Proposing Some New Ecliptics in New Testament Studies Enabled by Digital Humanities-Based Methods

James Allen Libby

Abstract


“Fragmentation” is a well-worn watchword in contemporary biblical studies. But is endless fragmentation across the traditional domains of epistemology, methodology and hermeneutics the inevitable future for the postmodern exercise of biblical scholarship? In our view, multiple factors mitigate against such a future, but two command our attention here. First, digital humanities itself, through its principled use of corpora, databases and computer-based methods, seems to be remarkably capable of producing findings with high levels of face validity (interpretive agreement) across multiple hermeneutical perspectives and communities. Second, and perhaps more subversively, there is a substantial body of practitioners that, per Kearney, actively question postmodernity’s impress as the final port of call for philosophy. For these practitioners deconstruction has become both indispensable — by delegitimizing hegemonies — but, in its own way, metanarratival by stultifying all other iterative, dialectical and critical processes that have historically motivated scholarship. Sensing this impasse, Kearney (1987, pp. 43-45) proposes a reimagining that is not only critical but that also embraces ποίησις, the possibility of optimistic, creative work. Such a stance within digital humanities would affirm that poietic events emerge not only through frictions and fragmentation (e.g. Kinder and McPherson 2014, pp. xiii-xviii) but also through commonalties and convergence. Our approach here will be to demonstrate such a reimagining, rather than to argue for it, using two worked examples in the Greek New Testament (GNT). Those examples – digital humanities-enabled papyrology and digital humanities-enabled statistical linguistics – demonstrate ways in which the data of the text itself can be used to interrogate our perspectives and suggest that our perspectives must remain ever open to such inquiries. We conclude with a call for digital humanities to further leverage its notable strengths to cast new light on old problems not only in biblical studies, but across the spectrum of the humanities.


Keywords


Digital Humanities, New Testament, Computational Stylistics, Papyrii, Stylometry, Genre, Authorship, 7Q5, Dead Sea Scrolls

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aageson, J., 2008. Paul, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Early Church. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

Achtemeier, P., Green, J. and Thompson, M. M., 2001. Introducing the New Testament: Its Literature and Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Adam, A., 2000. Handbook of Postmodern Biblical Interpretation. St. Louis: Chalice.

Adam, A., 2006. Faithful Interpretation: Reading the Bible in a Postmodern World. Minneapolis: Fortress.

Aichele, G., Miscall, P. and Walsh, R., 2009. “An Elephant in the Room: Historical-Critical and Postmodern Interpretations of the Bible.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(2), pp. 383–404.

Aland, K., 1974. “Neue neutestamentliche Papyri III.” New Testament Studies, 20(4), pp. 357–376.

Author, 2010. “A Reworked Omnibus Protocol for Identifying Fragmentary Papyri Using 7Q5 as a Test Case.” In: SBL Annual Conference. Atlanta, GA., November 21st, 2010.

Author, 2015. Disentangling Authorship and Genre in the Greek New Testament: History, Method and Praxis. Ph.D. dissertation. McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, ON., Canada.

Author, Forthcoming-a. “Novel Identifications for the 7Q5 Papyrus Enabled by a Reworked Omnibus Protocol for Identifying Fragmentary Papyri.”

Author, Forthcoming-c. “A Protocol and Software to Meaningfully Reduce False Negatives and False Positive in the Identification of Fragmentary Texts of Antiquity.”

Baayen, R., van Halteren, H., Neijt, A., et al., 2002. “An Experiment in Authorship Attribution.” In: 6th JADT. Saint-Malo, France, 13-15 March 2002. Paris: JADT.

Baillet, M., Milik, J. and de Vaux, R., 1962. Les "petites grottes" de Qumrân: exploration de la falaise, les grottes 2Q, 3Q, 5Q, 6Q, 7Q̀ a 10Q, le rouleau de cuivre. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Barr, G., 2002. “The Impact of Scalometry on New Testament Letters.” The Expository Times, 114(1), pp. 3–9.

Baur, F., 1845. Paulus, der Apostel Jesu Christi: Sein Leben und Wirken, seine Briefe und seine Lehre. Stuttgart: Becher & Müller.

Binongo, J. and Smith, M., 1999. “A Bridge between Statistics and Literature: The Graphs of Oscar Wilde’s Literary Genres.” Journal of Applied Statistics, 26(7), pp. 781–787.

Bockmuehl, M., 2006. Seeing the Word: Refocusing New Testament Study. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Burrows, J., 1987. “Word-Patterns and Story-Shapes: The Statistical Analysis of Narrative Style.” Literary & Linguistic Computing, 2(2), pp. 61–70.

Burrows, J., 1992. “Not Unless You Ask Nicely: The Interpretative Nexus between Analysis and Information.” Literary & Linguistic Computing, 7(2), pp. 91–109.

Carnap, R., 1984. “On the Character of Philosophic Problems.” Philosophy of Science, 51(1), pp. 5–19.

Chubb, T., 1731. A Discourse Concerning Reason, with Regard to Religion and Divine Revelation. London: T. Cox.

Comte, A., 1830. Cours de philosophie positive. Bachelier: Paris.

de Wette, W., 1842. Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die Bibel alten und neuen Testaments. 4th ed. Berlin: Reimer.

de Wette, W., 1843. Kurze Erklärung der Briefe an die Colosser, an Philemon, an die Ephesier und Philipper. Leipzig: Weidmann.

Deissmann, G., 1927. Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World. Translated from German by Strachan, L. R. M. London: Hodder & Stoughton.

Eichhorn, J., 1812. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Leipzig: Weidmann.

Erasmus, D., 1663. Annotationes, of, Aanteekeningen op 't Nieuwe Testament. Amsterdam: Voor Ian Rievwertsz.

Estrada, D. and White Jr., W., 1978. The First New Testament. Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

Estrada, D., 1972. “On the Latest Identification of New Testament Documents.” Westminster Theological Journal, 34(2), pp. 109–117.

Evanson, E., 1792. The Dissonance of the Four Generally Received Evangelists. Ipswich: George Jermym.

Focant, C., 1985. “Un fragment du second évangile à Qumrân: 7Q5 = Mc 6,52-53?” Revue Théologique de Louvain, 16(4), pp. 447–454.

Forsyth, R., Holmes, D. and Tse, E., 1999. “Cicero, Sigonio, and Burrows: Investigating the Authenticity of the Consolatio.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 14(3), pp. 375–400.

Garnet, P., 1973. “O’Callaghan's Fragments: Our Earliest New Testament Texts?” Evangelical Quarterly, 45(1), pp. 6-12.

Gödel, K., 1931. “Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme.” Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik, 38(1), pp. 173–198.

Green, J., 2000. “Scripture and Theology: Uniting the Two So Long Divided.” In: Green, J. B. and Turner, M., eds. 2000. Between Two Horizons: Spanning New Testament Studies and Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. pp. 23-43.

Green, J., 2011. Practicing Theological Interpretation: Engaging Biblical Texts for Faith and Formation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Green, J. ed., 2010. Hearing the New Testament: Strategies for Interpretation. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Greenwood, H., 1992. “St Paul Revisited: A Computational Result.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 7(1), pp. 43–47.

Greenwood, H., 1993. “Saint Paul Revisited: Word Clusters in Multidimensional Space.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 8(4), pp. 211–219.

Harman, G., 1965. “The Inference to the Best Explanation.” The Philosophical Review, 74(1), pp. 88-95.

Hemer, C., 1974. “Note on 7Q5.” Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenchaft und die Kunde der Älteren Kirche, 65(1-2), pp. 155–157.

Herdan, G., 1960. Type-Token Mathematics. A Textbook of Mathematical Linguistics. Hague: Mouton.

Holtzmann, H., 1872. Kritik der Epheser-und Kolosserbriefe: auf Grund einer Analyse ihres Verwandtschaftsverhältnisses. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.

Howard, W., 1952. “The Gospel According to John.” In: Buttrick, G. A., ed. 1952. The Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. 8. Nashville: Abingdon.

Jeanrond, W., 1988. Text and Interpretation as Categories of Theological Thinking. New York: Crossroad.

Jeanrond, W., 1991. Theological Hermeneutics: Development and Significance. New York: Crossroad.

Jeanrond, W., 1993. “Theology in the Context of Pluralism and Postmodernity: David Tracy’s Theological Method.” In: Jasper, D., ed. 1993. Postmodernism, Literature and the Future of Theology. Houndmills: Macmillian. pp. 143–163.

Juola, P., 2008. “Author Attribution.” Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 1(3), pp. 233–334.

Juola, P. and Baayen, R., 2005. “A Controlled-Corpus Experiment in Authorship Identification by Cross-Entropy.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 20(supplement), pp. 59–67.

Juola, P., Sofko, J. and Brennan, P., 2006. “A Prototype for Authorship Attribution Studies.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 21(2), pp. 169–178.

Kearney, R., 1987. “Ethics and the Postmodern Imagination.” Thought: Fordham University Quarterly, 62, pp. 39–58.

Knoke, D. and Burke, P., 1980. Log-Linear Models. Vol. 07-020. Newbury Park: Sage.

Kraus, T., 1999. “7Q5: Status quaestionis und grundlegende Anmerkungen zur Relativierung der Diskussion um das Papyrusfragment.” Revue de Qumrân, 19(74), pp. 239-258.

Kuhn, T., 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kümmel, W., 1975. Introduction to the New Testament. Translated from German by Kee, H. C. Nashville, TN: Abingdon.

Ledger, G., 1995. “An Exploration of Differences in the Pauline Epistles Using Multivariate Statistical Analysis.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 10(2), pp. 85–97.

Lowe, M., 2000. “The Critical and the Skeptical Methods in New Testament Research.” Gregorianum, 81(4), pp. 692–721.

Martini, C., 1972. “Notes on the Papyri of Qumrān Cave 7.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 91(2), pp. 15–20.

Metzger, B., 1968. The Text of the New Testament; Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. New York: Oxford University Press.

Moore, S. and Sherwood, Y., 2010. “Biblical Studies ‘After’ Theory: Onwards Towards the Past. Part 2, The Secret Vices of the Biblical God.” Biblical Interpretation, 18(2), pp. 87–113.

Moore, S. and Sherwood, Y., 2011. The Invention of the Biblical Scholar: a Critical Manifesto. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

Morton, A., 1986. “Once. A Test of Authorship Based on Words Which are Not Repeated in the Sample.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 1(1), pp. 1–8.

Mosteller, F. and Wallace, D., 1963. “Inference in an Authorship Problem.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(302), pp. 275–309.

Muro, E. 2010. Retrieved February 2nd, 2010, from http://www.bsreview.org/blog/2004/03/page/3.

Neurath, O., 1931. “Physicalism: The Philosophy of the Viennese Circle.” The Monist, 41(4), pp. 618–623.

O’Callaghan, J., 1972a. “¿1 Tim 3:16 : 4:1.3 en 7Q4?” Biblica, 53(3), pp. 362–367.

O’Callaghan, J., 1972b. “New Testament Papyri in Qumrān Cave 7.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 91(2), pp. 1–14.

O’Callaghan, J., 1972f. “Notas sobre 7Q tomadas en el Rockefeller Museum de Jerusalén.” Biblica, 53(4), pp. 517–533.

O’Callaghan, J., 1972g. “¿Papiros neotestamentarios en la cueva 7 de Qumrãn?” Biblica, 53, pp. 91–100.

Parker, P., 1972. “Enthält das Papyrusfragment 5 aus der Höhle 7 von Qumran einen Markustext?” Erbe und Auftrag, 48, pp. 467–469.

Peirce, C., 1867. “On the Natural Classification of Arguments.” Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 7, pp. 261–287.

Peirce, C., 1878. “Deduction, Induction, and Hypothesis.” Popular Science Monthly, 13, pp. 470–482.

Peirce, C., 1901. “On the Logic of Drawing History from Ancient Documents, Especially from Testimonies.” In: Project, T. P. E., ed. 1901. The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings,(1893–1913). Vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. pp. 75–114.

Popper, K., 2014. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London; New York: Taylor & Francis.

Porter, S., 2013. How We Got the New Testament: Text, Transmission, Translation. Grand Rapids: Baker.

Quine, W., 1980. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism.” In: Quine, W. V. O., ed. 1980. From a Logical Point of View: Nine Logico-Philosophical Essays. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. pp. 20–46.

Radday, Y., 1970. “Isaiah and the Computer: a Preliminary Report.” Computers & the Humanities, 5(2), pp. 65–73.

Roberts, C., 1972. “On Some Presumed Papyrus Fragments of the New Testament from Qumran.” The Journal of Theological Studies, 23(2), pp. 446–447.

Rudman, J., 1997. “The State of Authorship Attribution Studies: Some Problems and Solutions.” Computers and the Humanities, 31(4), pp. 351–365.

Schleiermacher, F., 1807. Ueber den sogenannten ersten Brief des Paulos an den Timotheos: Ein kritisches Sendschreiben an J. C. Gass, Consistorialassessor und Feldprediger zu Stettin. Berlin: Realschulbuchh.

Schmidt, J., 1801. “Vermutungen über die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher.” Bibliothek für Kritik und Exegese des Neuen Testaments und älteste Christengeschichte, 2(3), pp. 380–386.

Schmidt, J., 1804. Historisch-kritische Einleitung ins Neue Testament. Giessen: Tasché und Müller.

Scibona, R., 2001. “7Q5 e il ‘calcolo delle probabilità’ nella sua identificazione.” Bibbia e Oriente, 43(3), pp. 133–181.

Slaby, W., 1992. “Computer-unterstützte Fragment-Identifizierung.” In: Mayer, B. and Charlesworth, J. H., eds. 1992. Christen und Christliches in Qumran? Regensburg: Pustet. pp. 83–88.

Spottorno, M., 1992. “Una nueva posible identificación de 7Q5.” Sefarad, 52(2), pp. 541–543.

Spottorno, M., 1999. “Can Methodological Limits Be Set in the Debate on the Identification of 7Q5?” Dead Sea Discoveries, 6(1), pp. 66–77.

Thiede, C., 1984. “7Q: eine rückkehr zu den neutestamentlichen Papyrusfragmenten in der siebten Höhle von Qumran.” Biblica, 65(4), pp. 538–559.

Thiede, C., 1992. The Earliest Gospel Manuscript?: the Qumran Papyrus 7Q5 and Its Significance for New Testament Studies. Exeter: Paternoster.

Thiede, C., 1995. “7Q5—Facts or Fiction.” Westminster Theological Journal, 57(2), pp. 471-474.

Thiselton, A., 1992. New Horizons in Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Thiselton, A., 1995. Interpreting God and the Postmodern Self: On Meaning, Manipulation, and Promise. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Thiselton, A., 2006. Thiselton on Hermeneutics: The Collected Works and New Essays of Anthony Thiselton. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Thiselton, A. and Marko, U., 1998. “Thirty Years of Hermeneutics: Retrospect and Prospect.” In: Krašovec, J., ed. 1998. Interpretation of the Bible: The International Symposium in Slovenia. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic. pp. 1559–1574.

Tracy, D., 1987. Plurality and Ambiguity: Hermeneutics, Religion, Hope. San Francisco: Harper & Row.

von Weizsäcker, K., 1892. Das apostilische Zeitalter der christlichen Kirche. Freiburg: Mohr.

Wallace, D., 1994a. “7Q5: The Earliest NT Papyrus?” In: Evangelical Theological Society Southwestern Regional Meeting. John Brown University, Siloam Springs, AR, 4 March 1994. www.Bible.org: Biblical Studies Press. Also Available at: https://bible.org/article/7q5-earliest-nt-papyrus [Accessed 10 May 2015].

Wallace, D., 1994c. “7Q5: The Earliest NT Papyrus?” Westminster Theological Journal, 56(1), pp. 173–180.

Watson, F., 1997. Text and Truth: Redefining Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Whitehead, A. and Russell, B., 1910. Principia Mathematica. Vol. I. London: Cambridge University Press.

Wittgenstein, L., 1999. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Translated from German by Ogden, C. K. Mineola, NY: Dover.

Ziegler, J. ed., 1984. Zechariah. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.