Back in the Game

So it's been quite awhile since my last post. I have been busy with a lot of things since my last post. I completed my Master's thesis, my first triathlon, a second year of Ancient Greek, a year of Latin, and I went to Rwanda and Egypt. Before I left for Rwanda I sent in PhD applications to Florida State University, Indiana University, Fordham and The Ohio State University. To make a long story short, this was an extremely bad year to be applying to PhD programs. Most programs significantly cut the amount of applicants due to funding. I was not accepted to any of the four programs I applied to.

That sort of brings me to today. When Professor Larry Welborn (one of my recommenders/2nd reader for my thesis) found out that things didn't go well here, he presented me with an opportunity to continue my research at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. I am currently weighing my options. I have the choice of doing the program from here in the US or moving to Sydney. And of course this all depends on my acceptance and funding considerations. I will be applying to begin in January of 2010. Before Dr. Welborn contacted me, I had nearly given up on getting my PhD. I essentially began making new plans for a new future that did not include academia. To have someone like Dr. Welborn believe in my abilities and my research has been a blessing. Not only is Dr. Welborn an extraordinary scholar, but he is a wonderful human being and a good man to know.

Now I will start on a new adventure, which has lead me to start posting again. Dr. Welborn has encouraged me to extract a portion of my thesis to submit to an academic journal. This will help to secure funding at Macquarie as well as help me get my feet wet in this wild world of Biblical Studies. Also, since the program is a "British style" PhD., I will need to submit a brief dissertation proposal. So as it goes, I have gone from literally no writing, to a lot of work, all needing to be completed in the coming months. Needless to say, it is time to get back to writing, thinking and hoping. I will update the blog as I continue to develop my research into a publishable article and as I organize my dissertation proposal.

From Thesis to Triathlon

I am glad to report that I finally finished the process of writing my thesis. It has been a great experience, but I'm also glad to be done. So what's next? I am taking a year between my master's and PhD. to do some more language study. I'll do another year of Attic Greek and a year of accelerated Latin. In the meantime I'll be putting together PhD. applications.

Besides the thesis, one other activity that has taken up my summer is triathlon training. I've spent my "free" time training for the three events of the triathlon (swim, bike, run). This will be my first Tri and because of that I am doing the shortest one possible as not to kill myself on my first try. It is a .6 mile swim, 12.4 mile bike and 3.1 mile run. I hope to someday do an IronMan. Perhaps the same year I finish my PhD?

The Joy of Finishing a Draft!

I finished a draft today and turned it in to my advisor and second reader for comment. I am very excited about the prospect of being done! I have loved researching, but I love being done more! Thank you to my wonderful wife for putting up with me through all of this!

Thesis should be mandatory!

Wow, it has been way too long since my last update. I have been doing a lot of reading this summer, and I admit, not enough writing. But, I've learned a lot! One of the things I'm most excited it about is how I'm increasing my knowledge in the literary field. Dealing with the topic of a motif took me into the realm of literary criticism. I've read definition after definition of the motif, swam through criteria for motifs, read about implied readers and implied authors...you get the point I had to step outside of my comfort zone (biblical studies) and read stuff that I would never have picked up if it weren't for this thesis. That just goes to show the importance of this process. Not only does it increase a one's knowledge in his or her field, but it also creates a well-rounded scholar.

After looking at how far I've come as a scholar, I realized the importance of this journey. Then I realized something else. I am the first student from my school in I don't know how many years to do the thesis option. Yes, that's right, option. I don't know how the majority of theological schools do it, but mine does not require MTS students to do a thesis. I chose to do one because of my own educational goals, which required a thesis to be done. I know I will, in my final evaluation, suggest that all MTS students be required to do a thesis. This is not because I had to do it and no one else did, but because I have seen how much one can learn from working on a project like this, both in the field and well outside the field!

EGLBS Presentation

I had the privilege of presenting a brief version of my thesis at the Eastern Great Lakes Biblical Society regional conference. I have to say that my presentation went very well. I was a bit nervous, this being my first presentation, but everything went smoothly, I read at a normal pace (I think), and I was able to field all of the questions with confidence. Here are a few of the issues raised:

-How could Mark support secrecy given the nature of the gospels?
-How do I reconcile the revelation of the secret beginning in Mark 8?
-Is Jesus' messiahship really the secret?

Most of these questions I've been thinking about for a while now and I found myself able to answer most of them. That was a very good feeling! I also had the opportunity to have conversations with David Barr and Timothy Dwyer. Professor Dwyer invited me to lunch and we discussed his research on Mark's secrecy motif which has influenced my own research greatly. Among many things he encouraged me to take a look at Mark's use of παραδιδωμι in light of my argument that Mark's use of secrecy is a pragmatic warning to revealers. I hope to develop something on this in time to add it to my thesis before it is due.

Thesis Considerations

I have decided to use this space to write about my thesis research. Hopefully this will help me hash some things out and to receive some constructive criticism as well. In this post I would like to give a summary of my thesis. I hope to expand on this summary in further posts. The title of my thesis is "Mark’s Secrecy Motif: Hellenistic Mystery Cults and the Warning Against Revealers in Mark’s Gospel." I hope to address the following questions:

• What was the function of secrecy in Hellenistic mystery cults and in Mark’s gospel?
• Were there advantages to being initiated into the mysteries, including soteriological and eschatological advantages?
• What was the secret in Mark?
• Did Mark’s Gospel function to reveal the secret or to show the consequences of revelation?

The thesis will address the influence of Hellenistic mystery cults on early Christianity, especially the Markan Community. I hope to clearly identify the advantages of initiation into a few specific mystery cults and to compare those advantages to those described in Mark's Gospel. I will ultimately move to argue that the Markan Community in fact functioned as a mystery cult, and Mark's Gospel was warning to those who might reveal the secret. I will also move to argue that the action of the women in Mark 16.8 is Mark's ideal reaction to the secret.

Is Q Enough?

Upon reflecting on my previous post, and after reading Steven's comments I think it is necessary to consider my question about Q a little further. Steven's opinion is that there has to be some written element to Q, which he sites good evidence for. I previously suggested that Q is an oral source. Considering Steven's opinion and my own suggestion, I am led to wonder if the concept of Q is flexible enough to answer the question of textual origination. Let me explain.

First, when looking at the Synoptics, we see 3 different gospels with some similarities, and as Steven pointed out, some more obvious than others. If I am correct about Q, it serves as an explanation of how these similarities got into 3 different gospels. Hypothetically, Q is a collection of recorded sayings that originated before any of the 3 Synoptics. It seems for many scholars that this is an easy enough explanation.

I will now turn to Mark to explain why this is much more complex than it seems. First of all, Mark seems to be a fantastic storyteller who is able to embrace a number of audiences. At this point I am forced to look at Mark's gospel as something flowing from a storyteller's mouth into the listener's ears rather than from an author's pen into a reader's eyes. Bear with me. It is widely accepted that Mark is the earliest gospel, and in most theories used only Q as its source as well as being a source along with Q for Matthew and Luke. Again, my problem, we are talking about a storyteller rather than an author. If Mark is a storyteller it is plausible that his story woud originate from oral tradition. This is what led me to suggest an oral version of Q. When Luke and Matthew are brought into the picture, it is harder for an oral Q theory to hold up as Steven has pointed out. However, it does not cause oral Q to concede to written Q, and thus my original question returns. Is Q enough?

Most scholars want a written Q or an oral Q. One or the other. Along with this, most scholars want one source and they want to call it Q (although some scholars see no reason for any original source). I don't think Q is enough. To me, there has to be more. For example, Greco-Roman literature and culture should be considered a source used at least by Mark. I think Q has created a road block for further consideration. For most Q stands as a good explanation and the academy has spent years trying to figure out what is in Q and what Q really is when we have a considerable amount of other concrete, plausible sources that deserve our attention.