A 4 year postdoctoral position is being advertised in Lausanne to work on the new project there on Mark 16 led by Claire Clivaz. Further details are here. It is a digital humanities post and is located in the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics (which obviously interprets its remit broadly!).
A forum for people with knowledge of the Bible in its original languages to discuss its manuscripts and textual history from the perspective of historic evangelical theology.
- Contributors
- Peter M. Head (ed)
- Tommy Wasserman (ed)
- P. J. Williams, and others
From 2007 to now, we've got (1) the "Perspectives on the Ending of Mark" book, (2) Nicholas Lunn's "The Original Ending of Mark," and (3) my book, "Authentic: The Case for Mark 16:9-20." Just what discoveries are left to be made? Quite a few commentators are not paying attention to what is already available.
ReplyDeleteAlso on the opposing side are Kelhoffer's Miracle and Mission as well as virtually every scholarly commentary on Mark (whether by liberals or conservatives), including older works dating back to the 19th century -- so I also wonder what further developments could possibly arise from such position. With no new manuscripts, patristic testimony, or versional evidence that would affect the issue, this seems more like reinventing the wheel than anything else.
ReplyDeleteWell, there is a little bit of new patristic testimony: Fortunatianus (in the mid-300s) alludes to Mark's mention of Jesus' ascension in his Gospels-commentary, and seems to make use of Mark 16:20, as I report at http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/search?q=Fortunatianus . But nothing that would need four years to analyze.
ReplyDeleteThe intersection between digital and traditional humanities will be the nexus for creativity.
ReplyDeleteYep.
Delete