Mindless in Missouri

Don't get me wrong, I have a grudging admiration for Martin Luther, more-so having recently read psychoanalyst Erik Erikson's biography - an oldie but goodie first published in 1959 - Young Man Luther. No doubt about it, Anfechtung has a lot to answer for!

But these two pictures are nothing but jaw-dropping in their Lutherolatry. I mean, c'mon guys, talk about putting someone on a pedestal! The first is apparently arranged to exhibit the excellencies of Concordia's ESV Study Bible being released about now. Weighty. Authoritative. I mean who would argue with a glowering visage like that!

The second is the somewhat unimaginative but phallic cover of the initial volume in the Concordia edition of Luther's works. The reformer protectively holds a bible while gazing upward. It begs for a caption: Nein Katie, you must stay up in the loft, these chocolates are mine, all mine!

You'll need to click on the photos to appreciate the utter horror of it all in larger form. Mercifully, both publications come from the whinging Misery Synod, famous for its wooden literalism, rather than any responsible Lutheran body, but still... this is verging on cultic.

Rodney vs the Reprobates

Rodney Stark is author of The Rise of Christianity, a volume with a good deal to recommend itself - at least from the perspective of the church history paper I took a year or so back. Stark is a sociologist with a fascinating reconstruction to offer on how early church growth reached warp drive so quickly in the first centuries CE.without the aid of either WGN or a Branding Task Force.

Stark's subsequent books have been tilted in an ideological direction, something bemoaned here once before. The Stark truth is that Christianity turned out to be the best thing since sliced bread. No wait, that's a bit redundant... sliced bread owes its genius to Christianity (or something like that.)
Wicked rationalist Richard Carrier is calling his bluff. Stark would have us believe that the scientific weltanschauung could only arise in the Christian West. This is just bad history, according to Carrier, in two podcasts for the Polyschizmatic Reprobates Hour. This is an amusing excursus, if you're moderately geekish or into ancient history.

Okay, so you have to be a bit patient while Carrier and his affable host "Dan the Demented" indulge in a spot of intellectual banter on famous-but-forgotten Greeks and Romans, but perseverance will reward with some weirdly fascinating historical stuff (did you know that Luther is said to have had a copy of Josephus with no references to Christ?)
Sorry Rodney, but I think you're toast.

And Matthew begat Josh

I've just had one of those "duh!" moments. You know, when something completely obvious finally penetrates through your thick skull.

How many times have I read through (or skipped over - it's not exactly riveting) the alleged genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke. These passages have proven to be a minefield of bad exegesis over the centuries. The two disagree, and given that there's supposed to be no genetic contribution to Jesus from Joseph's side anyway, the whole purpose seems a bit irrelevant.

Of course there are the Josh McDowell types, eager to race in and explain it all away, but then they would, wouldn't they? Working back from the conclusion to fiddle with the evidence till it fits... not a good look.

Then a light snapped on, courtesy of Julie Galambusch. In her book The Reluctant Parting she writes:

Matthew begins his gospel with a rather quaint nod to tradition: a genealogy of Jesus modeled on the "begats" of the Hebrew Bible. Matt. 1:2-16 is based loosely on 1 Chron. 3:1-3, but with the generations juggled in order to divide Jewish history into three distinct, fourteen-generation epochs... Matthew seeks to demonstrate numerologically (a practice called gematria in Hebrew) that the moment for the messiah's birth has arrived.

That's it - gematria! Forget all the tortuous apologetic drivel from McDowell, and even much of the painstaking eisegesis in the commentaries, we're talking numerology. Matthew wasn't completely incompetent after all, nor was he trying to be dishonest by the standards of his time. As a Jewish scribe he is doing something quite predictable, and something McDowell himself would understand in the event that he had a moment of honest clarity: he's fiddling with the numbers to make them say what he needs them to say - but (as I'm sure they'd both assure us) all in a good cause.

Lutheran Ethics, Abortion and George Tiller

As a person with a Lutheran background (somewhat convoluted and sidetracked admittedly, as most people who read this blog know) I found a recent university course on Christian ethics moderately distasteful in its carelessly assumed Calvinism. I prefer progressive Catholic teaching on ethics by far, and am especially impressed by the work of Daniel Maguire (not top of the bishops' hit parade by any stretch!) Maguire's A Moral Creed for All Christiansis worth a truckload of Reformed gnat-straining.

A specifically Lutheran approach to ethics, however, is hard to pin down. It's not the same as our Calvinist brethren, and often woefully negligent in specifics. I found this article by Ed Knudson, an ELCA pastor, fascinating because he actually tackles the ethical question, and in the difficult context of the recent murder of George Tiller, a doctor who performed abortions. Tiller was also a practicing Lutheran. Knudson goes as far as implying that he was a martyr.

I'm not sure how to evaluate Knudson's article. It needs time to "settle," and deserves a second (and third) reading before leaping to conclusions. Reservations? You bet. But definitely food for thought (and grist for fundagelical outrage, no doubt.)

Related Link: Online Journal of Public Theology.

Hans Kung on Beginnings

Hans Kung is a brilliant scholar and among the most perceptive voices in Christendom. Reading his Christianity: Essence, History & Future (2004) is to subject oneself to a well-deserved slapping about the chops for intellectual laziness and historical ignorance from a writer whose rigor rises far above those charges. Mea culpa! Non-Catholics in particular should probably read Kung to get a flavor of the best-case-scenario for the church-to-come, both post-Ratzinger and post-Calvinist. Kung is a prophet ahead of his time.

Having said that, The Beginning of All Things: Science and Religionis a disappointment. Kung is outside his field, and doggy-paddling beyond his depth, a keen amateur out for a romp. Intelligent and articulate? That goes without saying. Convincing and authoritative? No. A good editor might pare the material down to a salvagable level by dumping a good third of the text, but even then I have my doubts. This book, unlike his others, is likely to date quickly. John Haught is the better communicator on the fault line between religion and science

Pommies posturing on Paul

BBC4 has a recent program on Paul the apostle available online for those with an interest in this pivotal figure. Some mildly interesting discussion hosted by the insufferable Melvyn Bragg, with a sizable dose of utter nonsense as well, and a lot of dim-witted posturing by the blokes, dressed up with upper-class accents. Possibly the only sane person in the studio is Helen Bond, if you don't fall asleep before she gets a chance to get a word in.

BBC programs only stay on the web for a short time, so "get it while it's still lukewarm."

LSB - kinda cool

Study Bibles: there are the academic ones (Oxford, HarperCollins etc.) and the apologetic ones, and ne'er the twain shall meet. Except perhaps this once.

Augsburg Fortress' Lutheran Study Bibleis now out. I was surprised on unpacking the amazon.com box to find what a substantial volume this is. LSB is designed to mesh in with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's Book of Faith project, and mark out the distinctives that separate a Lutheran approach to scripture from the overwhelmingly Reformed emphasis that largely reigns unchallenged in the English speaking world.

In terms of appearance and design, beautiful may be a little strong as an adjective, but not by much. The list of scholars who have contributed is impressive: Terence Fretheim, Karl Donfried, Diane Jacobson... But the LSB isn't designed for eggheads either, ELCA wanted it accessible to a wide readership, and I think they've come close to striking a decent balance. The text appears in a single wide column, with study notes in a side margin, with icons identifying whether background information, theological insights, or Lutheran perspectives are being supplied. A further icon indicates questions for reflection, a category that will appeal to some, but I personally find rather twee.

The LSB uses the text of the NRSV, minus the apocrypha. Flicking through the Pentateuch you will find additional charts on the ten plagues, the ten commandments (with the separate numbering in Jewish, Catholic/Lutheran/Orthodox, and Reformed/Anglican communities), and Hebrew festivals.

The quality of the study notes varies from book to book depending on who each was assigned to. The notes in Numbers, for example, are much fuller and more engaging, than those in Genesis. To get a feel for the LSB you can download the book of Jonah.

Several essays anchor this NRSV firmly in a Lutheran context, and because this is an ELCA production we are talking about a stream of Lutheranism that stands in the best tradition of European and American scholarship (though again, this is not a scholarly Study Bible as such.) Lutheran Study Bible from Augsburg Fortress should be distinguished from the yet-to-be-launched volume of the same name from the fundamentalist Missouri Synod (Concordia imprint) which promises to be something else entirely.

My initial reaction, in a country like New Zealand where Lutherans are as rare as hens' teeth, was to immediately share my delight by finding a smug Presbyterian or Baptist to whack over the head with it (metaphorically speaking, of course.) Wisdom prevailed, and I'll bide my time till the next Jehovah's Witness comes knocking...