England, America, Israel, and…Judah

Why did the survivors of the Kingdom of Judah (golah, she’erit, Diaspora, returnees) in the sixth century adopt/appropriate/retain the identity “Israel,” even though the two polities had not been united under the same monarch since the tenth century? Continue reading

Posted in Bible-Theology, Culture-Economics-Society | 1 Comment

Update

I realized that it’s been quite a while since I wrote a substantial post on THTW. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Links: 2 June 2016

The Limits of Critique |Sydney Review of Books

Amusing, but…no, adamantly: Could We Just Lose the Adverb (Already)? — Vulture

A couple of pieces on the “technologizing” of The Word:

Scary: Sandton and Stellenbosch – EFF identifies land for redistribution – Times LIVE

Posted in Links | Leave a comment

Links: 11 May 2016

Starbucks sued over ice-to-coffee ratio.

Sounds like Job: Israeli man files for restraining order against God

How blockchain will revolutionise far more than money | Aeon Essays

Physicists Seek To Lose The Lecture As Teaching Tool : NPR

How Literature Became Word Perfect | New Republic

Posted in Links | Leave a comment

Ding an Sich

This quotation and article deserve their own post:

“Could it be that the Donald has emerged from the populist circuses of pro wrestling and New York City tabloids, via reality television and Twitter, to prove not just Plato but also James Madison right, that democracies ‘have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention … and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths’? Is he testing democracy’s singular weakness — its susceptibility to the demagogue — by blasting through the firewalls we once had in place to prevent such a person from seizing power? Or am I overreacting?” (Andrew Sullivan: America Has Never Been So Ripe for Tyranny)

No, you’re not overreacting. This is not “democracy gone wrong”; this is democracy itself, in all its g[l]ory.

Posted in Culture-Economics-Society | Leave a comment

Article on Benjamin: “Special Forces”

My article, “‘Special Forces’: A Stereotype of Benjaminite Soldiers in the Deuteronomistic History and Chronicles,” has now been published in the Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament (30.1 [2016]: 16-29).

I would like to post the article publicly, but I need to review the terms of publication to see what the embargo period is. In the meantime, the article should be accessible online if you have access to the Taylor & Francis website through your institution.

Posted in Bible-Theology, Research | Leave a comment

Links: 23 April 2016

From the wide, wacky world of academics:

“Glaciers and Sex”: On the academy’s latest folly.

The worst piece of peer review I’ve ever received | Times Higher Education (THE)

Scientific Regress by William A. Wilson | Articles | First Things

Intriguing:

Adam LaRoche Quit Baseball To Follow His Faith

Harriet Tubman to go on $20 bill; Hamilton to stay on $10 – CBS News

Posted in Links | Leave a comment

Review of Biblical Literature: Leslie C. Allen, “A Theological Approach to the Old Testament”

My review of Leslie C. Allen’s A Theological Approach to the Old Testament: Major Themes and New Testament Connections, has (finally!) been published in the Review of Biblical Literature.

Leslie C. Allen, A Theological Approach to the Old Testament: Major Themes and New Testament Connections (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2014).

(Disclosure statement: I received a free review copy of this book from the publisher through RBL, but was not otherwise compensated for this review.)

Posted in Research | Leave a comment

Links: 8 April 2016

Don’t Force the Celebration at Funerals | Christianity Today

Hijab-Wearing Professor who Left Wheaton College Heads to UVA | NBC Chicago

Baseball’s Endangered Species – The New York Times

Microsoft’s disastrous Tay experiment shows the hidden dangers of AI – Quartz

Busy and distracted? Everybody has been, since at least 1710 | Aeon Essays

Posted in Links | Leave a comment

If You Want to Enjoy the Game Tonight…

…Then don’t read this blog post.

Still there? Good. In all honesty, I will probably watch part of tonight’s NCAA Men’s Basketball National Championship Game. I’m ashamed to say that I will probably enjoy it, especially if Villanova (the local favorite) wins.

But it’s becoming more difficult for me (and many others) to endure watching college sports when the system is designed to take advantage of the marketable skills and talents of young (mostly minority) athletes without compensating them.

In “honor” of the NCG, I’m reblogging one of my posts from a few years ago: Make a Name for Oneself. Here are a couple of links to other important stories in the same vein:

Ask yourself this: In what other industry would we tolerate a bunch of rich white dudes colluding to pay their employees far below the market value of their wages?

___

 

A while ago, I wrote this “parable” intended to highlight the hypocrisy of college athletics. In the wake of the Johnny Manziel autograph scandal, more and more observers are beginning to agree that the system is inherently unfair. Rick Reilly writes in this stellar piece:

The NCAA has very clear rules: Everybody and their gastroenterologists can make money off Johnny Manziel except Manziel himself. The pursuit of wealth is available to every person enrolled at Texas A&M except student-athletes. The whiz pianist, the science prodigy, even the hopeful sportswriter. When I was at the University of Colorado, I worked 40 hours a week at the town newspaper, writing. Nobody threatened to throw me out of school.

Admittedly, the students represent the school in some way, and should be expected to abide by certain standards of behavior. But why should that by definition prevent any legal profiting off of their fame? Non-scholarship athletes are allowed to work, and athletes with other scholarships are allowed to work–why can’t scholarship athletes be permitted to sell their labor or brand?

What we have in college athletics is the mixture of two different sorts of services: education and entertainment. At top athletic schools, the football and basketball programs are highly profitable and are used to support the other athletic programs and the educational ventures of the university.

Without any historical background, it’s not entirely obvious why an institution should be running both an entertainment business for profit and an educational business not-for-profit (leaving aside whether a for-profit model is better for education). Professional franchises try to sell their product and drum up support by associating themselves with a city or state (or region: New England or Carolina). If another franchise moves to that region, they will be required to share profits with the established team for infringing upon their “territorial rights” in that sport.

College franchises sell their product through association with a college, which may extend the reach of their “fan base” beyond a region. College athletics is also billed as a different sort of product–anyone who follows the pro and college versions of football and basketball will know that the games are somewhat different. But there’s also the “spirit” of college athletics, a youth and excitement that the NCAA has been able to roll into a very compelling product.

College athletics began as a way for students to maintain healthy bodies with healthy minds. But with the growth of mass entertainment in college athletics, its profitability caused a specialization. Eventually, colleges ceased to care about a recruit’s academic abilities and focused only on their athletic promise. The student bodies at big state schools have “athletic specialists” whose talents are exploited by others to subsidize the “academic specialists.” This is wrong. Talented athletes should be paid based on the market value of their services.

Incidentally, other countries don’t permit their colleges and universities to be used as free farm-systems for their professional leagues. In Europe, soccer clubs can be formed at the lowest levels and can move up year by year based on their performance. There are no government subsidies for stadia/arenae and no giant college athletic programs.

Why have college athletics at all? Why not separate the two ventures? Or, we could make athletes employees of the university and just pay them based on the value they add to the school, like janitors, professors and presidents? I was amused to learn that the Chilean soccer team, Universidad de Chile, has no affiliation with the university. Let’s split off the education and entertainment businesses, allow the sports teams to use the “brand”–the name of the school–but the players will be paid and can do what they want with their money.

This won’t happen until the NCAA’s draconian restrictions on player compensation are challenged and overturned in courts. I hope that will happen soon. In the meantime, all the wealthy (mostly white!) administrators, pro franchise owners, and TV execs will continue to profit at the expense of the (mostly minority) athletes who are the product.

More interesting reading/listening:
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/08/roger_noll_on_t.html
http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2007/01/michael_lewis_o_1.html

__

UPDATE: It looks like Manziel has been suspended for a half-game–so, basically, nothing at all. Apparently, the page on which Texas A&M announced the statement with the NCAA had an advertisement from which you could purchase an autographed photo of Johnny Manziel. Too perfect. Dan Wetzel has another great column here.

Posted in Culture-Economics-Society | Leave a comment