Many people think that Powerpoint (or Keynote) presentations assist in communicating ideas and facts. It’s true that visual information that accompanies oral presentations can help — but it has to be done well!

Here’s a youtube video of how NOT to use Powerpoint.

And here’s a slide show that shows how creative visuals can supplement (not compete) with the speaker’s words. Ideas and information will be better retained when this kind of dual presentation is employed.

The creator and presenter of this slide show, Beck Tench, works for the NC Museum of Life and Sciences. Follow her on Twitter at @10ch

In this book, Brueggemann takes a brief (the text of the book is only 65 pages) look at an “exceedingly difficult text” (p. 11) in the Hebrew Bible: Joshua 11.

Introduction
In the introduction, Brueggemann discusses how the conviction that Scripture is revelatory (by communities of Jews and Christians) is necessarily appropriated differently because of differences of contexts and cultural settings. He believes that the current state of hermeneutics convinces many (including himself) that there is “no single, sure meaning for any text.” Thus, the “revelatory power of the text is discerned and given precisely through the action of interpretation which is always concrete, never universal, always contextualized, never ‘above the fray,’ always filtered through vested interest, never in disinterested purity” (p. ix). If this is true of the interpretation process, then, according to Brueggemann, it should also be true of the process that forms, shapes and presents the text. Brueggemann suggests that because of this, revelation is never “simply a final disclosure, but is an ongoing act of disclosing that will never let the disclosure be closed.”

Chapter 1: Revelation, Interpretation, and Method
Here Brueggemann discusses two methods of interpreting Scripture (from the late 20th century) and their relation to the revelatory character of Scripture: sociology and literary analysis. Brueggemann has tried to meld of these methods with the result of seeing Scripture as revelation that is not offering a flat, obvious conclusion, but “is an ongoing conversation that evokes, invites, and offers” (p. 7). He also reviews the terminology that he employed in his Theology of the Old Testament of testimony, dispute and advocacy. These juridical terms (and juridical metaphor) are used by Brueggemann to argue “texts are like witnesses that trace out the character of Yahweh against other characterizations of Yahweh, and thereby advocate a certain rendering of reality” (p. 9). This method, thus, recognizes that every text makes a claim that must be “recognized and weighed alongside other texts with other claims” (p. 10).

Chapter 2: Discerning Revelation from God
In light of the text of Joshua 11, Brueggemann asks these questions: “How are these texts of violence to be understood as revelation? What is it that is disclosed? And how shall this disclosure be received as serious, authoritative, and binding as the only rule for life and faith?” (p. 11). Most of this chapter summarizes the pericope and focuses attention on the only speech, which happens to be from Yahweh (v. 6), in this section of narrative. Brueggemann also notes that there is little here that is explicitly Deuteronomistic, with the exception of the formula of obedience in v. 10.

Chapter 3: Divine Permit
Brueggemann begins by defining monarchy (“political concentration of power and an economic monopoly of wealth”) and characterizing the Israelites of Joshua 11 as “antimonarchic.” He identifies the initiative of the king of Hazor as “preemptive, perhaps not unlike the Bush administration’s initiative against the alleged growing threat of the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ in Iraq” (p. 20). Thus, we have a description of competing social systems, with the Canaanite monarchy identified by the multiple occurrences of the phrase “horses and chariots.”

He then focuses on Yahweh’s statement in verse 6: “Do not be afraid of them, for tomorrow at this time I will hand over all of them, slain, to Israel. You shall hamstring the horses and burn the chariots with fire.” This speech, addressed only Joshua, includes assurance, promise, and command. Brueggemann notes that all the action of the events is done by the Israelites and that Yahweh takes no direct action here. The three mentions of the “horses and chariots” are centered around Yahweh’s mandate for their destruction. Brueggemann draws attention to the fact that it is only the weapons (i.e., horses and chariots) that are to be destroyed. Brueggemann sees this as permission of Yahweh for a liberating movement by the Israelite community against an oppressive, monarchic adversary. So, what does this reveal about Yahweh? “Yahweh is allied with the marginalized, oppressed peasants against the monopoly of the city-state” (p. 24). This means that the disclosure of Yahweh given in this passage is not intervention, but rather authorization.

Brueggemann sees this as an example of how revelation does not “come down to intrude in the community” but rather “arises up out of the hurt and the hope of [the] community, so that the dream is understood as certified from heaven” and thus, has credibility on earth (p. 26).

Chapter 4: Revelation in Ancient Context
Brueggemann addresses other instances of violence in the pericope (e.g., ḥerem) as “remembered revelation” (v. 12, 15, 20, 23) and not recorded direct speech of Yahweh. Therefore, this revelation refers to an older torah, and the community must interpret. After looking at Joshua 11 on three levels—theological, sociological, and methodological—he returns to the governing question, “Does God mandate violence?” His conclusion, based on this passage, is “yes” but one that is “tightly circumscribed” and “in the interest of ending domination.” For Brueggemann, this means that the community “was utterly persuaded that the God of the tradition is passionately against domination and is passionately for an egalitarian community” (p. 39).

Chapter 5: Revelation and Canonical Reading
This chapter asks “What would we know of the ways and character of God if we had only this particular rendering? Or what would be lost if we did not have this text?” (p. 43). Brueggemann continues to build his case for a hostility to the “horses and chariots” kind of monarchic domination, in large part, because of the system of oppression and subservience that its sustenance necessitates. Brueggemann concludes that “Israel knows it is not to emulate royal modes of power, knowledge, or language” and that alternatives are available that “permit freedom and justice” (p. 54).

Chapter 6: Yahweh versus Horse and Chariot
Brueggemann leaves the Joshua text and expands to other biblical texts to demonstrate that the “power of Yahweh will defeat oppressive kings who have horses and chariots.” He discusses “prophetic assertions” (e.g., Hos 1:7; Isa 31:1; Mic 5:10, Isa 43:16-17; Zech 4:6), “psalmic doxologies” (Ps 20:7; 33:16-17; 76:6-7; 147:10-11), and “sapiential discernment” (Prov 21:30-31) to distill theological statements which do not contain the “problems” of the Joshua text, but which share the same warrant for Yahweh’s sovereignty over horses and chariots.

Chapter 7: Despite Chariots of Iron
Brueggemann summarizes, again, the implications of his interpretation of Joshua 11 for the context of the Israelites, as a community assaulted by superior force. He sees the fundamental claim of Joshua 11 to be the disclosure that Yahweh is “a God who will invert the historical process and give land to the landless” (p. 62). Only a brief amount of text is devoted to our own cultural context, which Brueggemann describes as “more fully embedded in communities of horses and chariots, more fully committed to domination” (p. 64).

Thoughts
I appreciated the amount of time Brueggemann devoted to explaining his hermeneutic and methodology. While some of his phrases (taken out of context) are sure to ignite people who desire an absolute truth with only one interpretation in scripture, he nonetheless demonstrates that contrary to what you want to believe, the fact of the matter is that there are a lot of sincere, intelligent believers who read the same passages and come to different understandings. That says something, and needs to be accounted for. Brueggemann does that by demonstrating that both the formation and the interpretation of Scripture are necessarily contextualized.

This book doesn’t give answers for to how to deal with violence in our present-day biblically. But then, I don’t think that is its purpose. Rather, Brueggemann illustrates his hermeneutic by showing how to understand the texts of violence in the Hebrew Bible within their own context.

If you are intrigued, challenged, or dismayed by what you find in this short book, there are 8½ pages of a very worthwhile bibliography to direct you to further reading.

Many thanks to James Stock of Wipf and Stock Publishers for providing me with a copy of this book to review. I appreciate the opportunity.

However, I would like to point you to an article (available as a PDF for download here) which details the science behind the imaging of the ostracon. I find this fascinating (and a great change of pace from the speculation contained in some of the other articles).

The article is SPECTRAL IMAGING OF OSTRACA by Gregory Bearman & William A. Christens-Barry, PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 6(7) (2009). Abstract:

By analogy with ancient texts, infrared imaging of ostraca has long been employed to help improve readings. We report on extensive spectral imaging of ostraca over the visible and near infrared. Spectral imaging acquires the complete spectrum for each pixel in an image; the data can be used with an extensive set of software tools that were developed originally for satellite and scientific imaging. In this case, the spectral data helps explain why infrared imaging works to improve text legibility (and why not in some cases). A better understanding of the underlying imaging mechanism points the way for inexpensive methods for taking data either in the field or at museums.

Enjoy!

A little bit before SBL 2009 in New Orleans, Stephen Chapman sent me a copy of his recent article in the journal Word & World (Volume 29, Number 4, Fall 2009, 334-347). The theme of this issue is Canon. If you can get your hands on it, I’d recommend reading it. Here is the abstract for Chapman’s article, “What Are We Reading? Canonicity and the Old Testament.”

Contrary to the standard step-by-step model of the formation of the Old Testament canon, the process was more fluid, on [sic] ongoing recognition of the authority of certain books, based on their use. Hints at early canonical moves are evident already in the Old Testament texts themselves. All of this is important to Christian readers because, without the Old Testament, the church cannot properly know who Jesus is.

Chapman provides a helpful outline of the history, rationale, and details of what he calls the standard model of Old Testament canon formation and contrasts this with an alternative model (which asks if canon is “more about authority than closure”). Chapman credits the work of James Sanders and Brevard Childs as influential in the development of this alternative. A pull-quote in this second section of the article asks, “Must a canon by definition be literarily unchanging, officially approved, and nationally applicable?”

I realize I am not summarizing the entire article here, my purpose is to point out the article (and the volume) as worthy of your time if you are interested in Canon issues.

The editorial, by Frederick J. Gaiser, is available in full-text (PDF) online here.

When one offers up the “slippery slope” argument, it is likely that they’ve failed to comprehend that it’s possible the truth lies at the bottom of the hill, not the top.

Read the post here.

You can look at each of the resources in depth at your leisure. My question today is not which one handles what challenge better, but rather, who should determine which software you use?

There is definitely a discussion going on about the pedagogical value of introducing bible software earlier in the seminary curriculum (and in particular, for the biblical language courses). The problem is how to integrate these programs into the classroom. Some seminaries seem to let the programs just filter in as students discover their merits on their own. At the other end of the spectrum are the seminaries that mandate purchase of a specific program that is then utilized (and supported) throughout the curriculum. I see value in both approaches.

First, I own a Mac. I have used Accordance for years. But until recently, I was in a very small minority. Most of the support I needed I found on the Accordance forums (also their blog and website), through social media networking, or Accordance seminars. Most of the computers around me were PCs and most of those users chose BibleWorks. Most students will become familiar with whatever program they use in seminary/university and will not want to change to another program after graduating because they are heavily invested in software and experience. So, since I was personally convinced that I wanted to use Accordance, I would have a hard time having someone tell me I could not and would have to buy another program and use that for classes.

On the other hand, as an instructor, I see the value of having everyone “on the same page.” Calvin Seminary does require their students to purchase one package (a specially tailored Logos package, if I recall correctly). Carl Bosma has developed a detailed seminar-like course that teaches students exactly (step-by-step) how to use the program. The course is part of a pre-semester orientation (the training is ongoing though). This means that the IT department and the professors all know exactly what program their students have, they can share filters, data, links, etc. with no conflict issues. They can pull material up in class and students can follow along on their own computers. Students are allowed to collaborate and share resources they develop. By the time they graduate, the idea is that they have a personal library of notes, sermons, etc. all linked in their Logos program and they know exactly how to do studies and sermon prep utilizing all their Logos text and book resources. There is a plan to have support for Mac users of Logos, but for now I think most of their Mac users run Logos in a Windows environment on their computer.

The issue, especially for students choosing seminaries, could come down to a minor decision-making fork-in-the-road along the lines of “I’m a Mac; I’m a PC.” In other words, if I really want to keep using my Mac, if I have heard that Accordance does fantastic searches and has lots of scholar-level texts, will I choose a school that is only PC and Logos-based? What about if my church has already given me a copy of BibleWorks and my mentor is very skilled in that program? Now, obviously much more important criteria will be considered (and should be) first. This is not a primary concern. But it isn’t a minor annoyance either. It’s more along the lines of deciding whether you want to live for several years with the cold weather up North vs the sunny South. Except that the decision will likely affect a student for many more years. The skills a student learns and practices in school/seminary will likely be the skills they continue to use later in the ministry. It would be very difficult to switch after becoming a competent user of one program for 3 or 4 years (not to mention the expense of switching programs or platforms).

So, what do you think? Should schools decide for students which bible software to buy? Does the benefit outweigh removing individual choice in the matter? Should all the options be made available to students so they can make an informed choice? What is your own experience?

—————————–
To be completely candid, I now run Windows 7 via Parallels 5 on my MacBook Pro (please don’t condemn me). I needed to do this to run some Windows-only software to allow me to work with colleagues on some projects. As a result, I have SESB and limited Logos resources loaded on the Windows side. I also have Vocabula and some translator software for projects I am working on. I do use the Olive Tree iPhone app, and am a beta tester for some of the original language modules (more about Olive Tree in another post). The only program I do not currently have access to is BibleWorks (however, at one point I did have a copy to demo for my students, but I left that copy of the program with the instructor who followed after me).

UPDATE: The nice folks at Bibleworks have contacted me and offered to send a copy of the program so that I can include that resource as I continue to review software and develop digital tools. Thank you Jim Barr!

And, the Top 50 Biblioblog list is out for the month of November. The monthly Top 50 Biblioblog list is now a six-month listing, the current list is here.

This week he is discussing the cognate literature (such as Enuma Elish, Atrahasis, and Gilgamesh) of the Hebrew Bible. Why is this helpful?

Placing Israel in its broader cultural and religious context has been referred to as the “comparative approach.” This is a sometimes-maligned term, as it is unfortunately understood by some to imply that Israel was simply copying or “borrowing” what was around them. This is not the case. Rather, the literature of Israel and that of her predecessors and neighbors reflect a common way of looking at the world. The value of these ancient texts is not in telling us from where Israel got her ideas. Instead, they help us understand what kind of a text Genesis is. I like to refer to this as “genre calibration.”

Read the entire post here.