Both explain my lack of posts here recently:
- since Cylcone Nargis hit Burma/Myanmar I have used my blogging time to provide updates on the relief effort, and as I get information how the Karen people have been impacted.
- because my writing time this sabbatical was shortened by teaching elsewhere I am trying to finish polishing an article on the coherence of Amos 7:1-8:3
1. Burma is the country whose military rulers have chosen to call "Myanmar" both English versions refer to the same geographical location, but may indicate a political, or - in view of the generals' behaviour - humanitarian, bias.
Labels: burma
¶ 8:31 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
Oh, yes it works like this:
- Jer 31:31-34
- Amos 1:1
- 1 John 3:16
Labels: bible, bibleref, biblical.studies.online
¶ 3:04 PM
[to Del.icio.us]
Labels: gen 1, genesis, open.biblical.studies
¶ 2:12 PM
[to Del.icio.us]
Thanks for those links. As you have noted earlier they're intriguing - especially the בָּרָא discussion. I wish I could have more time to plunge into them.
I look forward to borrowing your copy of Walton's monograph when you've acquired it. :-)
By 
Stephen G, at
May 6, 2008 10:37 PM
I found that Walton's lecture at Wheaton pulled together his ideas well also, and plan to use it with the Genesis class so they can enter into the discussion: http://www.wheaton.edu/physics/research/symposia/conferences03/
By Tim, at
May 7, 2008 6:25 AM
Labels: study-skills, writing, zotero
¶ 6:00 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
The first is Duane's abnormally interesting, and credulous(?), Isaiah 38:9-20: An Abnormal View in which he provides a strong sketch of arguments that might be made to claim that Hezekiah actually wrote part of the Bible in his own hand. (At the moment I hope he does expand the post to a paper, it would be fun to hear the discussion! And perhaps I will as I continue to follow the blogs over the next few days/weeks :)
The second I am also noting for my Genesis class reading list (for next semester) where John (Hobbins) asks: Does Genesis 1 describe the creation of things or the assignment of functions to things? A Response to John Walton frankly he takes John (Walton)'s special pleading more seriously than I would, but he provides a really good clear discussion that I want my students to follow.
Two fine examples of why (biblio/biblia)blogging is both fun, and useful!
Labels: biblical.studies, genesis, is.38, isaiah, open.biblical.studies
¶ 2:00 PM
[to Del.icio.us]
Tim,
Thanks for your interest in my post on Isaiah 38:9-20. I continue to think about developing this into a paper. The main problem is one of methodology. Whatever is going on here, it is likely too underdetermined to say much of anything with certainty. As to "credulous:" I tried to be as equivocal as possible and still be more or less coherent. I doubt very much that Hezekiah wrote any or much of this. Some part of it may, I say "may," go back to him. Despite a complex history of editing, even in Isaiah, every text began with something. My underlying purpose in doing this post is to (continue to) lay some groundwork for something quite different. What that is will unfold over time.
By Duane Smith, at
May 5, 2008 3:48 AM
The word was probably badly chosen, what I meant to mean was that I find the argument intriguing, fairly convincing, but only because it is an idea I like. If I am properly critical there are too many "probables" in it that maybe multiply together into an "unlikely".
But I still think discussing it is abnormally interesting and could be fun. (And useful too, if only in that it might help clarify some of the issues, such as the distribution and nature of literacy in the Iron Age Levant.
By Tim, at
May 5, 2008 6:11 AM
Dr. Walton is "the man" - just had to say it.
By Tim, at
May 7, 2008 1:50 AM
I haven't met him, though he writes and speaks (judging by the Wheaton 'cast http://www.wheaton.edu/physics/research/symposia/conferences03/ ) clearly and simply yet with interesting and useful ideas - a great combination when one finds it in my book :)
By Tim, at
May 7, 2008 6:27 AM
By the way, for David (when he returns from lazing on the beach!) there is a mobile version, it is just over 1/2 the size of the WMV, but I'm showing the Flash version above (so Mac users can watch it ;-) which is 3x the size of the WMV or 6 times the 3GP...
What can I say to excuse this arrant sales pitch for Zotero? Well, it is Saturday, so I'm unwinding, or possibly coming undone ;-0
Labels: scholarship, study-skills, writing, zotero, zothelp
¶ 1:01 PM
[to Del.icio.us]
Nice. But it would be more impressive if it rendered "BasicBooks" as two words.
By Iyov, at
May 3, 2008 1:36 PM
Jim might see this as an example of the Wikiization of education, I prefer to think of it as an example of the fallibility of the librarians on whose work World Cat works, and my own failure as a proper Citation Nazi to spot such errors!
By Tim, at
May 3, 2008 1:39 PM
Just a few days earlier he wrote about The Open Access Monograph Series That Almost Was and dropped frustrating hints about a newer and better project. So, before he (or someone else) announces that project, I'll reiterate a call for contributors. Any established scholar who wants to write a commentary on a biblical book, and who is interested in getting your work seen and used more widely than print can achieve, take a look at the Hypertext Bible Commentary project, and then contact me for more details.
- Commentary writing appeals to our strengths and training...
- Commentary writing is a recognized genre within the guild ... All the great scholars write commentaries...
- Commentary writing is relatively straight-forward...
- Commentary writing can be an act of piety...
- Commentaries sell so publishers keep asking scholars to write them...
- Commentary writing reflects and contributes to advances in the field, presenting the latest research in a convenient location...
The Amos "volume" has already (in its peer reviewed stable form) been consulted by thousands of readers each month since its publication in late 2005. The changeable experimental version also gets a huge number of visitors.If you don't want to spend the time to write a commentary, or you are not yet an "established" scholar then, offer a dictionary article these too will get larger than print readership, these also will be peer reviewed before publication, and so should "count" as publications, but most of all you will contribute to making solid information available to everyone who is interested. And unlike most scholarly writing your article will get read and considered and used!
Labels: bible.dictionary, commentary, open.biblical.studies
¶ 6:59 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
Look NOW ;)
Tyler is doing the next one himself, so send your nominations to him over the next three weeks...
Labels: biblical.studies
¶ 6:24 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
acerbic? moi? heaven forfend!
By Jim, at
May 3, 2008 9:43 AM
Jim, the words are yours. Indeed may "heaven forfend!"
By Tim, at
May 3, 2008 10:38 AM
PS: ;-)
By Tim, at
May 3, 2008 10:38 AM
Now he's trying to convince us that this format could be a good way to spread the Bible.He convinced me to spend a while playing with 3GP, if I cut the frame rate to slideshow proportions (just 1fps) and keep the audio low (but not too low) I can fit a whole short Psalm with pictures into less than 400KB. Judge for yourselves if it is worth it (just remember I spent more effort on the technical side than choosing photos - so there are lots of cute kids ;-)
Here is the 3gp version of Psalm 67 at only 368KB, and the WMV Psalm 67 at 1.97MB with much better picture quality to demonstrate what you lose in making it quite that small for a phone. (and a Flash version of Psalm 67 for Maccies at "only" 2.57MB!)
Labels: bible, mobile, psalms, video
¶ 2:27 PM
[to Del.icio.us]
Bravo Tim - your are a mobile wizard !!!
By Bob MacDonald, at
May 2, 2008 4:20 PM
Really cool. Welcome to the 21st century.
By David Ker, at
May 6, 2008 8:52 PM
BTW Ker not Kerr.
By David Ker, at
May 6, 2008 8:54 PM
Aaagh, I must NOT rely on my memory, especially not for names!
By Tim, at
May 7, 2008 6:29 AM
¶ 7:19 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
"...and the dwindling revenue pot from CD sales."
Yet when:
"In Rainbows was later released conventionally as a CD, and topped the US and UK charts."
All the free publicity and hype helped then, and others spotted it:
"Most recently fellow English rockers Coldplay said Monday that they would give away its new single Violet Hill free of charge, resulting in the group's website crashing the next day due to demand."
Smart move Radiohead, "give it away" so that you sell even more copies, and by maintaining or enhancing your fame as well rake in the bucks. But, as I asked back in October when the move was announced:
But how do people (say biblical scholars) who do not get paid mega-bucks for personal appearances and the like pay for the other people's work needed for a successful publication. Our own work is either a hobby or we are paid for it as part of our job, but whatever format we choose except the casual blog, we need proofreaders, designers, film editors etc... to help make the "product"... how do we pay them?
Labels: culture
¶ 7:46 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
Thus:
print journalism is going through a wrenching transformation, and its future is in doubt. Over the past two decades, newspaper readership in the United States has plummeted. After peaking in 1984, at 63 million copies, the daily circulation of American papers fell steadily at a rate of about 1 percent a year until 2004 when it hit 55 million. Since then, the pace of the decline has accelerated. Circulation fell by more than 2 percent in 2005 and by about 3 percent in 2006.A print newspaper is a "bundle" of services but:
When a newspaper moves online, the bundle falls apart. Readers don’t flip through a mix of stories, advertisements, and other bits of content. They go directly to a particular story that interests them, often ignoring everything else.This, it is sometimes argued, is promoting an "unbundling" of traditional newspaper services, with some becoming free on the Internet, and other more specialised services being paid for, yet users do not want to pay online, and:
few newspapers, other than specialized ones like the Wall Street Journal, are able to charge anything for their content online, the success of a story as a product is judged by the advertising revenues it generates. Advertisers no longer have to pay to appear in a bundle.Neither the first article, nor Clay Shirky's followup, which argues that What Newspapers and Journalism Need Now: Experimentation, Not Nostalgia, really offers a clear prediction of the future of investigative journalism, though Clay seems to see blogging filling this role [?] ;).
Sean asks some sensible questions:
If you take as a given that academic publishing must change to meet the new realities of the Internet economy (i do), which parts will become essentially free goods, and which parts will continue to require a high level of professional competence. Even more importantly, assuming some of these services can’t be easily replaced, what are the new economic models that will provide the required compensation for them?My answers really haven't changed much over recent years. I still see the "content" of tertiary education (textbooks and lectures typically in the current system) becoming free, or at least dirt cheap. See "Gatekeepers, Open Courseware and the future of the University". That others have joined MIT since 2004 just reinforces this view. Nichthus will ask: How will such content be financed? Basically I suspect long term through either advertising or cheap prices and high volume (a sort of iTunes University ;-)
So, what will teachers, like me, offer to justify our excessive salaries: guidance, tuition, the things we have traditionally provided, since time immemorial. See: Tim Bulkeley "Back
to the Future: virtual theologising as recapitulation" Colloquium,
2005, 37,2, 115-130.
Labels: digital, education, internet
¶ 10:22 AM
[to Del.icio.us]
She was asked:
Can you tease out an example of how publishing will change?Wireless phones, which didn't exist 20 years ago, have changed not only the way people communicate but also the way they live. People are going to read, and they're going to read paper for the rest of our lifetimes. But I'm convinced that different distribution for content will change the way we live. We have entered the digital world. It's not like we're just stepping our toe into it. The Bible Experience audio Bible was the best-selling Bible of 2007.
I think we can make some predictions today for how further distribution changes will alter the way we live our Christian life. The spiritual journey many of us have will be changed by the Internet and digital technology. But I'd like a little more time in this discovery process before I can vocalize how.
Now, this is cautious, but much less cautious than print-based publishers usually are! It makes projects like David's for mobile phones or our PodBible relevance visible!
[to Del.icio.us]
