Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Current project: master's thesis
Files require the standard SBL fonts SPTiberian and SPIonic.
This thing will be done by mid-June 2006. The proposal I wrote in three days (2 research, 1 a twelve-hour typing marathon), and it's riddled with typos, but went through; the thesis itself will be done in only 5 mos. and will not be riddled with typos. I will update this posting until the thing is put to bed. If anyone wants to proof-read and edit for me, feel free--I need all the help I can get.
My thesis proposal. Click here.
A very rough and unedited draft of Chapter 1. Click here.
A very rough and unedited draft of Chapter 2. Click here.
A very rough and unedited draft of Chapter 3. Click here.
This thing will be done by mid-June 2006. The proposal I wrote in three days (2 research, 1 a twelve-hour typing marathon), and it's riddled with typos, but went through; the thesis itself will be done in only 5 mos. and will not be riddled with typos. I will update this posting until the thing is put to bed. If anyone wants to proof-read and edit for me, feel free--I need all the help I can get.
My thesis proposal. Click here.
A very rough and unedited draft of Chapter 1. Click here.
A very rough and unedited draft of Chapter 2. Click here.
A very rough and unedited draft of Chapter 3. Click here.
Publication(s), ideas, and miscellaneous in ascending order of importance
Some papers require the standard SBL fonts SPTiberian and SPIonic.
Lectures in Ephesians (with a translation) prepared for a stupid class; but my lectures are cool! Click here.
Seeds for papers on the insufficiency of the law in Galatians and the Pentateuch and the use of the OT in Eph 4:7-13 (solving three interpretive problems)--that last one works perfect, whenever I can find the time to write it up. Click here.
My dissertation proposal. The real thing will be written better than this. Click here.
An analysis of Hayao Miyazaki's emergent mythopoeia based upon three of his films, originally from a course on reading film as theology by Bruce Marchfelder, also published online at Nausicaa.net. Has some typos I will get around to correcting sometime soon. Click here.
A poetic analysis of Joshua 2 being published in an upcoming volume of JSOT, originally from an advance OT exegesis course on Joshua by Dr. V. Philips Long. Click here.
A discourse analysis of Eph 3:1-13 currently submitted to CBQ, originally from an advanced NT exegesis course on Ephesians bt Dr. Bob Derrenbacker. Click here.
My CV. Woo-hoo. Click here.
Lectures in Ephesians (with a translation) prepared for a stupid class; but my lectures are cool! Click here.
Seeds for papers on the insufficiency of the law in Galatians and the Pentateuch and the use of the OT in Eph 4:7-13 (solving three interpretive problems)--that last one works perfect, whenever I can find the time to write it up. Click here.
My dissertation proposal. The real thing will be written better than this. Click here.
An analysis of Hayao Miyazaki's emergent mythopoeia based upon three of his films, originally from a course on reading film as theology by Bruce Marchfelder, also published online at Nausicaa.net. Has some typos I will get around to correcting sometime soon. Click here.
A poetic analysis of Joshua 2 being published in an upcoming volume of JSOT, originally from an advance OT exegesis course on Joshua by Dr. V. Philips Long. Click here.
A discourse analysis of Eph 3:1-13 currently submitted to CBQ, originally from an advanced NT exegesis course on Ephesians bt Dr. Bob Derrenbacker. Click here.
My CV. Woo-hoo. Click here.
My non-publications, post 2: Select Papers from my biblical studies graduate degree at Regent College
Some of the ealier papers require Mac Accordance fonts Yehudit and Helena; later papers require the standard SBL fonts SPTiberian and SPIonic.
A paper on the self-authentication of scripture vis-a-vis faith and autonomous human reasoning, using Locke and Calvin as case-studies,written for Paul Helm in Systematic Theology A. Mediocre. Click here.
A paper on I Pet 2:24-25, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in Introduction to Exegesis. My first ever exegesis paper--very mediocre (but so-so for an intro-level class). Click here.
A paper on the use of Daniel 7 in Mk 14:62, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in NT Seminar: the OT in the NT. My first real biblical theology paper--getting better. Click Here.
An analysis of the Source Critical method, written for Dr. Iaian Provan in Biblical Interpretation and Hermeneutics. Nailed. Click here.
A paper on Gen 15, written for Dr. Iain Provan in Genesis. Clicke here.
A paper on christology in Ephesians, written for Dr. G. D. Fee in Pauline Christology. Nailed. Click here.
A paper on the theme of Brother Versus Brother in Genesis, written for Dr. Iain Provan in Genesis. Click here.
A poetic analysis of 2 Sam 11, written for Dr. V. Philips Long in OT Seminar: Poetics of Biblical Narrative. My first poetic analysis--innovative not not perfectly communicated. Click here.
A paper on the narrative shaping of the Psalter, written for Dr. Iain Provan in Psalms. Click here.
A paper on biblical idolatry and image formation in Isa 6:9-10, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in Isaiah. Nailed. Click Here.
A paper on Isaiah and the film The Last of the Mohicans, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in Isaiah. Click Here.
A critique of Gregory of Nyssa's allegorical interpretation in his The Life of Moses, written for Dr. Bruce Hindmarsh in Introduction to Spiritual Theology. This one really burned me: The class was sub-par (great lecturing, though), and the pseudo-field is a made-up joke; yet the paper was graded as if it were for a 700-level class. I've graded 500- and 600-level coursework for 3 yrs. now, and this should have been an A paper at even a 600-level. Superiority of pre-critical exegesis my arse; leave it to spiritual historians to think they know how to do biblical studies. (Was all that too harsh?) Anyway, a required course I never wanted to take, and all I got was a blemish on my transcript for work that exceeded expectations. Nailed (I think). Click here.
A survey on the critical issues in the Didache, written for Dr. Don Lewis in Church History. Nailed. Click here.
A paper on the self-authentication of scripture vis-a-vis faith and autonomous human reasoning, using Locke and Calvin as case-studies,written for Paul Helm in Systematic Theology A. Mediocre. Click here.
A paper on I Pet 2:24-25, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in Introduction to Exegesis. My first ever exegesis paper--very mediocre (but so-so for an intro-level class). Click here.
A paper on the use of Daniel 7 in Mk 14:62, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in NT Seminar: the OT in the NT. My first real biblical theology paper--getting better. Click Here.
An analysis of the Source Critical method, written for Dr. Iaian Provan in Biblical Interpretation and Hermeneutics. Nailed. Click here.
A paper on Gen 15, written for Dr. Iain Provan in Genesis. Clicke here.
A paper on christology in Ephesians, written for Dr. G. D. Fee in Pauline Christology. Nailed. Click here.
A paper on the theme of Brother Versus Brother in Genesis, written for Dr. Iain Provan in Genesis. Click here.
A poetic analysis of 2 Sam 11, written for Dr. V. Philips Long in OT Seminar: Poetics of Biblical Narrative. My first poetic analysis--innovative not not perfectly communicated. Click here.
A paper on the narrative shaping of the Psalter, written for Dr. Iain Provan in Psalms. Click here.
A paper on biblical idolatry and image formation in Isa 6:9-10, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in Isaiah. Nailed. Click Here.
A paper on Isaiah and the film The Last of the Mohicans, written for Dr. Rikki Watts in Isaiah. Click Here.
A critique of Gregory of Nyssa's allegorical interpretation in his The Life of Moses, written for Dr. Bruce Hindmarsh in Introduction to Spiritual Theology. This one really burned me: The class was sub-par (great lecturing, though), and the pseudo-field is a made-up joke; yet the paper was graded as if it were for a 700-level class. I've graded 500- and 600-level coursework for 3 yrs. now, and this should have been an A paper at even a 600-level. Superiority of pre-critical exegesis my arse; leave it to spiritual historians to think they know how to do biblical studies. (Was all that too harsh?) Anyway, a required course I never wanted to take, and all I got was a blemish on my transcript for work that exceeded expectations. Nailed (I think). Click here.
A survey on the critical issues in the Didache, written for Dr. Don Lewis in Church History. Nailed. Click here.
My non-publications, post 1: Papers I kept from my philosophy undergraduate degree at Western Washington University
Here's the first batch of files, using www.sendfile.com. Sorry for the download delay. All these and files in future posts are read-only (mostly MS Word .docs).
Man, are a lot of these bad. And apparently written before I discovered spellcheck. I started my degree in fall of 1997, if that helps with chronology.
A paper on a specific argument against the foundationalist theory of justification, written
for Dr. Neil Feit in Epistemology II: Theories of Justification. Click here.
A paper on human reasoning (not a big topic at all), written for Dr. Paul Olscamp in History of Philosophy: the Rationalists. Not good, but my first foray into my critique of the rationalistic positivism tradition of analytic philosophy and the beginning of my break with the Phil Dept. My insistance annoyed a few cages. I'm quite proud of the direction, because I concluded, "having unjustifiable belief(s) is a necessary conditions of being human, and these beliefs can be the only foundation for knowledge," years before I read of N. T. Wright's critical realism; he may have written 500 pp. and gotten there first, but I got there independently... Click here.
A paper against Newton-Smith's argument (from science?!) for the non-beginning of time (to a metaphysical position?!), written for Dr. Ned Markosian in Metaphysics II: Philosophy of Time. (My sources were absolute rubbish, however...) Click here.
An essay exam on supererogation, written for Dr. Phil Montague for Ethics I. I have no idea what any of it means anymore. Click here.
A paper on the connection between Hume's epistemology and theory of causation, arguing that all empiricist epistemology inevitability decays into hard, self-contradictory skepticism, written for Dr. Hud Hudson in History of Philosophy: the Empiricists. Another foray into a critique of the analytic tradition. For five class assignment in two terms, I won runner-up for best paper three friggin times; this was one of those. Around now, my writing ability starts becoming decent. Click here.
A paper on the 'gap problem' for Kant (the gap between his metaphysics and his epistemology)--Kant can't--written for Dr. Hud Hudson in History of Philosophy: Kant and Post-Kantian Traditions. Very dense, but that's Kant's fault, not mine; he didn't start writing until he was fifty, and twenty years later did all his future students a huge favor by dying. Easily the one of the worst writers in history. This was the big paper, and this time I won the best paper [Kant] award. Click here.
A paper arguing for compatiblism for human free will and physical determinism, written for Dr. Fracis Howard-Snyder in Metaphysics Guided Study. Basically, I think that human's have moral responsibility, straight up. So it is logically necessary and trivially true that anything, whatever happens to be true, is compatible with human moral responsibility. Click here.
A paper discussing compatibilism, Okhamism, and Boethianism about human free will and divine foreknowledge, written for Dr. Fracis Howard-Snyder in Metaphysics Guided Study. I think the whole issue is the result of a category mistake and have no problem maintaining that humans have moral responsibility, even if that runs against the grain of the analytic tradition; a side-effect of my losing interest in philosophy. Click here.
A paper discussing the phase-sortal view of material composition, written for Dr. Ned Markosian in Philosophy of Composition. The only interesting thing is because I'm tired of the analytic tradition, I don't argue for anything but instead just discuss and point out conditional commitments--all the firmer you can get with rationalistic positivism. Click here.
Man, are a lot of these bad. And apparently written before I discovered spellcheck. I started my degree in fall of 1997, if that helps with chronology.
A paper on a specific argument against the foundationalist theory of justification, written
for Dr. Neil Feit in Epistemology II: Theories of Justification. Click here.
A paper on human reasoning (not a big topic at all), written for Dr. Paul Olscamp in History of Philosophy: the Rationalists. Not good, but my first foray into my critique of the rationalistic positivism tradition of analytic philosophy and the beginning of my break with the Phil Dept. My insistance annoyed a few cages. I'm quite proud of the direction, because I concluded, "having unjustifiable belief(s) is a necessary conditions of being human, and these beliefs can be the only foundation for knowledge," years before I read of N. T. Wright's critical realism; he may have written 500 pp. and gotten there first, but I got there independently... Click here.
A paper against Newton-Smith's argument (from science?!) for the non-beginning of time (to a metaphysical position?!), written for Dr. Ned Markosian in Metaphysics II: Philosophy of Time. (My sources were absolute rubbish, however...) Click here.
An essay exam on supererogation, written for Dr. Phil Montague for Ethics I. I have no idea what any of it means anymore. Click here.
A paper on the connection between Hume's epistemology and theory of causation, arguing that all empiricist epistemology inevitability decays into hard, self-contradictory skepticism, written for Dr. Hud Hudson in History of Philosophy: the Empiricists. Another foray into a critique of the analytic tradition. For five class assignment in two terms, I won runner-up for best paper three friggin times; this was one of those. Around now, my writing ability starts becoming decent. Click here.
A paper on the 'gap problem' for Kant (the gap between his metaphysics and his epistemology)--Kant can't--written for Dr. Hud Hudson in History of Philosophy: Kant and Post-Kantian Traditions. Very dense, but that's Kant's fault, not mine; he didn't start writing until he was fifty, and twenty years later did all his future students a huge favor by dying. Easily the one of the worst writers in history. This was the big paper, and this time I won the best paper [Kant] award. Click here.
A paper arguing for compatiblism for human free will and physical determinism, written for Dr. Fracis Howard-Snyder in Metaphysics Guided Study. Basically, I think that human's have moral responsibility, straight up. So it is logically necessary and trivially true that anything, whatever happens to be true, is compatible with human moral responsibility. Click here.
A paper discussing compatibilism, Okhamism, and Boethianism about human free will and divine foreknowledge, written for Dr. Fracis Howard-Snyder in Metaphysics Guided Study. I think the whole issue is the result of a category mistake and have no problem maintaining that humans have moral responsibility, even if that runs against the grain of the analytic tradition; a side-effect of my losing interest in philosophy. Click here.
A paper discussing the phase-sortal view of material composition, written for Dr. Ned Markosian in Philosophy of Composition. The only interesting thing is because I'm tired of the analytic tradition, I don't argue for anything but instead just discuss and point out conditional commitments--all the firmer you can get with rationalistic positivism. Click here.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Intro Post
Does anyone actually read this stuff? Why bother taking the time to write it?
Okayokayokay: As of Spring 2006: Lucy and I have been married almost six years. She's finishing a BSN at UBC. I am finishing a four-year master's in biblical studies under Rikk Watts (and Gordon Fee, Iain Provan, and Phil Long) at Regent College. My thesis is provisionally entitled, "The Use of the Old Testament in Romans 9:6-29: God's Judgment on Israel's Idolatry." I've accepted a postgraduate research position at the University of Durham under John Barclay. My provisional topic is Paul's understanding of the Gentiles vis-a-vis Gentiles in OT cosmic eschatological new creation (leading to the center of Pauline theology...?).
Except we can't start until 2007 because of the stupid Kingdon of Uk's stupid bureaucracy.
This blog is just for posting select past and current projects (and drafts thereof) of mine. Once I figure out how to do that... The papers include stuph going back to my philosophy undergrad degree--not good, but at least it shows the arc of my development. And I'll also post a kept-current CV.
