Harvard

...now browsing by tag

 
 

The Semester So Far

Thursday, September 25th, 2008

We are now officially three weeks into the semester. For Gordon-Conwell students that means we’re very close to being a third of the way through the semester. That thought is somewhat sobering, but I digress.

Below are my thoughts on classes so far, and how I’m feeling about each:

Interpreting the New Testament: So far things have gone well. Interpreting the NT is basically a New Testament Hermeneutics class. I’ve covered many of the topics in other classes, and in more depth as I’ve studied the Hebrew Bible. Most of the concepts are transferable. As a result I’m not feeling especially excited about this class. However, the reading–most notably Bruce Metzgers The Text of the New Testament and N.T. Wright’s The New Testament and the People of God–has been absolutely fascinating. The introduction to New Testament textual criticism provided in class was also helpful. On the whole I’m looking forward to seeing what the rest of the semester holds, but I’m not expecting it to be a class where I learn something amazingly new each week.

Ugaritic: I vacillate between really liking this class, and loathing vocalizing verbs and nouns. It’s taken three weeks, but I feel like I’ve finally got the basics of Ugaritic under control. Now if I can manage to push forward I think I may enjoy things. Color me undecided on this one.

Independent Reading in the Hebrew Bible: I’m reading Qohelet. What could be better? I’m also looking forward to getting into both Job and Proverbs. Overall, I’ve really, really enjoyed the course work, and the reading is interesting. I’m actually looking forward to my midterm. I learn a bit more about Hebrew grammar, idiom, etc each time I look at the texts for this course, so I’ve been very pleased so far.

Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: This course is excellent. I can already see that this will be my favorite course this semester. Dr. Saley manages to lecture without being dry, and if a student has a question he doesn’t have the answer to off the top of his head he writes it down and brings the answer to the next class. I absolutely am going to steal that idea when I teach. Since Textual Criticism is an area I haven’t done a ton of work in I’m learning a great deal. I’m especially looking forward to the second half of the semester, when we’ll actually be doing textual criticism on a section of 1 Samuel.

Textual Criticism: Recovering the Text of the Hebrew Bible by P. Kyle McCarter

Thursday, September 4th, 2008

I fully realize that this book is from 1986, so it may seem a bit late to be writing a review. However, you’ll have to forgive me since I was only 2 when the book originally appeared. This is one of the required texts for my Textual Criticism seminar at Harvard this semester. I’m looking forward to the seminar, and this book was short so I decided to go ahead and review it before the semester gets underway. I should also point out the fact that I am hardly an expert when it comes to textual criticism. Keep in mind that this review is very much from a student’s perspective.

The first thing that deserves comment is the size of the book; less than 100 pages, including appendices. As a student I’m extremely thankful. The book is good, it says what needs to be said and then moves on. McCarter excels at being concise in his statements. These are all things that hit the mark, as far as a student is concerned. At the same time, it means that McCarter’s book will never be the only text in a graduate seminar on textual criticism. This is fine though, since it serves well as an introduction (which is really all its supposed to do).

Something else that jumped out at me in the book is that McCarter is quite witty. Having an author who is easily able to inject wit into a textbook always makes for a more enjoyable read. In Textual Criticism this is done with style. I lost track of the number of places I chuckled as I read through the book. A question for any of you Johns Hopkins students, is McCarter this witty in class?

I should also mention the appendices. These short addendums are quite helpful. A glossary is the first to appear, and defines some of the basic vocabulary of text criticism (witness, codex, haplography, homoioarkton, etc). The second appendix is a bibliography of primary sources. For someone who has not done much in depth work with textual criticism, this is a gold mine of information. If this information wasn’t already available on the Internet, its inclusion alone would justify the purchase. Even so, it is still convenient to have the information in one easily accessible place. The final appendix deals with the textual characteristics of each book, or section of books, in the Hebrew Bible. This is another extremely helpful resource for beginning students, and one I’m sure I’ll consult often this semester.

In my opinion, the negatives of Textual Criticism are few. Obviously, because of its brevity, it doesn’t touch on every issue imaginable in textual criticism. It is, after all, more of an introduction than a monograph. You’ll have to move on to Emanuel Tov’s Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible for a more thorough treatment of the various issues. The only other negative is one that I’m not entirely sure I’m educated enough to give at present. However, with that disclaimer, I’ll go ahead; McCarter appears to be quite in love with LXX, and often makes very little mention of the DSS. Conversely, Tov mentions the Qumran materials often and even accuses McCarter’s Textual Criticism of adopting “the approach of the period before the discovery of the new data [ie, the DSS]” (Tov, Textual Criticism, 14).

Those caveats aside, I think McCarter’s Textual Criticism is a helpful introductory textbook. It certainly doesn’t offer the depth of Tov, but it provides a way to quickly get oneself up to speed on the necessary material. It’s worth reading, especially for those who only desire an introduction.

-Calvin