Pictures with important scholars

Recently I have had the good fortune of reflecting upon my time at Duke, as a result of both my interview this month at biblioblogs and my dissertation preparation and writing.  In doing so, I was led back to the album of pictures from my Duke hooding.  It was great to be reminded of those times.  In light of that–and to continue the trend of ‘getting to know me’–and also because discussion of these names have come up again and again both here on my blog and in my comments on others’.  I thought I would share a few pictures of me with some of my Duke profs . . . and some very seminal scholars to boot!
Richard Hays

Richard Hays

Stephen Chapman

Stephen Chapman

Jim Crenshaw

Jim Crenshaw

Briefly, as if any of them needed clarification, Richard Hays is George Washington Ivey Professor of NT, and is well-known for his use of intertextuality and “echoes of Scripture” in Paul and, now, his current work, on echoes in the gospels.  Stephen Chapmanwas a student of the late Brevard Childs, and is among an elite group of scholars still doing canonical criticism.  And Jim Crenshaw, who just retired two years ago, was professor of OT and is one of the world’s leading scholars on wisdom literature.  He has also written prolifically on the prophets.  His concept of God–especially in the book of Jeremiah (see his Whirlpool of Torment and Defending God)–is very similar to my view.
I hope you enjoy these pictures!
Comment away!

7 thoughts on “Pictures with important scholars

  1. John Anderson says:

    Hey Phil!

    Interesting question. I don’t know that I meant anything specific by it now that I think about it. Let me hazard an answer though–I know based upon our past discussions you expect as much from me!

    Two things come to mind (though again I’m not sure this is even what I meant).
    1) Chapman is a student of Childs. Canonical studies of the Hebrew Bible have developed in light of and beyond Childs. Maybe it was an (implicit) reference to him as using–and forgive the horrible pun–a “Childs-like” approach?

    2) In one of my courses a year or two ago, the question was raised by someone asking who still does canonical criticism today, post Childs. My teacher came up with only a small list of names, among which was Dr. Chapman. This probably relates quite a bit to point #1 above. I realize the methodology itself is quite diverse. But, as ‘canonical criticism,’ there were only a handful or two we came up with. This is not an attack on the method–you know I am very appreciative of Childs’ work (anything not historical-critical is a step in the right direction!). I think the point was simply that while many may indeed employ canonical criticism as a method, there are only a small number that do it in the way Childs did, or who commit themselves to its methodological outworkings as well.

    I hope that is helpful!

  2. Philip Sumpter says:

    Thanks John, I appreciate your informative responses, as usual.

    there are only a small number that do it in the way Childs did

    This is quite true. At the end of his career, Childs hesitated to use the term “canonical approach” (approach, not criticism – this is important) because of the ways in which it had been appropriated. Even amongst Evangelicals there is a diverse use of the term. See the online article by Schultz.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s