Christopher B. Zeichmann

Christopher B. Zeichmann

A Wordpess Site

Author: Christopher Zeichmann

New article in Journal for the Jesus Movement in Its Jewish Setting

By on November 13th, 2017 in Academics, Scripture

Just a quick update. An article I wrote for the Journal of the Jesus Movement in Its Jewish Setting was recently published.  The article concerns Mark’s use of Latinisms and the location of its geographic setting.  JJMJS is an open-access journal, so it can be found online free here: http://www.jjmjs.org/

 

Loanwords or Code-Switching? Latin Transliteration and the Setting of Mark’s Composition

Abstract

The composition of Mark’s Gospel is variously located in metropolitan Rome, Syria, and Palestine, with nothing close to a consensus emerging. This article takes up one particular line of argumentation for Markan provenance and provides it a clearer methodological and theoretical apparatus, namely the issue of Latin transliteration. Some commentators note that the prevalence of Latin suggests a Roman context, while others contend that Markan vocabulary is consistent with the Roman East. This article examines the distinctive ways in which Latin was transliterated in the aforementioned regions in epigraphs, papyri, and literary texts. Comparative work will indicate that Mark’s use of transliterated Latin verges on incompatible with pre-War Palestine, is quite dissimilar for the city of Rome, but overlaps in significant ways with that of Syria and post-War Palestine. Though this argument is not conclusive about Markan origins in its own right, it may clarify the utility of the argument from Latinisms for future discussions.

New Publications and Indiegogo

By on August 29th, 2017 in Academics, Scripture

This summer has been eventful! Two articles I wrote are now in print:

“The Date of Mark’s Gospel Apart from the Temple and Rumors of War: The Taxation Episode (12:13–17) as Evidence.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 79 (2017): 422–437.

“Capernaum: A ‘Hub’ for the Historical Jesus or the Markan Evangelist?” Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 15 (2017): 147–165.

 

Moreover, I have launched an Indiegogo campaign to fund a new website for the study of the military and the New Testament.  Any contributions would be greatly welcome!

Luckily, nearly all the research is completed for this project!  The issue now is funding the launch of a website for this, Database of Military Inscriptions and Papyri of Early Roman Palestine (DMIPERP).  The website will have lots of neat features:

  • Searchable collection of all known inscriptions and papyri concerning the military and Palestine 63 BC-132 AD, in their original language and English translation. Each will have a bibliography and a brief commentary on its significance.  There are roughly 300 such texts.
  • All inscriptions concerning Christians in the Roman army before Constantine’s reign (306 AD).
  • A map and gazetteer of all military sites in early Roman Palestine, noting when they were used.
  • Cameo essays by experts on how literary sources (Josephus, rabbinic writings, Philo of Alexandria, Tacitus, Eusebius, etc.) can aid the study of the military in early Roman Palestine.
  • Regular updates to include the latest archaeological finds!

Moreover, this will help create materials necessary for my upcoming book, tentatively titled The Roman Army and the New Testament.  This book aims to be both useful for academics and accessible to interested non-specialists – especially ministers, educated laity, and military enthusiasts. The book will cover a range of topics, including the demographics of the military in New Testament times, the role of the military in early Roman Palestine, and discussion of every single instance the military appears in the New Testament.

Superman: Champion of the Oppressed

By on April 26th, 2017 in Academics, comics

I have uploaded some images that may interest those who have read my article, “Champion of the Oppressed: Redescribing the Jewishness of Superman as Populist Authenticity Politics,” Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 29 (2017): forthcoming.   The first four Figures are discussed in the article itself.  I have included some other images and interesting links below them.

Who is Superman in his earliest stories? He’s referred to as the following: Champion of the Oppressed (AC #1), Dedicated to Assisting the Helpless and Oppressed (AC #6), Friend of the Helpless and Oppressed (AC #7), A One-Man Battle Against the Forces of Evil and Oppression (AC #8, 12), Savior of the Helpless and Oppressed (AC #9, 10), Champion of the Helpless and Oppressed (AC #11).  Siegel and Shuster seem to be preoccupied with this phrasing, which I have tried to elucidate in my article.

I would strongly encourage anyone interested in these matters to visit your local comic book shop and pick up a collected version of these Superman stories, which are immensely entertaining.  Four collections are available at a range of prices:

Siegel, Jerry and Joe Shuster. [1938-1940] 1997. Superman: The Action Comics Archives, vol. 1. New York: DC Comics. [Hardcover]

———. [1938-1939] 2006. The Superman Chronicles, vol. 1. New York: DC Comics. [Paperback]

———. [1938-1940] 2013. Superman: The Golden Age Omnibus, vol. 1. New York: DC Comics. [Hardcover]

———. [1938-1940] 2016. Superman: The Golden Age, vol. 1. New York: DC Comics. [Paperback]

 

Continue reading “Superman: Champion of the Oppressed”

Gospel of Jesus’ Wife Blog Posts and Online Articles

By on December 12th, 2016 in Academics, Scripture

This post is intended to be an up-to-date collection of blog posts and online articles cited in the article “Gender in Biblical Studies after the Forgery of The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife.” Biblical Interpretation 26 (2018): 391-412.  Links cited in the article are all collected here for ease of access. [Last Updated 30 Aug 2018]

 

Ahmed, S. 2004. “Declarations of Whiteness: The Non-performativity of Anti-Racism,” borderlands 3/2: n.p. <http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol3no2_2004/ahmed_declarations.htm>

Askeland, C. 2014. “Jesus Had an Ugly Sister-in-Law,” online post at Evangelical Textual Criticism <http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.ca/2014/04/jesus-had-ugly-sister-in-law.html>.

Baden, J. and C. Moss. 2014. “The Curious Case of Jesus’s Wife,” The Atlantic 315/5: 74–81. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/12/the-curious-case-of-jesuss-wife/382227/>

DeConick, A.D. 2014. “Sexism and the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife,” online post at Forbidden Gospels Blog <http://aprildeconick.com/forbiddengospels/2014/5/9/sexism-and-gospel-of-jesus-wife>.

Depuydt, L.  2014b. “The Papyrus Fragment and the Crocodile: When Discerning a Blunder Is Itself a …” online post at NT Blog <http://markgoodacre.org/Depuydt.pdf>.

Gurry, P. 2016. “The Owner of the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife Unveiled,” online post at Evangelical Textual Criticism <http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.ca/2016/06/the-owner-of-gospel-of-jesus-wife.html>.

Le Donne, A.  2016. “Jesus’ Wife: What Did We Learn?” online post at The Jesus Blog <http://historicaljesusresearch.blogspot.ca/2016/06/jesus-wife-what-did-we-learn.html>.

Mazza, R. 2016. “The Jesus’ Wife Fragment: End of Story?” online post at Faces and Voices <http://facesandvoices.wordpress.com/2016/06/17/the-jesus-wife-fragment-end-of-story/>.

Mroczek, E. 2014. ““Gospel of Jesus’ Wife” Less Durable Than Sexism Surrounding It,” online post at Religion Dispatches <http://religiondispatches.org/gospel-of-jesus-wife-less-durable-than-sexism-surrounding-it/>.

Roberts, M.D. 2014. “Was Jesus Married? Does the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife Help Answer This Question?” online post at Reflections on Christ, Church, and Culture <http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/2014/05/05/was-jesus-married-does-the-gospel-of-jesus-wife-help-answer-this-question/>.

Sabar, A. 2016a. “The Unbelievable Tale of Jesus’s Wife,” The Atlantic 318/1: 64–78. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/07/the-unbelievable-tale-of-jesus-wife/485573/>

———. 2016b. “Karen King Responds to ‘The Unbelievable Tale of Jesus’s Wife’,” online post at The Atlantic <http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/karen-king-responds-to-the-unbelievable-tale-of-jesus-wife/487484/>.

Thompson, A. 2012. “Reality Check on Jesus and His ‘Wife’,” online post at Cosmic Log <http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/18/13945001-reality-check-on-jesus-and-his-wife>.

West, J. 2012. “No, People, A 4th Century Scrap Doesn’t Prove Jesus Had a Wife,” online post at Zwinglius Redivivus <http://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/2012/09/18/no-people-a-4th-century-scrap-doesnt-prove-jesus-had-a-wife/>.

———. 2014. “What a Very Odd and Curious Response: Or, How Some Feminists Need to Learn about Adiaphora,” online post at Zwinglius Redivivus <http://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/2014/05/08/what-a-very-odd-and-curious-response-or-how-some-feminists-need-to-learn-about-adiaphora/>.

———. 2016. “The State of Biblical Scholarship in America: An Observation,” online post at Zwinglius Redivivus <http://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/2016/06/18/the-state-of-biblical-scholarship-in-america-an-observation/>.

 

Other links of interest:
The Smithsonian‘s initial announcement of GJW (2012)

Ariel Sabar’s update on GJW at The Smithsonian (2012)

An abbreviated version of Tony Burke’s “Heresy Hunting” article (2008)

e-Clavis entry on GJW, by Ian Brown with a thorough bibliography (2017)

A nearly comprehensive set of links to relevant blog posts by Michael Gondrin (2017)

Tony Burke’s Introduction to Fakes, Forgeries, and Fictions, which has an insightful discussion of GJW (2017)

Jesus’s Wife on the Web – Chance Bonar has an insightful article (2017)

Gender in Biblical Studies after the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife

By on June 18th, 2016 in Academics

A couple years ago Eva Mroczek wrote an excellent blog post on the open sexism surrounding academic discourse on the Gospel of Jesus’ Wife and it seems worth revisiting in light of the Atlantic article published yesterday. It’s difficult to know what to make of all of it, but a few things warrant further discussion.

1) In terms of the scholarly hype surrounding the article itself, in what ways is it being framed as a rehabilitation of “masculinized knowledge” against the ostensibly “hyperfeminist” theology advanced by King and GJW? That is, in what ways are scholars finding reassurance in the fact that “they were right all along” or that existing (often, but not always, patriarchal) knowledge regimes still hold a place of priority in the academy? It was clear from the beginning that certain sectors of the academy were doing their best to minimize or discredit GJW, even as King remained extremely measured in her claims about it.

2) In terms of the previous efforts to discredit GJW, how is it that the gospel was understood as representative of “hyperfeminist” concerns, when it is now clear that it was a product of a deep misogyny? How is it that the disciplinary knowledge of biblical studies is able to conflate the two? One notices that despite the complete dissolution of feminine agency in both GJW and Fritz’s thinking, this text has represented a threatening variety of feminism in certain sectors of the academy. What is that threat and how did it become proximate to discourse on feminism?

3) In terms of gendered knowledge, why do Nag Hammadi literature and other Christian apocrypha have much closer to gender parity among experts than male-dominated discourse on canonical literature? Why is “canon” so appealing to masculine scholars and why do non-canonical works seem to threaten that knowledge – we are always immediately reassured that the latest non-canonical work tells us nothing about the historical Jesus but is of interest only to historians of later periods? It’s difficult not to be reminded of the discussion of Secret Mark, which (regardless of authenticity) I think functioned to reassure us that there was nothing even vaguely queer going on in early Christianity. In what ways does “canon” itself represent an investment in existing sources of authority and knowledge regimes – or even things “worthy of study”?

Just to be clear, I’m not trying to “call out” anyone, but trying to think through the texture of scholarly discourse in a broader sense. I hope that the initial post was clear that not all who were gunning for it from the beginning are usefully labelled “sexist,” even if they (like all of us) are socialized in a patriarchal context. I’m mostly interested in how “legitimate” scholarly knowledge – knowledge inextricable from patriarchal norms and discourses – operates in this context. All of this to say, I’m not calling anyone in particular sexist on account of their early rejection of GJW; rather, I am trying to ask is “how do many dismissals function to reinforce the fundamental sexism of biblical studies regardless of the scholar’s intent?”

[This post is a modified form of a Facebook post I made to facilitate discussion on the matter – if you would like to participate, feel free to add me as a friend]

 

SBL presentation

By on November 18th, 2015 in Academics, Scripture

SBL is right around the corner and I will be presenting at the Redescribing Early Christianity section.  This year the theme is redescribing time and anachronism.  Here is my abstract.

 

Mark’s Jesus as Post-War Subject in Pre-War Galilee

 

Abstract: While most scholars agree Mark was composed around the time of the Judaean War, many are reluctant to see any implications in the Gospel aside from isolated pericopae (e.g., Olivet Discourse, rending of the temple veil). This paper will suggest that in fact the conditions of Palestine after the Judaean War resonate throughout Mark. It will argue that Mark presents Jesus as a time-displaced subject from the post-War period that inhabited Galilee during the reign of Herod Antipas. In so doing, the Markan Jesus operates with an anachronistic hindsight allowing him to authorize a number of practices for the Markan readers in the post-War period, whether through explicit instruction or exemplary practices of his own. This paper will take Jesus’ discussion of tax practices (12:13-17) as its point of departure, examining anachronisms and their authorizing function. Two further examples will also be discussed more tentatively: 1) cultic reconfigurations adjusting for the loss of the temple and 2) authorizing the site of Galilee – Capernaum in particular – as the locus for refugee activity. In so doing, Jesus’ peculiar status as a post-War subject residing the pre-War period (and the continuity the Markan readers ostensibly hold with his practices) legitimates their claims in the context of post-War Jewish authenticity politics. This paper will elaborate on the functions of anachronism and time-displaced subjectivity in Markan patterns of legitimation.

Martial’s Epigrams 11.94 and the Fiscus Iudaicus

By on June 4th, 2015 in Academics

Martial, Epigrams 11.94 reads:

Your overflowing malice, and your detraction everywhere of my books, I pardon: circumcised poet, you are wise! This too, I disregard, that when you carp at my poesy ouplunder them: so, too, circumcised pet, you are wise! What tortures me is this, that you, circumcised poet, although born in the very midst of Solyma [Jerusalem], corrupt my boy. There! You deny it, and swear to me by the Thunderer’s Temple. I don’t believe you: swear, circumcised on, by Anchialus. (Translation by Walter Charles Alan)

I initially researched this passage in tandem with my work on Jewish understandings of same-sex intercourse in the early Roman period.  I also suspect there is untapped potential for work on the fiscus Iudaicus as well.

 

The fiscus Iudaicus replaced the half-shekel Jewish temple tax after the destruction of the temple.  While the temple tax was collected by Jewish authorities and used to fund the temple cult in Jerusalem, the fiscus Iudaicus was imposed by Vespasian to fund Jupiter Capitolinus – the temple of Jupiter in the city of Rome. One can only assume this was intended to cause offense and humiliate Jews after the loss in the Judaean War.

 

Here, Martial seems to make an oblique reference to the fiscus Iudaicus that – as far as I can tell – has never been noted before. Martial wrote mostly under Domitian’s princeps and makes a few other references to the fiscus Iudaicus elsewhere in his writings (Epigrams 7.55 and possibly Liber spectaculorum 36 [see Honora Chapman’s “Reading the Judeans and the Judaean War in Martial’s Liber spectaculorum.”]).  These other references permit us to infer his demand that a Jewish rival swear by the temple of Jupiter in Epigrams 11.94 acts as a humiliating reminder of the Jewish tax’s purpose.
Some commentators want to see references to the temple’s destruction in this epigram: Louis Feldman suggests the demand that the Jewish poet swear by “Anchialus” is a corruption of “Antiochus” (i.e., Antiochus IV Epiphanes); Peter Schaefer suggests “Anchialus” is a corruption of “Archelaus” (i.e., Archelaus II).  Neither of these seems particularly satisfactory to me; the traditional explanation that “Anchialus” is the name of Martial’s slave-boy (a name common among slaves) seems fairly plausible and makes sense in context.