Philonica et Neotestamentica

Home » Education (Page 2)

Category Archives: Education

Philo in postcolonial perspectives II

After posting the message below, I discovered another possibly relevant study from a postcolonial perspective. In the last issue of Studia Philonica (Vol XXII 2010), p. 247, there is mentioned an unpublished PhD Dissertation:

R.M. Victor, Colonial Education and Class Formation in Early Judaism: A Postcolonial Reading (Diss. Texas Christian University, 2007).

Now it turns out that this study has in fact been published in 2010, but I have not been able to see it yet:

Royse M. Victor, Colonial Education and Class Formation in Early Judaism.
A Postcolonial Reading
(Library of Second Temple Studies 72; T & T Clark International,2010.

According to the publisher presentation, in this study, the author, “Taking the colonial education system as one of the major analytical categories, this study makes an inquiry into how colonialism functioned and continues to function in both the ancient and the modern world. Based on the Books of Maccabees, Ben Sira, Dead Sea Scrolls, Philo, Josephus, and early rabbinic literature, Victor seeks to determine how the institution of the gymnasium was used to educate the elites and enable Greek citizens, Hellenes, and Hellenistic Jews to function politically, ethnically, and economically within the larger Greek empire, and particularly in Judea, by creating a separate class of the “Hellenized Jews” among the Jewish population. It further reveals the continuity of the role of the colonial education system in forming a class structure among the colonized by exploring a similar historical incident in the British colonial era in India, and demonstrates how the British education introduced into colonial India in the early nineteenth century played a similar role in creating a distinct class of the “Brown Englishmen” among the Indians.”

If there are any others out there who knows about any other studies that apply postcolonial perspectives to the ancient diaspora Judaism, I would be very grateful to be notified. Please use the comments field below.

Quote of the day

“Why do theological students in the West continue to spend countless hours learning about a few well-known, now deceased German theologians whose global devotees are actually quite small, and yet completely ignore over one billion living, breathing Muslims who represent on of the most formidable challenges to the Christian gospel today?”
from Timothy C. Tennent, Theology in the Context of World Christianity: How the Global Church Is Influencing the Way We Think about and Discuss Theology (Zondervan, 2007).

Exit learning Hebrew?

Learning Hebrew is still obligatory in the theological studies, both in my country, Norway, as well as in several other countries and their theological institutions. But signs are visible in the horizon that might make one argue that time has come to consider a change. Here are some reflections on whether it is the time now to consider if the time of Hebrew language courses as obligatory in a theological pastoral education is over. By a pastoral education I mean the education/ curriculum necessary to be ordained as a pastor. Most often the various denominations have some fixed sets of requirements to be met to be ordained as a pastor, but not very specific requirements. The Church of Norway, as far as I know, has never made any specific requirements involving the specific curriculums, but leave it to the theological schools. Hence one should be free to decide if Hebrew is obligatory or not.
In other countries, the situation is similar. Very few churches set specific demands.

Should a pastor know Hebrew?
The criteria for being a pastor should be various and manyfaceted. Personal abilities as well as professional education and congregational experiences are most often focused. But does the ability to read some Hebrew belong to the professional education needed? Here are some arguments brought forth that might be considered
I would like very much if your stated your opinions in the comments field at the end of this post.

Arguments Pro et Contra
Pro arguments:
1. Hebrew has always been in the theological curriculums (at least in Norway). Together with Greek and Latin it has been considered one of the three “theological languages”. But Latin are now left out as obligatory in many institutions.
2. The Bible contains both the Old and New Testament (or the First and SecondTestaments, if you prefer that labelling). Pastors are supposed to be able to handle issues of translation and exegesis of both parts; hence Hebrew is necesarry as well as Greek.
3. One cannot readily understand the meaning of the New Testament authors without an understanding of the Hebraic mindset that hermeneutically underlies their message. Many problems in exegesis and doctrine arise because Christians without knowledge of the Jewish scriptures have imposed a Greek/Western mindset onto the pages of the Hebrew  Scriptures.
4. Leaving Hebrew out will make students and pastors liable to be too dependent on those who know Hebrew. They might tend to become “close-minded traditionalists” who clutch their inherited ideas, or “open-ended relativists” who don’t care much about doctrinal formulations.

Contra arguments:
1 Most students struggle with learning Hebrew, and very few pastors are able to uphold the knowledge of the Hebrew they once acquired. Biblia Hebraica is often one of the first books to be stored away when entering a pastorate. In the United States I have been told that less than 20 % of the pastors are able to keep up with the Biblical languages. They don’t have enough time and energy to keep up their knowledge of two biblical languages.
2 Pastors have very little need for the skills to read Hebrew. They preach very rarely from the Old Testament; and if they have too, there are lots of literature to help the lack of Hebrew.
3 The first Christians did not know Hebrew! While the first apostles and Palestinian Christians knew Hebrew this knowledge soon vanished. The New Testament is written in Greek, and they used the Greek Septuagint as their “Old Testament”: Hence Pastors today should focus on the Greek.
4Theological education and curriculums are in a pressed situation today. There is a great need to revise present curriculums in order to make students more able to ‘read’ the world of today (more than Hebrew): Hence theological curriculums should leave out Hebrew as obligatory, and make room for more social science knowledge and social world expertise.

How do you evaluate these arguments? What should a student have to learn to be allowed into a pastorate? What do you think about the role of Hebrew for a Pastor of today?

A challenge for pastors of tomorrow. . .

At  the beginning of a new year one might ask; what kind of education does a person need to be a pastor? How should a relevant curriculum be set up? There are various responses out there to such a question, the variety mostly being due to the kind of denominational traditions involved.

But if we are engaged in pastoral education, such questions should always be considered relevant. How should a theological curriculum be composed to best equip a person to serve as a pastor in a church today?  Our social wold is becoming more and more influenced by what is often called globalization: influences that were rare are now becoming common, religious ideas that were exotic and strange are being held by our neighbors across the street, or at the next door, and religion as such is being scrutinized, evaluated and criticized to an extent unknown to many only a few years ago.

In a book published in 2007 by Timothy C. Tennent, Theology in the Context of World Christianity: How the Global Church Is Influencing the Way We Think about and Discuss Theology (Zondervan, 2007), I found the following statement of opinion:

The purpose has been to widen the perimeterof theological reflection so that the theologians, church leaders and missionaries of tomorrow will be more adequately equippedto respond to the changing global context in which we live. Why do theological students in the West continue to spend countless hours learning about the writings of a few well-known , now deceased, German theologians whose global devotees are actually quite small, and yet completely ignore over one billion living, breathing Muslims who represent one of the most formidable challenges to the Christian Gospel today? We must be far more intentional about fostering a more engaged, missionfocused theology that is informed by actual global realities. The effectiveness of our global witness as the church of Christ depends upon it.

Looking back on the first decade of this millennium, I think two challenges are particularly relevant for pastors and thus for
a theological education that want to be relevant; namely a) the challenges from Muslim communities and theology to Christian theology (in a wide sense of the term), and b) the challenges from the growing and aggressive forms of atheism associated with writers as e.g., Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Victor J. Stenger, just to mention a few.

The former is relevant because it challenges our pictures of God, Jesus, and in fact of many other aspects of Biblical Christianity; the latter presents itself as a more scientific challenge, but I am not so much afraid of that as the vulgar picture they draw up of religion in general and Christianity in particular, and the impact it may have on those in the pews who never hear a sermon in which such aspects and issues are dealt with.

Surely, there are challenges out there;

but nevertheless: have a happy and healthy year in 2010!

The Presidential address

I am one of those who found the Presidential Address at the SBL’ Annual Meeting this month somewhat surprising but also a refreshing event; surprising because – as usual- I was expecting to hear some lecture from the scholar’s special field of studies; refreshing, because Prof. Clines presented a very good lecture on student focused teaching:

David J. A. Clines, University of Sheffield
Learning, Teaching, and Researching Biblical Studies, Today and Tomorrow

I must admit that when I later attended some paper presentations, I could not avoid thinking about this lecture of Prof. Clines and wonder if the presenter had attended it.

I still become frustrated when I am listening to scholars who, being given 20 minutes to present a paper, go on reading as fast as they can (and sometimes even faster) as if they were to present a 45 minutes paper in 20 minutes.
It annoys me, and frustrates me, and keeps me wondering; have they ever thought about the fact that there might be persons in the audience who do not have English as their first language. If they looked up from their manuscript, they might have seen people in the lecture hall coming from Asia or Africa, and there might as well have been some from Europe (even Norway), who were struggling hearing and/or understanding what was said.

I know I had a posting on this some years ago, but I see little improvement. Nor see I much improvement in using pedagogical devices as Powerpoint or good hand-outs.

Hence prof Clines presidential address was an refreshing experience. I enjoyed it.