Some random notes, stuff I've been doing lately . . .

I want to post here, but sometimes I'm not real sure what to say. I recently submitted some reviews of three books in the Journal of the Study of the New Testament Supplement series. Each book was, in its own right, an interesting read. The one that really grabbed my attention was entitled Scalometry and the Pauline Epistles. The author is George K. Barr, and he proposes using a measure of scale to understand and to interpret texts. Barr contends that the Pauline materials (as well as other texts) evidence a surprising range of scale that could be important for determining not only the importance of certain elements in a text, but also for the possibility of determining authorship of various disputed works. For Barr, scale exists in written texts as surely as in art, music, and architecture. The presence of scale in a text informs the reader with regards to the importance of certain materials, lending a sense of immensity to major themes and an aura of the mundane to less important materials.

Now, this idea intrigued me because I had no idea how to measure scale in a text. Fortunately for me, Barr spends a great deal of time not only defining the concept of textual scale, but also he describes a method whereby the scale of a text can be graphed and studied. Now, if you are graphically challenged like me, this material may not be the most exciting reading you have ever done. Nonetheless, Barr delineates an approach that has a feel of objectivity to it and yields some fascininating conclusions. Simply stated, Barr discovers 6 basic levels or models of scale in Pauline materials. Applying these models to books that are not universally accepted as Pauline, Barr discovers that they show the same range of scale as the undisputed Pauline materials. That is, they chart the same graph of scale as other works considered definitely by the hand of Paul.

Now, you may have turned off your computer at that point, but I think it is interesting in this way--working as I do in conservative Christian circles, the view has long been that Paul wrote all those epistles directly attributed to him. In other scholarly circles, however, the opinion has long been that Paul only wrote a handful of the 12 or so epistles bearing his name. If Barr's method checks out, then there will be a sort of graphical or scientific evidence that the conservative is correct. In fact, Barr believes so strongly in his conclusions that he calls for a radical change in sholarly consensus about the Pauline epistles. His call is similar to Luther's nailing the 95 theses on the door of the church in Wittenberg.

At any rate, I found it interesting that after all this time, an academic work could have a different or fresh approach and hold my attention. It might not be fascinating to you, but I certainly enjoyed the challenge of learning the language and use of scale in texts. Ah well, I've rambled enough. If you want more, feel free to ask.

Thanks for reading!