Monday, May 30, 2011

Sinaiticus in Times Literary Supplement Again

In the Times Literary Supplement published 27 May, pp. 26-27, appears J. K. Elliott's review of the facsimile of Codex Sinaiticus (combined with a review of David Parker's book on the codex).

See also last year's appearance of Sinaiticus in TLS here.

Diogenes Laertius' Text-Critical Marks (3d cent. C.E.)

Roger Pearse has recently blogged about the text critical marks described by the 3rd century biographer Diogenes Laertius in his Lives of the Philosophers.

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

What To Do with SBL Bags?

Have you ever wondered what other people do with their used SBL bags?

Then you should visit this facebook group What to do with SBL bags. As you can see there, I use one of mine to carry skates in winter time (and I am not the only one).

Note that I am not talking about saddleback leather bags (SBL), but the tote bags for participants of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) meetings.

I look forward to getting a new bag at the SBL meeting in London in July. By the way, in case you are an advertiser, don't forget the tote bag insertion ($350 for each insert), which for this meeting is apparently due on Thursday.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Lectionary 2282

I happened to be talking texts at lunch-time with a friend (as one does), and he said that he had worked on a lectionary manuscript which he found in his seminary library. So I said I'd like to see that and post it on our blog. Which is what I am about to do now.

John W. Taylor, 'A Greek Lectionary Manuscript at Southwestern Seminary', Southwestern Journal of Theology, Vol. 52, No. 1, Fall 2009, 33-51.


It has a nice photo and is a nice write up (esp. of the wierd variant at Luke 18.5). Enjoy.

Monday, May 23, 2011

SBL International Meeting in London, 2011

This year's SBL International Meeting in London 4-7 July (King's College, Waterloo campus) probably offers an all time high selection of papers in biblical textual criticism. (You can access the abstracts for the papers below by searching the online programme book here.)

4-22 Working with Biblical Manuscripts (Textual Criticism)
7/04/2011
8:30 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: 1.68 - Franklin Wilkins

Theme: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible


Tommy Wasserman, Örebro School of Theology, Presiding
Michael Langlois, University of Strasbourg
Working with Biblical Manuscripts: Joshua 10 at Qumran (30 min)
Torleif Elgvin, Evangelical Lutheran University College
A Variant Literary Edition of 2 Samuel from Qumran (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Break (30 min)
David Willgren, Orebro School of Theology
Psalms in the Making: Tracing the Tradition of Psalms 14 and Psalms 53 (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)

5-24Working with Biblical Manuscripts (Textual Criticism)
7/05/2011
8:30 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: 1.68 - Franklin Wilkins

Theme: Old Testament Versions / OT Citations in the NT


JLH Krans, Vrije Universiteit, Presiding
Valérie Kabergs, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Wordplay Within the Context of 'explicit ne explanations' in Genesis 1-11, as a Content-related Criterion in the Characterization of Septuagint Translation Technique (30 min)
Steve Delamarter, George Fox University
Ethiopic Manuscripts for the Textual History of the Ethiopic Old Testament (THEOT) Project (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Break (30 min)
Johannes M. de Vries, Kirchliche Hochschule Wuppertal/Bethel
The Textual History of the Pentateuch and the New Testament: Results of the Wuppertal LXX.NT Research Project with Particular Consideration of Codex Ambrosianus (30 min)
Ronald van der Bergh, University of Pretoria
Tracing the explicit quotations of the Twelve Minor Prophets in Codex Bezae's Acts (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)


6-25 Working with Biblical Manuscripts (Textual Criticism)
7/06/2011
8:30 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: 1.68 - Franklin Wilkins

Theme: Working with Greek New Testament MSS


Tommy Wasserman, Örebro School of Theology, Presiding
Don Barker, Macquarie University
Redating NT Papyri (30 min)
A. W. Wilson, Queensland, Australia
Scribal Habits in Greek New Testament Manuscripts (30 min)
Edgar Battad Ebojo, University of Birmingham
Profaning the Sacred? Nomina Sacra and the Scribe of Papyrus 46 (30 min)
Break (30 min)
Dan Batovici, University of St. Andrews
Textual Revisions of Hermas in Codex Sinaiticus (30 min)
W. Andrew Smith, University of Edinburgh
Unit Delimitation in the Gospels of Codex Alexandrinus (30 min)

7-23 Working with Biblical Manuscripts (Textual Criticism)
7/07/2011
8:30 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: 1.68 - Franklin Wilkins

Theme: Working with Textual Variants


Ronald van der Bergh, University of Pretoria, Presiding
Peter Williams, Tyndale House (Cambridge)
The Case for 'Filled with Compassion' in Mark 1:41 (25 min)
Jeff Cate, California Baptist University
Having a Gut Feeling for Anger: Mark 1:41 and Visceral Emotions (25 min)
Tommy Wasserman, Örebro School of Theology
P45 and Codex W in Mark Revisited (25 min)
Break (30 min)
Bill Warren, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary and Matt Solomon, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary
Finding the Remembered Jesus in Variant Readings: Textual Criticism Insights for Historical Jesus Research (25 min)
Silvia Castelli, VU University, Amsterdam
“Never to be accepted blindly, neither to be rejected blindly”: Wettstein on New Testament Conjectural Emendation (25 min)
Jan Krans, VU University Amsterdam
Beza’s Influence on the KJV New Testament (25 min)


Two other papers (at least) are of interest for textual criticism:


Keith E. Small, London School of Theology
Textual Variants in the Quranic Manuscript Tradition: An Analysis of the Dynamics of Textual Transmission (20 min)

(in 5-45 Quran and Islamic Tradition in Comparative Perspective on
7/05/2011, 1:30 PM to 4:30 PM, Room: 1.60 - Franklin Wilkins)

and

Jenny Read-Heimerdinger, Prifysgol Cymru - Trinity St Davids (Lampeter)
Variety is the Spice of Scripture: The Reciprocal Effects of Textual Criticism and Discourse Analysis (30 min)

(in 4-10 In Honor of Stephen H. Levinsohn: Discourse Studies and the Greek New Testament on 7/04/2011, 8:30 AM to 11:30 AM, Room: 1.71 - Franklin Wilkins)

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Evangelical Textual Criticism on Facebook

Evangelical Textual Criticism is now on Facebook.

The Facebook page will mirror this blog, i.e., the blogpost (not comments).

I take the opportunity to also mention that Tyndale House is on Facebook, as is Örebro Missionsskola and Örebro Teologiska Högskola.

Monday, May 16, 2011

Lambeth Palace display

Lambeth Palace (a sort of smaller scale equivalent of the Vatican Library for the Church of England) is putting on its own KJV inspired display. More details here.

Chris Jordan Joins IGNTP Committee

Dr. Christopher Jordan has been appointed new member of the International Greek New Testament Project.

Chris Jordan wrote his dissertation, "The Textual Tradition of the Gospel of John in Greek Gospel Lectionaries from the Middle Byzantine Period," under David Parker, University of Birmingham, 2010. Jordan promises to make a valuable contribution to the committee through his thorough knowledge about the lectionary tradition.

His dissertation is available at ETHOS (requires registration).

See our earlier report on Jordan's dissertation and successful defense here.

See also his online edition of the Protevangelium Jacobi here.

What is IGNTP?
The International Greek New Testament Project (IGNTP) exists to produce a comprehensive critical apparatus of the Greek New Testament.

It began in 1949, following on from the Critical Greek Testament project of 1926, and consists of a committee of European and American textual scholars which oversees the work. The fruits of this collaboration may be seen in the IGNTP edition of The Gospel according to St Luke (1984, 1987). The Gospel according to St John is currently in preparation.

See how can you contribute to the IGNTP here.

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Edinburgh: NT Job

There is a vacancy for a Lecturer in New Testament and Christian Origins at the University of Edinburgh and I've been asked to post a link here at ETC (which I happily do).

We are seeking an outstanding researcher/lecturer to join the Biblical Studies subject area in the School of Divinity (New College). The candidate can be a specialist in any area of NT study, but applicants whose field is Pauline studies or the use of the Old Testament in the New are particularly encouraged to apply.

The successful candidate will be expected to engage actively in research, teaching and administration and play a full part in the collegiate life of the Biblical Studies subject area and the School of Divinity.

Candidates are expected to have a relevant doctoral degree, and to have demonstrable achievements in research, publication, and teaching. The School has plans to develop PGT programmes delivered via distance learning, experience and/or an interest in this area would be advantageous.

For more info go here.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Report on Secret Gospel of Mark Symposium Pt 3

Report on Secret Gospel of Mark Symposium Pt 3 by Ryan Wettlaufer (pt 1 here; pt 2 here)

By the time I made it back to the conference they were in the middle
of Pierluigi Piovanelli's paper on Morton Smith and Aleister Crowley.
Yes, I do mean that Aleister Crowley. Piovanelli seemed to be trying
to establish the events and trends in Morton Smith's life that would
both motivate him and enable him to create a forgery like sm. For
example, Piovanelli pointed out a time when Smith was studying
Clement, thus giving him the knowledge necessary to forge a letter of
Clement. The titular event, however, was when Smith became fascinated with the life of Crowley, who - as Piovanelli documented - Smith appreciated as having a certain kind of edgey realness that was missing from other religious folk. In Crowley, Piovanelli argued, Smith found an archetype of the kind of Jesus he would really like to see, and so Smith invented the sm excerpts - with their edgey sexual elements - to create that Jesus. At least I think that's what Piovanelli was arguing, he went well past his allotted time and Phil Harland, who was chairing at this point, eventually cut him off.

Next came Allan Pantuck, who, surprisingly, is actually credentialed
as a medical doctor and a urologist. I wondered then what kind of
biblical studies chops he might have, and the answer was pretty
impressive ones. His work was well disciplined, well researched, and
very well ordered. If anyone could convince me of the authenticity of
sm, I think it would be this guy. He presented - with very nice
images of photos and scans - a survey of Morton Smith's own personal
writings. The point of this survey was essentially the opposite of
Piovanelli's: he wanted to show how Smith's life would have left him
ill-equipped to create a forgery like sm. For example, Pantuck showed
several personal letters wherein Smith lamented his poor Greek skills.
He confirmed this with personal writings of other scholars who
commented on Smith's poor Greek skills. These poor skills, Pantuck
argued, mean that Smith could not have had the ability to compose a
fake letter of Clement. Over all it was a strong presentation, though
I wonder what Smith would have thought about his integrity resting on
his incompetence!

Next came Peter Jeffery from Notre Dame. He was supposed to present
on Clement, and he may have been doing that in the first half of his
paper. It was rather quiet, and so I went to look in the back in the
vain and unfulfilled hope of replenished coffee. Suddenly, though,
Jeffrey came quite alive, and the second half of his presentation was
spirited to say the least. He exclaimed with more than a little
excitement that Smith's writings were full of "bullshit! just
bullshit!" and challenged anyone in the room to take "the Jeffrey
Challenge" wherein if you could take a copy of Smith's work, spend an hour in the library checking each one of his ancient source references, and not come to the conclusion that he was a crazy charlatan, then Jeffrey would write you a glowing recommendation on official Princeton letterhead to the business school of your choice! Jeffrey repeated this challenge several times, noted that he could use Princeton letterhead because he was emeritus there, and was, well, full of twitchy glee. Honestly, I wasn't quite sure what to make of it all,
except that I might have figured out where all the coffee went.

Finally Scott Brown gave a very quiet and studious paper on the seven
veil motif in sm and how it compared to Clement. It seemed like a
fine study, though at the end Brown admitted that, as there were no
Clement scholars there, no one was really qualified to evaluate his
thesis.

That was it for the main conference. There was a public debate later
that night, but I did not attend that. What was my reaction? I
suppose I now lean towards some kind of inauthenticity. What I really
came away with, however, was a better realisation of the variety of
options outside of the "hoax or real?" binary offered by the
conference's title. It could, at one end, be a real letter of Clement
with real, secret excerpts of Mark. Or, it could be a real letter of
Clement with nevertheless fake excerpts from Mark. Or, it could be a
fake letter of Clement with fake excerpts from Mark. If the latter,
however, the forgery could have been carried out by Smith, or it could
have been carried out by someone prior to Smith - even long prior - so
that Smith's discovery was, for his part, quite sincere. Finally, all
of those options could be further mirrored into two versions: the one
that sees the sm excerpts as describing a homosexual encounter, and
one that sees it as an innocent reference to teaching at night. In
other words, the sm subject is more complicated than I'd realised.

As for the conference, I thought it was well organized, but overall I
wasn't impressed by the level of debate. There seemed to be a lot of arbitrary back-and-forthing. One person argued that the style of sm proved authenticity because it matched the style of Mark. Another argued that the style disproved authenticity exactly because it matched the style of Mark - that's exactly what a forger would do! One argued that handwriting analysis proved that it was a forgery. Another
argued that different handwriting experts could show that it was not a
forgery. One argued that Smith studied Clement and was skilled at
Greek. Another argued that Smith did not study Clement enough and was unskilled at Greek. All told, it reminded me of a rather frank admission by the Lawyer Allan Dershowtiz that I read the other day (just don't ask why I was reading Dershowtiz!), who said "when you read opinions like this, you get the sense of philosopher-kings sitting around deciding how to arrive at the right result by a series
of inductive and deductive reasonings and analogies. In fact, that is
not how legal thinking generally occurs. People start with a
preference for having the case decided in a certain way... We start out
with points of view and then we search the literature. We search
philosophy, we search science for ways of rationalizing our
conclusion" (Thinking About Thinking, p. 15).


Other reports from the symposium:

Sarah Veale

Guestpost at Apocryphicity by Calogero A. Miceli

Tony Burke (Apocryphicity)

Idem, pt 2

Greek Fragment of the Testamentum Domini

In 2005 I published an article: ‘An Unidentified Theological Fragment from the Fifth Century in a Private Collection in Cambridge (de Hamel MS 373)’ Tyndale Bulletin 56 (2005), 35-38. This article dealt with the document that is pictured here, offering a transcription, and suggested it was a Christian text dealing with church order, but one which I had been unable to identify (hence the title!).
Recently two scholars who have been working on the Latin texts purchased with this Greek text have argued (I think persuasively) that this fragment represents a piece of the only surviving Greek manuscript of the Testamentum Domini (for some of the back story see here and here).

S. Corcoran, & B. Salway, ‘A Newly Identified Greek Fragment of the Testamentum DominiJournal of Theological Studies 62 (2011), 118-135. So kudos to them for solving the mystery - an excellent outcome all round.

Report on Secret Gospel of Mark Symposium Pt 2

Report on Secret Gospel of Mark Symposium part 2 by Ryan Wettlaufer (part 1 here)

Craig Evans went after break. His argument was that there were just too many co-incidences between ideas and comments that Morton Smith made before the supposed discovery of sm, and what he discovered in sm. Evans handed out a neat, 2 page chart of these co-incidences. For example, in his 1951 Tannaitic Parallels, Evans argues that Smith interprets the phrase "mystery of the kingdom of God" in Mark 4:11 as a reference to secret sexual activities. This, Evans argues, is a thoroughly unique interpretation held by no one else but Smith. It is remarkable, then, that in 1958 Smith would find the same phrase with the same unique interpretation in sm. Two pages of such co-incidences make, for Evans, "a case of too many coincidences and too many confirmations" for the discovery of sm to be genuine.

The response came from Allan Pantuck from University of California, who said that Evans had given a very fine paper, with the exception that he disagreed with every single point! He focused on refuting only a couple, however, arguing that they are either not really parallels, or not really co-incidences. For example, Evans had drawn a parallel between Smith and a fiction novel "The Mystery of Mar Saba" published in 1940, wherein the main character visits Mar Saba acknowledging that all the important mss were either burned, lost or removed, but hoping that something important might remain. Smith, Evans points out, also describes how he went to Mar Saba knowing that all the important mss were gone, but hoping something important might remain. Pantuck, however, countered that the fiction novel was based on the life of the author, who actually did consider himself a mss hunter and actually did visit Mar Saba with a faint hope of finding a valuable remnant. Since the author and Smith were both ms hunters who both visited Mar Saba, it's not really an incredible co-incidence, Pantuck argued, that they both had similar hopes and ideas.

After mid morning break came a presentation by Hershel Shanks, editor of Biblical Archaeology Review. He was supposed to present on the handwriting analysis of Agamemnon Tselikas, and he did distribute a hand-out to that end. He spent most of his time, however, making a very impassioned defence of Morton Smith's character, arguing that the only people accusing him of fraud are people who never knew him. Shanks emphasized that when we talk of fraud or forgery, we are accusing a "distinguished, tenured professor" of rank deception, and not only was this barbaric, but it was illogical to think that Smith would have engaged in such self-destructive behaviour, since his whole career would have been on the line had he been caught. In the ensuing discussion, several people pointed out that professors - even distinguished, tenured ones - commit all kinds of wrong-doing, and that humans in general have a bad habit of engaging in illogical, destructive behaviour. Shanks presented his case with great emotion, but I tend to agree with the crowd that an ad hominem argument really isn't valid, even if it's a pro hominem!

After this was lunch, followed by a paper by Marvin Meyer of Chapman University. Unfortunately I missed this one, as I was still wandering aimlessly around the campus of York University, desperately lost. The campus trails, you see, run in a random, goat-trail manner, and though there are stacks of arrow-signs at every intersection, they identify only the name of the nearest building in that direction, which means that while they may be helpful for finding out what building you are standing right in front of, they are pretty useless when the building you are looking for is far away from you, as it is for me most of the times when I am lost. There were a number of "you are here" maps, but, sadly, they were all either faded beyond recognition, or missing the all important "you are here" arrow.

To be continued...

Monday, May 09, 2011

Report on Secret Gospel of Mark Symposium Pt 1

This is a guestpost by Ryan D. Wettlaufer (check out his previous one here), who reports from the recent Secret Mark Symposium at York University on April 29.


On Friday April 29th I attended the Secret Mark conference at York University. I'm not a student of Secret Mark. Prior to this, my only two real experiences with it were reading Jacob Neusner's provocative summary in what was supposed to be a preface to an edition of Memory and Manuscript by Gerhardsson, and sharing a supervisor with Scott Brown. The former, I suppose, presupposed me against the authenticity of secret mark, the latter in favour, so in the end I guess you could say I was both uninformed and neutral. The perfect target audience in other words!

Tony Burke opened the conference by welcoming everyone and voicing his hope that this would allow for real discussion that would transcend that possible at the last SBL meeting. To that end, most of the papers had been emailed or posted in advance with time allotted at the conference for 15 minute summaries only, followed by generous discussion periods. I think this was a great way to do it. Confining the presentation to a 15 minute summary meant that most of the more tedious, technical data was kept in the full paper, while the presentation gave a concise version of the real meat of the argument.

Now for the papers. Note, I didn't know I'd be guest blogging this when I went to the conference, so I did not take notes, which means this is all offered as the best that I can remember it.

The first paper was by Charles Hendrick from Missouri State University. He argued in favour of the authenticity of both the Clement letter and the secret mark (herein sm) excerpts contained therein. The one point I remember, however, is that he argued strongly that despite popular portrayals, the sm excerpts did not describe Jesus having a homosexual encounter. Rather, the phrases "spend the night with" and "explain the mystery of the kingdom to" meant just that, and any sexual connotations we might read into them are purely the product of modern euphemism.

The response was from Bruce Chilton of Bard College. This was my first time hearing Chilton, and let me say, he is a phenomenal public speaker. If his topic was "the sleeping patterns of slugs" I think I would still find the lecture captivating. He was very good. In substance, he seemed to be offering his own paper more than responding to Hendrick. He spent most of this time (and a great deal of extra time) discussing the issue of provenance. He gave numerous examples of other documents, both ancient and early modern, that he has had a hand in authenticating and focused on the important role that provenance played in that authentication. The implication being, of course, that since we cannot verify the provenance of the sm material, we cannot authenticate it.

Then came morning break. I had woken up at 5AM in order to drive to the conference, and so I was happy when I saw a large urn of coffee at the back of the room. I remarked to a friend that "they better keep that coming all day!" Alas, before I could get any at first break, it was empty, never to be refilled all day long. I can't offer any compliments then to whoever is in charge of hospitality services at York.

To be continued...

Mt Athos: A Visit to the Holy Mountain

Check out the CBS news show "60 Minutes" featuring the monasteries at Mt. Athos. The Athos monasteries toghether hold about 8.000 Greek MSS, including the largest collection of extant Greek New Testament MSS.

The permission for a film team to visit Athos is very rare, the last time anyone was invited to film was in 1981. Apparently, the producers were very persistent this time. Finally they were invited by Elisaios, the Abbot of Simonopetras, who said "We weren't going to invite you but your persistence convinced us to open the door."

Mt. Athos, part 1

Mt. Athos, part 2

Brief interview with one of a few Americans on the mountain, discussing the invaluable treasures held at the monasteries.

Read the whole story with links at CBS here.

HT: The Biblical Literacy Project (Amy Anderson)

Thursday, May 05, 2011

Here and There around the internets

A couple of things worth noting:

a) The British Library online catalogue of illuminated Hebrew manuscripts is almost finished (as noted here, with a couple of images);

b) Claremont have posted images of (most of) the Nag Hammadi codices (and pretty good images at that, although so far I haven't found any of the whole codices and bindings yet) (HT: April DeConick);

c) Roger Pearse posts an interesting disussion of Persian Christian Manuscripts (including a link to a Russian PhD bu A. Pritula which has an English summary and an index of manuscripts) and another one here;

d) Rob Bradshaw posts a pdf of George I. Mavrodes on 'The Inspiration of the Autographs' EvQ 1969 (which is an interesting and critical discussion of this idea);

e) The recent conference of the Secret Gospel of Mark does not seem to have had a lot of blogging about it (but check out Timo Paananen's up-date and see Tony Burke's promise);

f) The programme for the International SBL in London is on-line here (lots of interesting papers; I haven't excerpted all the TC, perhaps someone else already has).

g) Papers have been accepted for SBL in San Francisco so perhaps we could compile some TC papers in the comments (don't be shy now).

h) Drew Longacre has collected a load of links to Hebrew biblical manuscripts with images online (brilliant: see the first comment below).

Wednesday, May 04, 2011

SBL GNT Acts 13:43

I'm compiling a list of errata to the SBL Greek New Testament. One of the oddest things I've found is the raised point after ἔπειθον in Acts 13:43. I cannot but assume this is a typo, though perhaps someone (Mike?) can persuade me otherwise. I'd be grateful to hear about other mistakes which people have found and I'll add them to my complete list (I've only read mid-way through Acts so far and so won't publish them all now.)

SBL Receives a NEH Grant to Build Interactive Website

Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) pressrelease:

SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AWARDED FUNDS TO BUILD PUBLIC WEBSITE

ATLANTA -- We are pleased to announce that the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) was awarded a $300,000 grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) to build an interactive website that invites general audiences to engage with biblical scholarship.

This is a rare opportunity for the SBL to speak to the continued importance of the Bible in modern culture and to communicate the value that biblical scholars bring to the study of the Bible and to the humanities.

The NEH review process includes peer review along with deliberation by the National Council on the Humanities. The award announcement described the grant recipients as highlighting the breadth of high-caliber humanities projects and research supported by the Endowment. “These projects represent some of the most innovative work happening in the humanities today,” said Jim Leach, Chairman of the NEH.

The site will begin production immediately, with a planned launch in 2013. Once completed, the site will become a powerful public platform for SBL members to speak directly to new audiences and to gain a stronger voice in the public square when questions arise about the Bible and its contexts.

“This is a huge opportunity for SBL to showcase the work of biblical scholars, educate and engage the public, and foster biblical scholarship,” said John Kutsko, executive director of SBL. “It also goes without saying that this award comes at a time of increasing pressure on the public support of the humanities at the state and federal levels. Thus, the award commitment is all the more significant in this context, and we are all the more grateful that the NEH has made us stewards of their support of scholarship, education, and the humanities.”

A strong team of SBL staff and members, led by Kent Richards, executive director emeritus, advised the project to its current status, and S2N Media developed the prototype site. For further information contact: Moira Bucciarelli, mbucciarelli@sblsite.org.

Monday, May 02, 2011

The Hook

I'm doing a bit of work on the "apostrophe" or "hook" between double consonants, which is interesting in its implications for the date of various manuscripts, such as P66 and the Koeln ms. of the "Unknown Gospel". There is a standard view trotted out that this is a third-century feature, but Comfort and Barrett have given a few examples of earlier (C2, one poss. C1) papyri with it. Does anyone know of any others?

Reviews of Philip Payne's Man and Woman, One in Christ

Two reviews of Philip Payne's monograph, Man and Woman, One in Christ: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Paul’s Letters (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009) refer to "the distigmai affair" on the ETC blog, as raised by Peter Head's SBL paper which I summarized here and here. (For Payne's "long series of response's on the blog, see here.)

The first is a review article by Thomas R. Schreiner, "Philip Payne on Familiar Ground," is published in Journal for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood Volume 15 No. 1 (Spring 2010): 33-46. The journal is a biannual publication of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (ISSN: 1544-5143).

Read online here or PDF here.

The second is an on-line review by Jim Hamilton published 19 April on his blog, "For His Renown" here.

Another review by Craig Blomberg is found on-line here (with Payne's very long response in the comment section).