Sad News and an Update on Personal Health Recovery

I have been away from the blog for a while due to an unfortunate tragedy in my family, in addition to some personal medical treatment.

Earlier this month, on Wednesday, February 15th at 3PM, my sister, Kristen Leigh Weddle, passed away. My whole family is devastated. She was only 30 years old, and she also has a young son who is only three years of age. I was fortunate (as I could be) to be in a meeting with my therapist as I received this news, when my partner Camille unexpectedly arrived at the consultation. Both my therapist and Camille consoled me as I wept, and I have since been very shaken up this month.

My sister was only a year-and-a-half older than me, and she was my only sibling. We fought a lot when we were kids, and there was a great deal of sibling rivalry. Looking back, though, even the fights were good memories. Both Kristen and I grew up in Trona, CA together and were raised in the same Christian private school. Kristen was very religious her whole life, and didn’t like my deconversion to atheism. Even my parents were more accepting of my choice to leave religion, but I think that Kristen had always hoped that I would one day return to Christianity. I don’t mind that she thought that way. I know that her intentions were in the right place, even though I didn’t share her religious beliefs.

As an atheist, I do believe that I will never see or speak to my sister again, but I also know that she is no longer suffering. My sister passed away due to organ failure of her heart, liver, and kidneys. It was a triple system failure, which is very difficult to recover from. She was in the ICU for several weeks before passing, so the news was not entirely unexpected; however, Kristen had also made a temporary recovery, which made our family hopeful, but also made her death more shocking when she returned to mortal condition.

Around the beginning of this month, when Kristen had already been in the ICU for a number of weeks, I made the personal decision to finally seek intensive medical treatment for my insomnia, which I have mentioned on this blog a couple of times now. It has been plaguing me for over seven years now, and only getting worse. It got to the point where I would literally sit in a dark room, starting at 5PM every day, in order to trick my body into thinking it was nighttime. I would then go through multiple boxes of sleep-aid tea, in addition to sleeping medication, and still stay up until 3AM every night, and sometimes as late as 6AM. With my only sibling facing critical health problems, I decided it was best for my parents and myself for me to finally get a hold on my health issues.

I have been receiving intensive therapy this month, and working through a program that is teaching me a lot about how to manage both my mind and body. Part of the process has been physiological. I have been taking new medication that has been greatly helping with falling asleep earlier. The process has also been psychological. I realized working with my therapist that part of my insomnia is rooted in my Christian upbringing and trauma in childhood. When I was a child, I used to have several nightmares about hell and also would stay awake at night fearing the apocalypse. I was always terrified that Jesus would come “like a thief in the night” (1 Thess. 5:2). These dreams diminished when I became an atheist in high school, and they completely disappeared when I became a naturalist in college. But nevertheless, they still had a lasting effect on my sleeping patterns.

I am happy to report that I have made tremendous progress in my program. I am now able to fall asleep within two hours of trying to go to bed, which I have been unable to do for over seven years now. I have been feeling much healthier and more energetic, and have also been losing weight from a better diet and exercising.

I am especially glad to be improving, since I will really need to step up as an uncle now for my nephew, James Tiberius Weddle (I had some part in choosing his middle name). He has a very good father, both sets of grandparents nearby, and an uncle and two aunts on his father’s side; but in many ways I am the closest thing that he has now to his mother. I plan to take him to Trona one day, and to show him the house where Kristen and I grew up together. I want to be a loving uncle who can remind him of who his mother was.

I will be finishing my program soon and traveling to Phoenix for Kristen’s memorial. Everything that has happened this last month has delayed a number of my academic plans, and I certainly haven’t had time for blogging. Overall, though, I am just glad to be feeling so much healthier. I am sure that I will get back into the swing of things soon, but I also know that everyone will understand if I am busy for the next while.

Life flies by quickly, and we never know when our last day will be. As someone who believes that our conscious experience is finite, it reminds me to make the most out of every moment. My life in this physical world is the only one that I will ever have, and I plan to cherish it to the fullest. I wish the same for all others who live with kindness and empathy.

With thought and care,

Matthew Ferguson

Posted in Miscellaneous | 17 Comments

Where I’ve Come From, and Where I’m Going

2017-in-roman-numeralsAs we start the new year I would like to share some of my thoughts and plans for both writing and activism in 2017, as well as some personal history that I have only briefly discussed on this blog before.

As readers of Κέλσος will know, I have a passion for ancient history and Greek and Latin literature, which inspired me to pursue a career in Classics in 2009. Before that major event in my life, however, I once had a career in politics.

Continue reading

Posted in Announcements, Musings | 21 Comments

Presenting at the SBL Pacific Coast 2017 Regional Meeting

[Unfortunately, I was unable to present at this conference, due to scheduling issues arising from my sister’s memorial service; however, I hope to resubmit this abstract to a future conference at a later time.]

I have a couple of announcements that I am planning to make in January 2017, about some of my future plans for blogging and activism, but for now I will post an announcement about an academic conference that I will be presenting at next year.

SBL

My paper “Eschatology in Alexander’s Letter to Olympias and the Book of Revelation” has been accepted to the New Testament: Epistles and Apocalypse section of the Pacific Coast regional meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature. Below is the abstract:

“The Alexander Romance is an open textual tradition comprised of numerous sources about the myths and exploits of Alexander the Great. The letter to Olympias is a special source in book 2 of the AR, appended to the text of recension β, but missing from recension α. The letter consists of a first person celestial travel narrative, in which Alexander journeys to the ends of the earth, descends into the sea, and flies into the air.

During his journey, Alexander describes seeing giant creatures with forearms and hands like saws, birds with human faces, and many other marvels. Although the preceding narrative in the AR is already quite legendary, the letter to Olympias stands out for its heightened fantastic elements, and it is written according to different generic conventions than the rest of the text.

Behind the baroque imagery in the letter is an eschatological undercurrent, in which Alexander pushes the world to its very limits. Similar themes of eschatology can also be found in other ancient accounts of celestial visions, such as the Book of Revelation. In the vision of John of Patmos he sees winged creatures covered in eyeballs, angelic beings, and the end of days. Unlike Alexander, who had merely traveled to the end of this world, John sees the world to come.

The letter to Olympias and the Book of Revelation offer two competing eschatologies. Alexander represents an earthly eschatology, whereas Christ represents an apocalyptic eschatology. Alexander may have been the greatest king of the Greeks, but Jesus is king over a divine and eternal kingdom. Comparing the eschatology in Revelation to other celestial travel accounts, such as the letter to Olympias, will shed light on the text’s role in defining the borders between the Christian and Greco-Roman worlds.”

You can also read this earlier blog post that I wrote on the same topic, in which I flesh out some more of my arguments and analysis. The SBL has always been one of my favorite academic conferences to both attend and present at, so I look forward to giving yet another presentation at next year’s regional meeting.

-Matthew Ferguson

Posted in Academic Conferences, Announcements | 5 Comments

Plans for the Fall Quarter

I started the Fall quarter at UC Irvine this week, and I have an exciting announcement about my teaching assignment over the next couple months. I’ll be serving as a TA for a Religious Studies course on Western religion, focusing primarily on Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, but also Zoroastrianism and other religions West of the Indus Valley.

I’ve taught a good deal about Christian origins in courses dealing with the history of the Roman Empire, previously, but this is my first teaching assignment specifically in “Religious Studies,” as opposed to Classics. The course should offer a good opportunity to broaden my inter-disciplinary work in the Humanities.

Aside from that, I am going to continue to be busy working on my dissertation for the rest of the year. I’ve been making good progress, but it’s also intense and time-consuming work. As such, I’m not sure right now whether I will have much time for blogging over the next couple months.

I wish I could spend more time writing on other topics of history and philosophy besides my dissertation, but the next couple years of my graduate work will be crucial for developing original and technical research that is of interest to scholars, and not just a general audience. Writing on issues of counter-apologetics is very helpful for providing online secular resources, but it can also wait for a more opportune time. (My hope is that others will write on these topics, during my temporary absence.)

In the meantime, I have a couple of pending projects that I am taking a break from, but plan to resume at some point. Among these is my ongoing book review of Craig Keener’s Miracles, which I started at the end of last year, but have had to pause while working on my dissertation.

I likewise will probably not be able to do much work on my book project for a while. I haven’t forgotten about it, but it’s going to be several years in the making, due to the fact that I will be developing it as a secondary project, alongside my more pressing work in academia. In general, however, I have found that my writing has steadily improved over the last four years, and so rushing a counter-apologetics book may not be the best approach at this point. Had I published a book two years ago, it probably would not be as strong as my writing today. Giving the project more years, as I focus on career development, therefore, I think will eventually lead to an improved final product.

In better news, however, I will soon be publishing a couple of peer-reviewed articles that consist of roughly 50,000 words (approximately 200 double-spaced pages of material). In a way, that content alone already amounts to the length of a small book, and so I am excited that I can publish it while doing other work on my dissertation. I’ll post an announcement here, once the articles are published.

Recently this blog reached over 300,000 page views (not even including the traffic I got on my old blog server). I haven’t done a word count of the material on this site, but I am confident that it would span over 1,000 double-spaced pages (maybe even 2,000). I’m glad to have created so much material, during the first half of my PhD graduate studies. I plan to create much more when time permits, but even the existing material already constitutes an extensive resource.

I’m hoping to have a good Fall quarter, and am looking forward to the months ahead!

-Matthew Ferguson

Posted in Announcements | Leave a comment

Eyewitness Recollections in Greco-Roman Biography versus the Anonymity of the Gospels

In the genre of Greco-Roman biography (as well as historiography) ancient authors did not always name all of their oral or written sources, and there were no footnotes in the literature of the period. Nevertheless, biographers from the early Roman Empire tend to cite such sources at a much higher frequency than what is seen in the NT Gospels. The citation of literary and documentary sources (e.g., letters, previous authors, notebooks, etc.) occurs more often in biographies that deal with subjects dating to long before the author’s lifetime. The biographer Suetonius, for example, cites far more literary and documentary sources in his Lives of Julius Caesar and Augustus (who lived over a century before he was writing) than he does in his Lives of the Flavian emperors (whose reigns he personally lived through).

What is interesting about biographies dealing with subjects dating close to the author’s own lifetime, however, is that they tend to include more citations of the author’s own eyewitness experiences, as well as discussion of his oral sources. Sometimes it is claimed that the authors of the Gospels do not explicitly discuss their own eyewitness experiences, nor cite their oral and written sources, because the Gospels were written close enough to Jesus’ lifetime for such sources to be implicit for their audiences. This assumption is undermined, however, by surveying the Greco-Roman biographical literature from the same period.

In fact, virtually every biographer from the early Roman Empire whose works are still extant–Cornelius Nepos, Tacitus, Plutarch, Suetonius, and Lucian–explicitly cites his own eyewitness experiences in biographies that deal with subjects dating to his own lifetime. The biographer Cornelius Nepos, for example, discusses a funeral speech that he heard of Atticus (a philosopher and friend of Cicero) in his Life of Atticus (17.1-2):

Nepos“Of the affectionate disposition of Atticus towards his relatives, why should I say much, since I myself heard him proudly assert, and with truth, at the funeral of his mother, whom he buried at the age of ninety, that “he had never had occasion to be reconciled to his mother,” and that “he had never been at all at variance with his sister,” who was nearly of the same age with himself; a proof that either no cause of complaint had happened between them, or that he was a person of such kind feelings towards his relatives, as to think it an impiety to be offended with those whom he ought to love.”

Tacitus, although he is primarily known for being a historian, wrote a biography of his father-in-law, the Roman statesman Agricola. And indeed, Tacitus specificities that he was related to Agricola at the beginning of the biography (Life of Agricola, 3.3):

“Meanwhile this book, intended to do honour to Agricola, my father-in-law, will, as an expression of filial regard, be commended, or at least excused.”

This would be like the author of Matthew, for example, stating that he was a personal disciple of Jesus. Not only do modern scholars doubt that the Gospel of Matthew was actually written by the disciple Matthew, but furthemore the author of the gospel makes no explicit statement about his personal relation to the subject. Tacitus likewise discusses stories and anecdotes that he personally heard from Agricola. Later in the biography (4.1), for example, Tacitus states:

TacitusI remember that he used to tell us how in his early youth he would have imbibed a keener love of philosophy than became a Roman and a senator, had not his mother’s good sense checked his excited and ardent spirit. It was the case of a lofty and aspiring soul craving with more eagerness than caution the beauty and splendour of great and glorious renown. But it was soon mellowed by reason and experience, and he retained from his learning that most difficult of lessons—moderation.”

And near the end of the biography (24.3), Tacitus also relates:

I have often heard him say that a single legion with a few auxiliaries could conquer and occupy Ireland, and that it would have a salutary effect on Britain for the Roman arms to be seen everywhere, and for freedom, so to speak, to be banished from its sight.”

The biographer Plutarch likewise discusses how he conversed with eyewitnesses regarding a battle fought by the Roman emperor Otho, who waged a civil war during his own lifetime. As Plutarch (Life of Otho, 14.1) relates:

Plutarch“This is the account which most of the participants give of the battle, although they themselves confess that they were ignorant of its details, owing to the disorder and the unequal fortunes of the several groups. At a later time, when I was travelling through the plain, Mestrius Florus, one of the men of consular rank who were at that time with Otho (by constraint, and not of their own will), pointed out to me an ancient temple, and told me how, as he came up to it after the battle, he saw a heap of dead bodies so high that those on top of it touched the gable of the temple.”

The biographer Suetonius discusses several eyewitness recollections, both from within his family, as well from his own experiences. In his Life of Caligula (19.3), for example, Suetonius describes his grandfather’s recollections about a spectacle that the emperor Caligula performed in the Bay of Naples:

“I know that many have supposed that Gaius devised this kind of bridge in rivalry of Xerxes, who excited no little admiration by bridging the much narrower Hellespont; others, that it was to inspire fear in Germany and Britain, on which he had designs, by the fame of some stupendous work. But when I was a boy, I used to hear my grandfather say that the reason for the work, as revealed by the emperor’s confidential courtiers, was that Thrasyllus the astrologer had declared to Tiberius, when he was worried about his successor and inclined towards his natural grandson, that Gaius had no more chance of becoming emperor than of riding about over the gulf of Baiae with horses.”

Suetonius likewise discusses his father’s own military experiences in his Life of Otho (10.1):

SuetoniusMy father Suetonius Laetus took part in that war, as a tribune of the equestrian order in the Thirteenth legion. He used often to declare afterwards that Otho, even when he was a private citizen, so loathed civil strife, that at the mere mention of the fate of Brutus and Cassius at a banquet he shuddered; that he would not have engaged with Galba, if he had not felt confident that the affair could be settled peacefully; further, that he was led to hold his life cheap at that time by the example of a common soldier.”

And, in his Life of Domitian (12.2), Suetonius even discusses an event that he personally witnessed during the emperor Domitian’s reign: 

“Besides other taxes, that on the Jews was levied with the utmost rigour, and those were prosecuted who without publicly acknowledging that faith yet lived as Jews, as well as those who concealed their origin and did not pay the tribute levied upon their people. I recall being present in my youth when the person of a man ninety years old was examined before the procurator and a very crowded court, to see whether he was circumcised.”

The Second Sophistic author Lucian, although he is not primarily known for being a biographer, likewise wrote a biography of the philosopher Demonax. And, in that biography, Lucian specifies that he personally knew and frequently consorted with the subject (Life of Demonax, 1):

Lucian“It was in the book of Fate that even this age of ours should not be destitute entirely of noteworthy and memorable men, but produce a body of extraordinary power, and a mind of surpassing wisdom. My allusions are to Sostratus the Boeotian, whom the Greeks called, and believed to be, Heracles; and more particularly to the philosopher Demonax. I saw and marvelled at both of them, and with the latter I long consorted.”

Considering that virtually every Greco-Roman biographer from the early Roman Empire, writing on subjects dating to within half a century or so of his composition, mentions his personal relation to events, the failure of any of the Gospel authors to explicitly do so should make us question whether the Gospels belong to the same literary genre as these authors.

In my essay “Are the Gospels Ancient Biographies?,” I discuss how a number of NT scholars, such as Richard Burridge and Dirk Frickenschmidt, argue that the Gospels belong to the genre of Greco-Roman biography. I am not fully against this comparison, but as I argue in my essay “Greek Popular Biography: Romance, Contest, Gospel,” the Gospels do not resemble the style of elite and historiographical biographers, such as those quoted above. Instead, the Gospels far more closely resemble the popular and novelistic biographical literature from antiquity–such as the Life of Aesop and the Alexander Romance–which likewise tends not to contain any discussion of sources or eyewitnesses, and instead is formally anonymous.

Much like these popular-novelistic biographies, the gospels Matthew and Mark do not even contain statements from the author in the first person, much less do they discuss the author’s own relation to events. The author of Mark, for example, at no point states that he was a personal attendant of Peter (and modern scholars likewise doubt that the gospel was actually written by John Mark). The author of Luke uses the first person in the prologue of his gospel (1:1-4), as well as in the prologue of Acts (1:1), in order to dedicate the works to Theophilus (an unknown, later Christian figure), but at no point does he explicitly state that he was a personal attendant of Paul. It is likewise doubtful that the ambiguous use of the first person plural, scattered throughout the “we” passages in Acts (16:10-17; 20:5-15; 21:1-18; 27:1-28:16), reflects the eyewitness experiences of the author (and such passages certainly do not claim eyewitness status as clearly as the biographers above). As William Campbell in The “We” Passages in the Acts of the Apostles (pg. 13) explains:

“Questions of whether the events described in the “we” sections of Acts are historical and whether Luke or his source/s witnessed them are unanswerable on the basis of the evidence currently available, as even the staunchest defenders of historicity and eyewitnessing acknowledge. More important, the fact that Acts provides no information and, indeed, by writing anonymously and constructing an anonymous observer, actually withholds information about a putative historical eyewitness, suggests that the first person plural in Acts has to do with narrative, not historical, eyewitnessing.”

The Gospel of John is the only one to claim eyewitness status, but this is only through an anonymous figure–“the disciple whom Jesus loved”–which, once more, is a vastly more ambiguous identification of source and eyewitness experience than what is used by the biographical authors above. In fact, the use of the “beloved disciple” is such an odd and ambivalent construction, that many scholars think the author is only suggesting (not explicitly claiming) to his audience that the gospel was based on the recollections of a specific eyewitness. As NT scholar Mark Goodacre (“NT Pod 38: Who is the Beloved Disciple in John’s Gospel?”) explains:

“It’s not a historical relationship, specifically, what it is, is the author of the fourth gospel allowing you to make that connection, even encouraging you to make that kind of connection, but himself just wanting to hold off a little bit on making that explicit claim.”

Now, I mentioned above that popular-novelistic biographies–such as the Life of Aesop and the Alexander Romance–likewise do not discuss authorial eyewitnessing. The earliest surviving versions of these texts were written, however, long after the periods in which both Aesop and Alexander the Great lived. We do possess another popular biography from antiquity, however–the Life of Secundus–which was likely written within 40-60 years of the subject’s own lifetime (roughly the same gap of time after which the Gospels were written about Jesus). But, like the Gospels, the author of the Life of Secundus does not discuss himself in the first person, nor does he mention any of his personal relation to events within the narrative.

So, the fact that the Gospels do not explicitly discuss any of their authors’ relation to sources or events is a major reason why scholars consider them to be anonymous. The fact that historiographical biographers–such as Nepos, Tacitus, Plutarch, Suetonius, and Lucian–actually do is likewise a reason why their biographies are not considered to be anonymous. But, we do have other anonymous biographical literature from antiquity–such as the Life of Aesop, the Alexander Romance, and the Life of Secundus. These biographies are popular and novelistic, however, and not historiographical, which should thus offer us some insight into where, on the broader spectrum of Greco-Roman biography, the Gospels more appropriately belong.

-Matthew Ferguson

Posted in Ancient Biography, Ancient Novel, Classics, Historical Jesus | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Diegesis and Mimesis: A Very Brief Introduction

Another major part of working on a dissertation in the humanities is that you will usually incorporate some form of literary theory into the central thesis of your argument. I have discussed in a previous post some current theory of what constituted “fiction,” as opposed to “history” and “myth,” in the ancient world. In this post, I will likewise discuss the difference between diegesis and mimesis as narrative techniques. These words will no doubt sound rather technical to those who do not specialize in literary studies, but they are very important for understanding how the Gospels are written.

To provide a brief definition of both of these terms, Sarah Bryant-Bertail (“Spatio-Temporality as Theater Performance,” pg. 6) writes:

“A division between the mimetic and the diegetic space can be made … [T]he mimetic space is that seen in performance by a spectator or projected by a reader onto an imaginary stage. It includes the scenography and the fictional locale this immediately refers to. The diegetic space is all that would not be seen in a real or projected theater but that is nevertheless established in the spectator/reader’s imagination through verbal and non-verbal signs systems, either in description or through imagery.”

All of this may still sound rather abstract, and so, below is a chart that I made last academic year for how these terms can be applied to ancient narratives:

Diegesis vs. Mimesis

The terms diegesis and mimesis are often employed to performance in theater, as Bryant-Bertail has done above. But they are also highly relevant to the narrative techniques used in novels, as well as historiography [1].

The essence of diegesis is to “tell” or “report” information within a text, whereas the essence of mimesis is to “show” or “perform.” These forms of narrative can manifest through multiple literary devices. Diegetic narrative is generally told in the voice of the narrator, whereas mimetic narrative is generally told in the voice of the subject. Indirect speech is more common in diegetic narrative, where the narrator reports or paraphrases the words of the subject. In contrast, direct speech is characteristic of mimetic narrative, where the exact words of the subject are performed. The effect of speaking words in the voice of the subject places mimetic narrative within the scene of the plot, while the diegetic use of the narrator’s voice generally provides information that is not voiced or shown within scene, but provided through external description. The tone of mimesis is generally dramatic, whereas the tone of diegesis is descriptive. Both diegesis and mimesis are used across multiple literary genres, but in varying ways depending on the nature of the genre.

Continue reading

Posted in Ancient Biography, Ancient Novel, Dissertation, Literary Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Understanding the Value of Biblical Parallels

Here on Κέλσος I frequently discuss parallels between the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and Christianity and other literature, historical figures, and religions of the ancient Mediterranean world. I am likewise currently working on a dissertation that compares the Gospels to popular-novelistic biographies, which seeks to identify the most suitable biographical subtype for situating the Gospels on the broader spectrum of Greco-Roman biography.

Part of the value of comparing literature and historical figures is that parallel situations often shed light on each other, which can help us to understand the context in which Christianity emerged and Christian literature was written. This context aids in interpretation, historical criticism, and sociological analysis. Something important to recognize about such comparisons, however, is that there are many nuances that both sharpen and impose limitations upon the parallels.

One misconception that should be cleared up, from the get go, is that a parallel between Jesus or Christianity does not necessarily entail a “double” or perfectly identical situation. Historical figures, literature, and events can share several characteristics in common, while still differing in many other regards. Most parallels are thus limited in their implications, and so must be treated with the proper nuance to understand their relevance.

Amitay 3One example of this is the comparison between Jesus and Alexander the Great. There are clearly many differences between these two figures, such as Alexander being a king and general, whereas Jesus was an itinerant peasant. And yet, these two figures also have much in common, such as the stories about their divine birth and their modeling on previous mythical archetypes. As such, the comparison between Alexander and Jesus has both its advantages and its limitations. The advantages can help us explain certain aspects of Jesus’ role in Christianity, whereas the limitations entail that there are still many other considerations to be made, in order to have a complete picture of either figure.

Since comparing literature and historical figures requires a great deal of nuance, and appreciation for shades of meaning and degrees of difference, I think it will be valuable to lay out some criteria below for how to make these distinctions, in order to apply parallels properly in literary and historical analysis. After discussion of these criteria, I will also discuss what I think will be some of the advantages and limitations of my dissertation.

Continue reading

Posted in Ancient Biography, Ancient Novel, Historical Jesus, History, Miracles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments