Variations are seen as part of the narrative art, but the art itself is not developmental in nature. Content tends to be very stable.

The oral traditional theory does remain theoretical. The scholarship normally focuses on the process rather than the actual outcome (Botha 2013, 181). Formulas and themes are clearly present in oral works, as in written compositions. Yet it remains difficult to analyze a work and identify it as definitively an oral composition. Lord, however, does suggest that it is possible to identify such works (Botha 2013, 182). As to the outcome of the process, however, he is clear that the oral process necessarily creates a stable product, rather than anything innovative. Innovation is the product of written, not oral, composition.

Botha notes that many aspects of the oral theory do not apply well to prose works, and that Mark's Gospel can be shown to be based on oral composition by means of historical argument. He does, however, take Mark to be an example of the textual outcome of oral composition (Botha 2013, 183). His greater interest is in the process of the transmission.

Formula tends to be closely tied to meter. Botha notes that Parry and Lord had a close relationship to the Homeric writings, in which many of the formulae serve a metrical purpose (Botha 2013, 184). Within folktale formulas, the meter may be lacking. However, the content fits into a thematic frame which remains stable.

Botha notes an argument, made by Talbert, that the gospels are "literary and interdependent" (Talbert, "Oral and Independent," page not cited) (Botha 2013, 184). On the other hand, Lord sees the gospels as substantially distinct and therefore unlikely to depend on each other from a literary standpoint (Botha 2013, 185). Talbert views the agreement of the Synoptics in order of events as a sign of literary interdependence. However, this is not necessarily the case, as an oral framework often includes a sequence of events. Botha observes that the type of literary dependence described by Talbert reflects a typographic bias which would have been impracticable given the technology and customs of the time (Botha 2013, 185). 

Based on the practicalities of writing customs and the real nature of human communication, Botha suggests that Mark is appropriately evaluated as an oral work, and that the traditional statistical analyses used to evaluate oral work are not of much use. Quantitative evaluations of syntactical patterns do not lend themselves well to human speech patterns (Botha 2013, 186). The patterns and formulations of oral storytelling are more relevant. The association of stock patterns and illustrations which further a particular element of content can be discerned in oral storytelling, though the minutiae of particular words, phrases, and grammatical constructions may differ (Botha 2013, 187). For instance, the use of epithets as found in Homer is largely absent. However (note at least the Kindle version, apparently erroneously, refers to "epitaphs"), certain formulaic presentations of names exist (Botha 2013, 188). Introductions of speech are quite regular as well. Mark's Gospel also frequently uses narrative elements in the same order in different narrative events (Botha 2013, 189). His use of motifs which can be combined into different contexts suggests an oral type of storytelling. This all suggests to Botha that Mark is working from an extensive "narrative grammar" to create his Gospel account (Botha 2013, 190).

In short, Botha has identified numerous features of Mark's Gospel which point to the compositional tactics of an oral storyteller (Botha 2013, 191). The tradition is brought to life through the art of a storyteller. This is distinctly different from the view of Form Criticism, in which there is a definitive message with definitive wording (Botha 2013, 192). Botha describes the apostolic band and those who followed them as itinerant, prophetic voices, retelling the story of Jesus. At some point, the narrative was dictated and a version reproduced in writing (Botha 2013, 193). The particular narrative of Mark could move toward a particular depiction of Jesus and one or more aspects of his work. This, of course, could differ from the narrative goals of other evangelists who would draw on remarkably similar events using similar structures (Botha 2013, 194).

​
0 Comments

Transmitting the Jesus Traditions

10/10/2023

0 Comments

 
10/10/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Seven: Transmitting the Jesus Traditions." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 146-173.

The way in which the Gospel, and other elements of early Christianity are transmitted is important to our understanding of the resulting message (Botha 2013, 145). It is part of understanding the source as a whole. Botha emphasizes that this task is critical in understanding the growth of "the Jesus movement" in all regards. The interplay of orality and literacy serves as a key to understand the nature of the compositions we now have.

Botha sees the developments between the time of Jesus and the publication of the Gospels as an essential part of the equation. For insight, he turns to classic works of form criticism. Bultmann took the period to be one of "informal and uncontrolled oral tradition" (Botha 2013, 147). Botha rightly describes both the terms "informal" and "uncontrolled" as current oral traditional scholars would interpret them.

Bultmann sees the resurrection as the point at which tradition became uncontrolled. Botha, however, thinks the nature of the community would imply a controlled, though possibly informal, spread. The apostolic group was influential in maintaining the message (Botha 2013, 147). There is reason to think the existence of eyewitness testimony would tend to regulate the content presented. Botha notes that the idea of a radical change has been influential in New Testament scholarship. As an example, he adduces the work of Kelber, who, in a rather sophisticated way, shifts the time of change to the time of inscripturation (Botha 2013, 148).

Dibelius, in contrast to Bultmann, takes the process to be controlled. Botha even characterizes it as "static" (Botha 2013, 148). Birger Gerhardsson goes farther than Dibelius by seeing "the primary situation within the community for the transmission of Jesus tradition as tradition itself" (Botha 2013, 148). The acts and words of Jesus were guarded and passed on as a matter of authoritative teaching. Botha finds this as analogous to the rabbinic transmission of oral Torah.

Botha finds a difficulty with these critical views because they fail to explain the variety in the written Gospels and the inconsistencies in identifying Jesus' "ipsissima verba" (Botha 2013, 149). Botha suggests that there is a way forward. He suggests "the possibility of re-applying the concept of informal, evolutionary models in a social-scientifically responsible way to parts (emphasis his) of the tradition process underlying some of the gospel traditions" (Botha 2013, 149).

If I understand Botha rightly, he is suggesting a synthesis of recent insights from the worlds of oral tradition and storytelling with the classic practices of hermeneutics, as an attempt to rightly identify the context in which the message was derived from an initial event to the point it was presented in essentially the written form in which we find it.

Botha moves on to discuss the transmission of the Jesus traditions in terms of rumor and folklore research (Botha 2013, 149). He observes that the nature of rumor suggests unreliable information, which is usually negative in its assessment of the subject (Botha 2013, 150). However, the dynamic may be applied appropriately to positive information. Rumor tends to follow a particular logical pattern based on the credibility of certain fundamental claims. A rumor, by its nature, is not an attempt to create something incredible, but to make sense of (often jumbled and confused) reality (Botha 2013, 151). There is regularly an element of imagination, though some rumors are predominantly constructed from factual information. They always, however, bear some sort of cultural or sociological selectivity (Botha 2013, 152).

Botha moves on to discuss the early research in rumor phenomena, in which details are quickly omitted from a message 152). After a period of reduction of the message, some details receive greater emphasis and elaboration. The elaboration tends to emphasize culturally acceptable standards (Botha 2013, 153). Counter to the experiments, however, oral exchange of rumors is not one-directional. A narrative held in community involves interaction of the community. In essence, there is a communal consensus which governs any developments.

Within the context of the Gospel accounts, there may well have been a particular ritual function (Botha 2013, 154). Within the first century community which gave rise to the canonical Gospels, the disciples who were involved in the fishing industry would have had access to a wide variety of settings in varied social strata, in which oral "news" would have spread readily. The communication by these disciples may well have opened relational doors with people and groups from varied backgrounds (Botha 2013, 155). Botha describes the interactions of these groups. indicating means by which an oral tradition about Jesus could have penetrated to many in the culture. The presence of a number of people who were eyewitnesses to events could tend to control the development of content (Botha 2013, 156).

Botha notes that stressful conditions, such as economic uncertainty or social or religious upheaval, can tend to increase rumor activities (Botha 2013, 157). Uncertainty in terms of health and mortality could be a strong factor in spreading discussions of Jesus' healing and raising the dead. Military conflicts and policies which led to conditions of poverty would only have increased uncertainty (Botha 2013, 158). This would make the message of Jesus increasingly attractive, especially among the extensive peasant population. Economic difficulties in the general population could easily account for a misplacement on the calendar of a census, which may simply have reflected a typical explanation for Joseph and Mary's presence in Bethlehem, or the particular sudden need to move to Egypt. The situation could be very real, even if the provocation was not at the exact time (Botha 2013, 160). Botha suggests that some details which may have been ambiguous could have been asserted as plausible reasons for actions. He goes on to describe a number of concepts, such as the work of the Magi, the penetration of legal imperatives into village life, and the presence or absence of political figures which could certainly influence explanations of the forces impelling actions recorded in the New Testament. What people thought the government was doing or not doing may have been more important influences on real actions than the actual deeds or inaction of governmental officials.

Another important feature of rumor is the use of counter-rumors, those intended to disarm harmful rumors. Botha sees evidence, in Matthew 28:11-15, of an official report of some sort with verses 1-10 and 16-20 constituting a Christian response to the report (Botha 2013, 164). This concept may explain many of the polemical statements recorded in the Gospels.

​
0 Comments

What Is Authorship?

10/9/2023

0 Comments

 
10/9/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Six: Authorship in Historical Perspective." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 126-144.

Botha observes that not only the concept of composition, but also the definition of authorship is easily treated anachronistically by modern scholarship (Botha 2013, 126). When considering authorship, we rightly consider what an author was thought to be in the time and place of the composition of the work in question. Following Foucault, Botha takes the author prior to the Enlightenment (and, for that matter, after it) not to be the sole magisterial creator of a work. There are always other forces at work, a cultural and sociological context, for instance, which take a hand in governing creative work. Botha describes this in some detail, then briefly discusses how the author's name recognition became an important data point only in the Enlightenment (Botha 2013, 128).

The terminology of authorship did not exist in Greco-Roman antiquity, nor did the concept. It was not until the Renaissance that people began to be thought of in terms of materials they wrote, though previously the individual might be recognized as someone whose ideas could be used in arguments. It was not until the Enlightenment that "literary property properly emerged" (Botha 2013, 129). Botha therefore briefly reviews some elements of the conceptual and practical elements of authorship in antiquity (Botha 2013, 130). Pliny the elder, a very prolific (and therefore unusual) author, spent extensive time in research, being read to and dictating notes and extracts. Lucian recommended extensive gathering of notes, then some process of organization. Apparently notebooks of some sort were kept, at least by some (Botha 2013, 131). Eventually, a text would be dictated for transcription on a scroll. A text would be revised, sometimes multiple times, before it was considered a finished work (Botha 2013, 132). Because of the nature of dictation, in some instances it would result in notes which would be filled in later by the scribe (Botha 2013, 133).

Publication, or really, release of a literary work, was often done either without the name of an author, or under some other name (Botha 2013, 133). A dedication of a work is often made to someone. This serves as an indicator that the work is finished, and also associates the author in some way with a more prominent individual. It further implies that a copy of the work has been furnished to the person to whom it is dedicated, hence the work is published (Botha 2013, 134). Some publishers are known to have existed, receiving texts and arranging for copies to be made and distributed. It was through public reading that the work would become known.

Distribution of books occurred normally not initially by making copies, but by oral presentation in public and by lending a book to a friend (Botha 2013, 136). Any additional copies were normally made by a private copyist, and could be subject to revision, emendation and error.

Authors, so as to establish their identity, tended to insert statements which could serve as personal markers (Botha 2013, 137). This could assist a reader in knowing the actual source of a work.

Botha concludes that a concept of the author as understood in antiquity is necessary to properly interpret works (Botha 2013, 137). The author in that world is not the same as an author in our world. Further, the communal nature of presentation influenced the content. An awareness of the traditions and expectations of the setting is crucial (Botha 2013, 138). The work of composition, also communal in nature, would influence what would appear. The way material would be included or excluded at all stages of the composition process and the way a listener would gather information would all be influenced by other social contexts.

​
0 Comments

Memory, Performance, and Reading

10/6/2023

0 Comments

 
10/6/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Five: Memory, Performance, and Reading Practices." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 102-143.

Botha describes differences between our modern Western engagement with reading and that in Greco-Roman antiquity (Botha 2013, 102). In a time when most activities were communal in nature, before easily obtained lighting and corrective eyewear, reading and studying would be quite different activities than most of us in the Western world would imagine. The mode of engagement with texts naturally results in different ways of processing the content.

Reading would have been done aloud, usually by someone performing the work for others, from a text often at least mostly memorized, and including some types of physical motion (Botha 2013, 103). It was considered perfectly normal to read by means of listening. While silent reading was known and practiced, in general reading aloud and in public was considered as the norm.

The form of written materials may be of assistance in understanding the work of reading and writing (Botha 2013, 106). Typographical conventions have given us a presupposition that books are generally compact units and that all the copies will be identical. Reference to and comparison of manuscript books on scrolls is cumbersome at best. Each one is at least a little different (Botha 2013, 107). Though the codex was known in one form or another at an early date, scrolls remained the preferred medium until the seventh century C.E. Botha suggests that "ancient readers did not imagine their texts to be easily accessible and manageable, nor to be diverse sources of information" (Botha 2013, 107). People who had some books normally had only a few, which were read repeatedly and in groups of people.

Paragraphing, spacing, and other formatting conventions we tend to consider standard were far from standardized in antiquity (Botha 2013, 108). It was the responsibility of the reader, not the author or copyist, to make interpretive decisions. Divisions and punctuation are simply not a priority in a written text. The oral communication was clear. The written version did not normally assist in making the decisions inherent in the oral event.

Botha compares reading aloud in antiquity to our tendency to play a piece of music on an instrument. While it is quite possible to look at musical notation and silently recreate the tune, it is more normal to turn the notation into something audible. This was the conventional way of dealing with written words in antiquity (Botha 2013, 111).

Related at least in part to the nonstandard production of writing, Botha notes that making citations and reference to works was not practiced with regularity until the 13th century (Botha 2013, 112). Rather, references would be made generally by memory based on extensive familiarity with wording which had been heard repeatedly.

Ancient reading entailed extensive memorization as well. Botha notes Quintilian's counsel to read aloud, murmuring, to avoid distractions (Botha 2013, 113). This, of course, adds to both muscle memory (not mentioned by Botha), and auditory memory.

Botha further notes the assumption that reading and listening were interactive. As noted by Pliny (Ep. 6.17) it was very rude not to respond and interact when listening (Botha 2013, 114). Because of these interactive dynamics, composition, normally done orally, would naturally be oriented toward the patterns used in performance. It was purposely tailored for its function (Botha 2013, 115). A composition event would have its roots in extensive mental preparation. This goes almost without saying in the case of (oral) poetry. Yet it was also applied by Quintilian and others to prose composition (Botha 2013, 116). Botha further references Pliny and Plotinus as examples of authors who clearly composed mentally.

Botha notes a tacit assumption made by modern readers, that readers and writers in antiquity would focus largely on structures dictated by modern textual methods (Botha 2013, 118). He urges that we find the more appropriate emphases for the original setting, based on orality and memory. This extends not only to our understanding of compositional tactics, but also to the way we attempt to grasp the composition itself (Botha 2013, 118).

Based on his previous argument, Botha suggests we should take a very different approach "to the synoptic problem and the Q hypothesis" (Botha 2013, 119). In its simplest terms, assuming orality fundamentally changes our view to literary criticism, and may well compel us to reject many of the presuppositions of textual and form criticism.

​
0 Comments

Writing in the First Century

10/5/2023

0 Comments

 
10/5/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Four: Writing in the First Century." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 75-101.

Botha evaluates the actual physical process of writing in the first century as a means to approach understanding the move of a message from oral to written form (Botha 2013, 75). Writing at a table or a desk, as we might picture today, was unknown. Rather, the illustrations and descriptions we have indicate either making a brief note on writing material while standing or doing more extensive writing either seated on the ground, a stool, or a bench, balancing the writing material on the thighs or knees (Botha 2013, 76). Ink would be in a container either set on the ground or held in the hand. This would have been difficult at best. Botha notes the column width roughly corresponded with the width of a human thigh and that writing tends to be larger at the bottom of a column. Depictions of writing desks appear in the eighth century and multiply thereafter (Botha 2013, 77).

Of importance to our understanding is the fact that reading and writing were considered labor, which would not necessarily be engaged in by those who held wealth and status (Botha 2013, 78). The lack of ability or practice in reading or writing was not seen as a hindrance. At this point, I feel compelled to observe that the inability to read was cited in chapter three as a means by which government and powerful people could oppress others. Yet here it does not serve in that way.

The use of a scribe was a common practice. Botha notes that reading and the physical act of writing were not closely associated among Greco-Roman societies as in ours (Botha 2013, 79). I observe that the ability to write with a regular and clear hand remains elusive to many in my society, which has made extensive use of typographical tools. In antiquity, penmanship was considered far less important, and a completely different skill than the ability to create intelligent arguments. Writing the argument was the work of a scribe. Botha observes that this was a practice recognized adequately well, that laws were promulgated stating minimum allowed prices to be charged to military personnel in exchange for writing (Botha 2013, 80).

Botha calculates the price of various copies of New Testament and early Christian documents. While not extremely expensive, compared to a laborer's wage it would be costly to purchase a copy of a Gospel (Botha 2013, 84). Methods of speedwriting and abbreviation were known. This would enable a secretary to take notes or transcripts in real time, then go back to make a clean and generally legible copy (Botha 2013, 85). The creation of an early Christian text, such as a Gospel, would have required several days' work of dictation, copying, editing, and preparation of a final version. "Whatever the case may have been, the creation of most early Christian documents reflects dedication and commitment. Though nothing wildly exorbitant, we are once again reminded of a fairly serious investment of resources" (Botha 2013, 88).

It is important to consider the role of the scribe. Botha notes that, as far as we can tell, the scribe was rarely a mere copyist, but also normally played a role in gathering information and editing (Botha 2013, 90). The role of the secretary would vary depending on the level of collaboration or edition desired. Botha notes that this causes difficulty in our attempts to ascribe communication to a named author or that person's assistant (Botha 2013, 91).

Botha moves on to describe the assistant in terms of someone who was societally servile and who was forced into a subservient role, even reflected in the typical posture used for writing (Botha 2013, 92). He emphasizes the domination of the named master in the writing project. The ideas were considered worthy of merit and were expressed orally by those who had attained a high level of education and standing. The writing was considered the work of a laborer and would receive little or no credit (Botha 2013, 93).

​
0 Comments

Growth and Use of Writing

10/4/2023

0 Comments

 
10/4/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Three: Greco-Roman Literacy and the New Testament Writings." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 52-74.

Botha evaluates the concept of increased literacy in the early Christian period. At issue, in his opinion, is whether modern authors who make claims about literacy conceive of it in the same way as people in the early Christian period would (Botha 2013, 52). A second, more challenging question is how the author's work governs the reader's response.

In addressing the alleged breadth of a reading public, Botha observes that almost all widely distributed texts in antiquity were Homer and Euripides, with other pieces of literature in very limited circulation. He also finds little evidence of a book selling industry, let alone publishing (Botha 2013, 53). In the empire as a whole, while it certainly would have been possible to make many copies of a wide variety of works, and while alphabetic languages are relatively easy to read, in fact we don't find it happening widely. The usage was, rather, fairly limited, including noteworthy inscriptions (Botha 2013, 54).

Among the difficulties inherent in studies of literacy are different definitions. Botha notes while some equate it with reading, others equate it with writing, competencies which require very specific skills and admit of varied levels of proficiency (Botha 2013, 55). Further, orality and literacy only very rarely could be considered to exist entirely apart from each other. In the presence of literacy there is necessarily an oral element. Botha additionally observes that inscriptions may well have been seen merely as part of the decoration of a monument. Graffiti, though apparently plentiful, does not tend to show a high level of literacy and may have been engaged in by a relatively small group of people (Botha 2013, 57).

For literacy to become widespread, access to schooling is required (Botha 2013, 59). Botha asserts public funding as necessary for building literacy, and the lack of such public funding in small communities to have severely limited literacy throughout the Roman empire. Elementary schooling was available to the wealthy, both free children and some slaves of wealthy people (Botha 2013, 60).

Botha turns to Roman Egypt for evidence of education, finding that extensive finds of papyrus have yielded some documentation of life (Botha 2013, 61). Both school exercises and evidence from homes indicate Homer as the primary literary figure. Schoolwork done on pieces of papyrus suggest a prosperous economy. Literacy seems widespread among the wealthy. In less prosperous villages there are fewer signs of literacy. Though writings of a more technical nature can be found, Botha considers them to be highly theoretical or technical, not useful for a general purpose (Botha 2013, 62). This emphasizes the utility of oral tradition as a means of imparting practical learning. Orality remained the default means of spreading information (Botha 2013, 63).

Because of the usefulness of orality, Botha observes that many in antiquity would have had little use for writing. It would not be the first means of communication for most purposes (Botha 2013, 64). Literacy would, however, have purposes. Botha cites Levi-Strauss, as well as Graff, following Gramsci, who takes literacy as a primary means to keep secrets, thus exercising oppressive power over others (Botha 2013, 64). Governmental use of writing could therefore be a tool of power, thus discouraging the desire to spread literacy (Botha 2013, 65). Letters might be written, but often simply to introduce a messenger. Many religious practices did not require literacy either (Botha 2013, 66). Religious writings were generally intended to be read aloud so as to be received by others.

Because of the cultural context of orality, Botha extrapolates, "Early Christian writings must be seen in their historical environment" (Botha 2013, 67). Citing Ong, Nelson, and Lord, Botha describes early Chrsitian literature as not having the structural and rhetorical features which have frequently been assumed of literature (Botha 2013, 68). Botha's argument suggests that the way we interpret the Gospels is through the lens of redaction criticism, as the work of  self-conscious editors using pieces of other works. Likewise, with Paul, if we assume a listening audience rather than a reading audience, some methods of text dissection can be seen as irrelevant.

​
0 Comments

An Oral Culture with Writing

10/3/2023

0 Comments

 
10/3/23
Scholarly Reflections

Botha, P.J.J. "Chapter Two: Living Voice and Lifeless Letters." Orality and Literacy in Early Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013, 34-51.

Writing, re-introduced into the Greek world about the 8th century B.C., was seen by the Greeks as foundational to their preservation of knowledge (Botha 2013,34). The use of a fully alphabetic means of writing with recognizable letters made writing well known. However, comfort with books and reading remained relatively scarce (Botha 2013,35). The culture, as a whole, remained one of orality. Through the Hellenistic period, including the time period in which the New Testament arose, composition remained oral in nature, written works were produced to be read aloud, and learning focused on memorization (Botha 2013,36). Botha describes this in terms of classical literature, intended to be spoken.

Botha observes that a variety of factors influenced maintenance of an oral culture (Botha 2013, 38). Ranging from eye care to industrial conditions to the availability and difficulty level of education, many factors limited the population of fluent readers. The use of more literate persons to assist less literate ones was common throughout the period (Botha 2013, 39).

Plato's attitude toward writing may be instructive. Botha illustrates numerous passages in which it is clear that writing is limited in that a written work cannot explain itself and may equally be used by those with a good or an inferior understanding of it (Botha 2013, 40). A written text was inferior to the testimony of an expert who could explain, illustrating and answering questions.

Botha further adduces Papias' desire, quoted in Eusebius, that living testimony be relied on for ascertaining truth (Botha 2013, 42). The "living voice" is also considered by Galen, Quintilian, and Pliny to be the pinnacle of communication. Clement of Alexandria, moreover, described his writing as that which would guard him against future forgetfulness (Botha 2013, 43). This indicates that he considered his writing to serve as his personal notes which could guide his real communication. 

Botha does observe that there were voices in antiquity who expressed negativity toward oral tradition. Cicero spoke favorably of written records, as did Seneca (Botha 2013, 46).

​
0 Comments

Orality and Mute Manuscripts

10/2/2023

0 Comments

 
0 Comments

    ​Help Fuel This Ministry by Clicking Here!

    All the work of Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry, including this blog, is supported by the generosity of people like you. Please consider joining our team of prayer and financial supporters. Read more here!
    Please Note: The opinions presented in blog posts are not necessarily those of Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry. Frequently we report on contrary views, often without comment. Please chime in on the discussion.

    About Throwing Inkwells

    When Martin Luther was dealing with struggles in his life he once saw what appeared to be an angelic being. Not trusting that he was going to be informed by someone other than the God revealed in Scripture, he took the appearance to be untrustworthy and hurled his inkwell at it. The chipped place in the plaster wall is still visible at the Wartburg Castle, though apparently the ink stain on the wall has been refreshed periodically by the caretaker.

    Blog Feeds

    RSS Feed

    Want to keep up with what's happening at Wittenberg Door? Subscribe to our mailing list!

    Categories

    All
    1 Chronicles
    1 Corinthians
    1 John
    1 Kings
    1 Peter
    1 Samuel
    1 Thessalonians
    1 Timothy
    2019-02-feb
    2 Chronicles
    2 Corinthians
    2-john
    2 Kings
    2 Peter
    2 Samuel
    2 Thessalonians
    2 Timothy
    3-john
    Abortion
    Academic-success
    Acts
    Advent 1
    Advent-1-a
    Advent-1b
    Advent-1c
    Advent 2
    Advent-2-a
    Advent-2b
    Advent-2c
    Advent 3
    Advent-3-a
    Advent-3b
    Advent-3c
    Advent 4
    Advent-4-a
    Advent-4b
    Advent-4c
    Akagi 2016
    Aland 1961
    Alesso-2009
    Alexander 1999
    Allegory
    Allitt-2010
    All Saints' Day
    Alon 1996
    Amos
    Anaphora
    Anointing
    Antioch
    Anunciation
    Apollinaris Of Hierapolis
    Apologetics
    Apostles' Creed
    Apostolical Constitutions
    Apostolic Fathers
    Applied Theology
    Aristides Of Athens
    Aristotle
    Aryeh 2021
    Ascension Day
    Ash Wednesday
    Athenagoras Of Athens
    Audet 1996
    Augustine
    Bakker-1993
    Balabanski-1997
    Bammel-1996
    Baptism
    Baptism-of-christ
    Baptism-of-the-lord-b
    Bardy-1938
    Baron-2019
    Baron-maponya-2020
    Bauckham-1984
    Bauckham-2006
    Bauckham-2007
    Beale-1984
    Belief
    Belonging
    Benamos-1999
    Betz-1996
    Biesenthal-1893
    Bigg-1904
    Bigg-1905
    Blogcation
    Blomberg-1984
    Boehme2010
    Botha-1967
    Botha-1993
    Botha-2013
    Braaten-2007
    Bradshaw 2002
    Bruce-1988
    Bruce-1988
    Bryennios
    Butler-1960
    Caneday-2017
    Canonicity
    Capon-1998
    Capon1998
    Carr-2010
    Carson-1991
    Carson-moo-2005
    Catechesis
    Catholicism
    Cerfaux-1959
    Chilton-1984
    Chrismation
    Christmas-1b
    Christmas-1c
    Christmas-dawn
    Christmas-day
    Christmas Eve
    Christmas Midnight
    Chronicles
    Church History
    Church Order
    Circumcision And Naming Of Christ
    Cody 1995
    Colossians
    Conditions
    Confession Of Peter
    Confessions
    Connolly 1932
    Connolly 1933
    Connolly 1934
    Constantine
    Constanza-2013
    Cooper & Lioy 2018
    Costa 2021
    Court 1981
    Creeds
    Culley 1986
    Cyprian
    Daly 1978
    Daniel
    Danielou 1956
    Davids 1984
    Davis 1995
    DeHalleux 1996
    Dehandschutter 1995
    Denominations
    Deuteronomy
    Didache
    Diversity
    Divine Fellowship
    Dix 1933
    Dix-2005
    Dix2005
    Doane 1994
    Draper
    Draper 1984
    Draper 1989
    Draper 1995
    Draper-1996
    Draper-1997
    Draper-2000
    Draper 2005
    Draper-2006
    Draper 2008
    Dube 2016
    Due 2003
    Early Christian Functionaries
    Easter-2
    Easter-2a
    Easter2b
    Easter-2c
    Easter-3
    Easter-3a
    Easter-3b
    Easter-3c
    Easter-4
    Easter-4a
    Easter-4b
    Easter-4c
    Easter-5
    Easter-5a
    Easter-5b
    Easter-6
    Easter-6a
    Easter-6b
    Easter-6c
    Easter-7
    Easter-7a
    Easter-7b
    Easter-7c
    Easter-b
    Easter-day
    Easter-monday
    Easter-sunday-a
    Easter-sunday-c
    Easter-sunrise
    Easter-tuesday
    Easter-wednesday
    Ecclesiastes
    Eleutheria2014
    Elman-1999
    Ephesians
    Epiphany
    Epiphany-1c
    Epiphany-2-a
    Epiphany-2c
    Epiphany-3-a
    Epiphany-3b
    Epiphany-3c
    Epiphany-4-a
    Epiphany-4b
    Epiphany-4c
    Epiphany-5-a
    Epiphany-5b
    Epiphany-5c
    Epiphany-6-a
    Epiphany-6c
    Epiphany-7-a
    Epiphany-c
    Epistle Of Barnabas
    Epistles
    Eschatology
    Esther
    Ethics
    Eucharist
    Evangelism
    Eve-of-the-circumcision-of-christ
    Exodus
    Exodus-20
    Experiential Reading
    Eybers 1975
    Ezekiel
    Ezra
    Fagerberg-1988
    Fagerberg1988
    Fall Of Jerusalem
    Farrell-1987
    Flew-2007
    Flusser-1996
    Forde-2007
    Fraade-1999
    France-2007
    Galatians
    Garrow 2004
    Gender
    Genesis
    Gero 1977
    Gibbins 1935
    Gibbs 2006
    Gibbs 2010
    Gibbs 2018
    Glover-1958
    Goga & Popa 2019
    Gonzalez-2010
    Good-friday
    Gospels
    Greek
    Grosvener-schaff-1885
    Grosvenor-1884
    Guardian-of-jesus
    Habakkuk
    Haggai
    Hagner 1984
    Harnack-1884
    Harrington 2008
    Harris 1887
    Harris 1984
    Hartin 2008
    Hasitschka 2008
    Hearon 2004
    Hearon 2010
    Hebrews
    Heilmann 2018
    Henderson-1992
    Henderson1992
    Henderson 1995
    Hezser 2010
    History
    Hoffman-1986
    Holy Cross Day
    Holy-innocents
    Holy-saturday
    Horsley 2010
    Hosea
    Hutchens2013
    Hymes-1994
    Ignatius Of Antioch
    Incarnation
    Infertility
    Isaiah
    Jaffee-1999
    James
    James Of Jerusalem
    James The Elder
    Jefford 1989
    Jefford 1995
    Jefford 2005
    Jefford 2019
    Jeffreys-1986
    Jeremiah
    Jerome
    Jesus
    Jewish Christianity
    Job
    Joel
    John
    Jonah
    Jones & Mirecki 1995
    Joseph
    Joshua
    Judaism
    Jude
    Judges
    Julian The Apostate
    Jungmann-1959
    Justinian
    Justin Martyr
    Kelber-1987
    Kelber-1995
    Kelber 2002
    Kelber 2010
    Kelber & Sanders 2010
    Kelly 1978
    Kevil
    Kings
    Kleinig-2013
    Kloppenborg 1979
    Kloppenborg 1995
    Kloppenborg 2005
    Kloppenborg 2008
    Koch2010
    Kok 2015
    Kolb-2000
    Kolb2000
    Kolb-arand-2008
    Kolbarand2008
    Konradt 2008
    Koukl 2019
    Kurekchomycz2009
    Lake 1905
    Lamentations
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-a
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-b
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-c
    Last Supper
    LaVerdiere 1996
    Law
    Layton 1968
    Lectionary
    Lent-1
    Lent-1-a
    Lent-1b
    Lent-1c
    Lent-2
    Lent-2-a
    Lent-2b
    Lent-2c
    Lent-3
    Lent-3-a
    Lent-3b
    Lent-3c
    Lent-4
    Lent-4-a
    Lent-4b
    Lent-4c
    Lent-5
    Lent-5-a
    Lent-5b
    Lent-5c
    Lessing-2014
    Lessing2014
    Lessing & Steinmann 2014
    Leviticus
    LGBTQ
    Lincoln-1885
    Lindemann 1997
    Literacy
    Literary Character
    Liturgy
    Livesey 2012
    Long-2009
    Lord-1986
    Lord-1987
    Lord's Prayer
    Love
    Luke
    Luther
    Lutheran Confessions
    Lutheran Distinctives
    Maas-2014
    Maccoull-1999
    Maier-1984
    Malachi
    Manuscripts
    Marcion
    Mark
    Marty-2016
    Martyrdom-of-john-the-baptist
    Martyrs
    Mary-magdalene
    Mary-mother-of-our-lord
    Mason-1998
    Massaux-1993-1950
    Matthew
    Matthias
    Mazza-1995
    Mazza-1996
    Mazza-1999
    Mbamalu-2014
    Mcdonald-1980
    Mcdonnell-montague-1991
    Mckean-2003
    Mcknight-2014
    Micah
    Middleton-1935
    Milavec-1995
    Milavec-2003
    Milavec-2005
    Milavec2012
    Miller-2019
    Missional
    Mitch-2010
    Mitchell-1995
    Molina-evers-1998
    Monasticism
    Monday-in-holy-week
    Montenyohl-1993
    Morris-1992
    Motyer-1993
    Mueller-2006
    Muilenburg-1929
    Music
    Nahum
    Nehemiah
    Neufeld-1999
    Newsletter
    New Testament
    New-testament
    Niditch-1995
    Niditch-2003
    Niebuhr-1956
    Niederwimmer-1982
    Niederwimmer-1995
    Niederwimmer-1996
    Niederwimmer 1998
    Numbers
    Oaths
    Obadiah
    Old Testament
    Old-testament
    Olsen-1986
    Ong-1987
    Ong-1988
    Ong-1995
    Oralit
    Orality
    Ordination
    Orphan-hosting
    Osborne-2002
    Osborne-2013
    Overman-2008
    Ozment-1980
    Ozment1980
    Painter-2008
    Palm-sunday
    Palm-sunday-a
    Palm-sunday-c
    Pardee-1995
    Pardee-2012
    Parks-1986
    Passionb
    Pastoral-office
    Pastors
    Patterson-1995
    Paul
    Pearce-1993
    Pentateuch
    Pentecost-10a
    Pentecost-10b
    Pentecost-10c
    Pentecost-11a
    Pentecost-11b
    Pentecost-11c
    Pentecost-12a
    Pentecost-12b
    Pentecost-12c
    Pentecost-13a
    Pentecost-13b
    Pentecost-13c
    Pentecost13c
    Pentecost-14a
    Pentecost-14b
    Pentecost14c
    Pentecost-15
    Pentecost-15a
    Pentecost-15b
    Pentecost15c
    Pentecost-16
    Pentecost-16a
    Pentecost-16b
    Pentecost-16c
    Pentecost-17a
    Pentecost-17b
    Pentecost-17c
    Pentecost-18a
    Pentecost-18b
    Pentecost-18-c
    Pentecost-19a
    Pentecost-19b
    Pentecost-19-c
    Pentecost-1a
    Pentecost-20a
    Pentecost-20b
    Pentecost-20-c
    Pentecost-21a
    Pentecost-21b
    Pentecost-21-c
    Pentecost-22a
    Pentecost-22b
    Pentecost-22-c
    Pentecost-23a
    Pentecost-23b
    Pentecost-23-c
    Pentecost-24a
    Pentecost-24b
    Pentecost-24-c
    Pentecost-25b
    Pentecost-25-c
    Pentecost-26b
    Pentecost-26-c
    Pentecost-2a
    Pentecost-2b
    Pentecost-2c
    Pentecost-3a
    Pentecost-3b
    Pentecost-3c
    Pentecost-4a
    Pentecost-4b
    Pentecost-4c
    Pentecost-5a
    Pentecost-5b
    Pentecost-5c
    Pentecost-6a
    Pentecost-6b
    Pentecost-6c
    Pentecost-7a
    Pentecost-7b
    Pentecost-7c
    Pentecost-8a
    Pentecost-8b
    Pentecost-8c
    Pentecost-9a
    Pentecost-9b
    Pentecost-9c
    Pentecost-b
    Pentecost-c
    Pentecost-eve
    Pentecost-monday
    Pentecost-sunday
    Pentecost-tuesday
    Petersen-1994
    Peterson-2010
    Peterson2010
    Philemon
    Philippians
    Philosophy
    Picirilli-1988
    Pick-1908
    Pieper-1924
    Pieper1924
    Pieper-1968
    Piper-1947
    Pluralism
    Pope Leo I
    Post-70
    Powell-2000
    Prayer
    Preaching
    Presentation-of-our-lord
    Proctor-2019
    Proper19c
    Proper20c
    Proper-21c
    Proper-22c
    Proper-23c
    Proper-24c
    Proper-25c
    Proper-26c
    Proper-27c
    Proper-28c
    Prophecy
    Prophets
    Proverbs
    Psalm
    Psalms
    Purity
    Quinquagesima
    Quintilian
    Rabbinic-character
    Real-presence
    Receptivity
    Reed-1995
    Reformation
    Reformation-day
    Reinhartz-2018
    Reproof
    Repschinski-2008
    Resurrection
    Revelation
    Rhetoric
    Rhoads-2010
    Richardson-gooch-1984
    Riggs-1995
    Ritual-meal
    Romans
    Romeny-2005
    Rordorf-1996
    Rosenberg-1986
    Rosenberg-1987
    Rosenfeldlevene2012
    Rouwhorst-2005
    Rueger-2016
    Russo-1994
    Ruth
    Sacrament
    Sacrifice
    Saenger-1999
    Sailhamer-1992
    Sailhamer1992
    Sale-1996
    Samuel
    Scaer-2004
    Scaer2004
    Schaff-1886
    Schaff-1888
    Schaff-1889
    Schaff 2014
    Schaff2014
    Schollgen
    Schroter-2008
    Schwarz-2005
    Scriptural-usage
    Seeliger-1996
    Senn-1997
    Septuagesima
    Sermon
    Sexagesima
    Sim-2008
    Simon-and-jude
    Smith-2009
    Smith-2018
    Sommerville-2006
    Song-of-songs
    Songofsongs
    St-andrew
    Stark 1997
    St-barnabas
    St-bartholomew
    Stewart-Sykes 2008
    St-john
    St-john-the-baptist
    St-luke
    St-mark
    St-matthew
    St-matthias
    St-michael-and-all-angels
    St-paul
    St-peter-and-paul
    St Philip And St James
    Strawbridge 2017
    St. Stephen
    St. Thomas
    St. Titus
    Sunday Of The Passion
    Svartvik 2008
    Syreeni 2005
    Syria
    Tatian
    Taylor 1888
    TDNT
    Teaching
    Telfer 1939
    Tertullian
    Textual Comparison
    Textual Integrity
    Theological Development
    Theophilos 2018
    Theophilus Of Antioch
    Thielman 2010
    Thursday-in-holy-week
    Timothy
    Titus
    Tomson-2005
    Tomson-2008
    Tradition
    Transfiguration
    Transfiguration-a
    Transfigurationb
    Transfiguration-c
    Trinity-1
    Trinity-10
    Trinity-11
    Trinity-12
    Trinity-13
    Trinity-14
    Trinity-15
    Trinity-16
    Trinity-17
    Trinity 18
    Trinity 19
    Trinity 2
    Trinity 20
    Trinity 21
    Trinity 22
    Trinity 23
    Trinity 3
    Trinity-4
    Trinity-5
    Trinity-6
    Trinity-7
    Trinity-8
    Trinity-9
    Trinity-a
    Trinity-b
    Trinity-c
    Trinity-sunday
    Tsang-2009
    Tuckett
    Tuesday-in-holy-week
    Tuilier-1995
    Tuilier-2005
    Twelftree-1984
    Two-ways
    Ty-19
    Vahrenhurst-2008
    Van-der-merwe-2017
    Van-der-merwe-2019
    Van-der-watt-2008
    Van-de-sandt-2002
    Van-de-sandt-2007
    Van-de-sandt-2008
    Vandesandt2010
    Vandesandt2011
    Van-de-sandt-flusser-2002
    Van-deventer-2021
    Varner-2005
    Vatican-ii
    Veith-1993
    Veith1993
    Veith-sutton-2017
    Verheyden-2005
    Verheyden-2008
    Vikisfreibergs-1997
    Visitation
    Voobus-1968
    Voobus-1969
    Vows
    Warfield-1886
    Wasson-toelken-1998
    Wednesday-in-holy-week
    Wegman 1985
    Wenham-1984
    Wenham-1992
    Weren-2005
    Weren-2008
    Weston-2009
    Wilhite-2019
    Wilson-2011
    Wilson2011
    Wilson20113470b5cf10
    Winger-2014
    Wischmeyer-2008
    Wolmarans-2005
    Wright-1984
    Young-2011
    Ysebaert2002
    Zangenberg-2008
    Zechariah
    Zephaniah
    Zetterholm-2008

Proudly powered by Weebly