A Dissertation: The Raw Data (along with some slightly subjective commentary)

Since I've had the privilege of defending and walking, I thought some might be interested in learning what exactly goes into a dissertation. So here goes:

Total number of hours:
Not sure about this one; I originally tried to keep a weekly log, but it soon fell by the way side. However, from the moment I passed comprehensive exams and began working on my dissertation's prospectus, it took me a total of 2 years and roughly 9.5 months (from the middle of June 2010 to the end of April 2013). However, I had to redo my prospectus so that set me back a little bit. Also, I worked full-time. Frankly, sometimes I had some bouts of inactivity that could and should have been avoided with a bit more self-discipline, so I'm confident I could have actually finished everything in about 2 years and 3 months with a little bit more effort on my part. On the other hand, I'm not married, and no doubt otherwise it would have taken me a bit longer.

However, it is possible to do an entire chapter in about 5-6 weeks, even with a full-time job (including plenty of time for rigorous proof-reading), because this is about the pace I had for my last few chapters (granted, they had less original research then some earlier chapters, however). Also keep in mind that your prospectus supplies much of your content for the first chapter.

All in all, in theory, it should be possible for a single guy or lady to produce a dissertation in about a year, even if working full-time, if that person has a clear sense of direction and is very self-disciplined (I did mostly well on the former, could have done better on the latter!)

Total number of pages:
284, including front matter and the bibliography.
238 for the actual content (not counting front matter or bibliography); this is actually a little bit shorter than average, it seems.
My bibliography was 28 pages, which I think is about average or possibly a bit above average.

Total number of words, including footnotes, bibliography, and front matter
91,954   (not, I'm not going to figure out how many sentences!)

Comments on the bibliography
By my count, I had approx.  362 sources. Out of those,
approx. 80 were foreign language sources (not translations), 41 of those were ancient Greek sources (including apostolic fathers, but mostly secular 1st century sources), 26 were German, 9 were french, 2 were Dutch, and one each were Latin and Italian. It is  recommended that at this level the student not rely on translations but rather provide his or her own translation. My own weakness was that, not being proficient in Latin, I had to rely on translations for Augustine, etc. (with one exception where I translated a simple phrase from John Calvin). In the case of my dissertation, I was working with a lot of 1st century Greek sources that used the terms prognwsis or proginwskw, so it was important that I provide both the Greek text and my own translation (with a couple exceptions; the Greek physician Rufus was especially difficult to work with, and in one particular citation of Plutarch I wimped out and had to use Sandbach's translation!).

Most utilized work outside of the Bible: John H. Elliott's A Home for the Homeless, which was extremely influential for my thesis.

Most surprisingly helpful source: Paul Boom, How Children Learn the Meaning of Words (in my opinion, this book had some great thoughts on lexical semantics)

Most obscure source (i.e., most difficult to get a hold of): Horst Goldstein, "Das Gemeindeverständnis des ersten Petrusbriefs." This was actually an inaugural dissertation (so far as I can determine) for Dr. Goldstein when he began teaching at Münster U. I had to purchase this from a German bookseller in Germany (please note that when buying from a store in Germany, there is a fee for transferring money, and the fee may actually turn out to be more than the cost of the book, including shipping!). Anyway, it's quite possible I own the only copy of this work in the U.S. A close second place goes to the commentary on 1 Peter in French by Ceslas Spicq, which, so far as could determine, only exists in one library outside of Europe a library which shall remain nameless since it refused to lend the book out! :) Fortunately, I got my own copy for roughly 30 dollars via the very helpful "ABE Books".

Most bizarre source (i.e., odd to find it in a dissertation on 1 Peter): James Holden, History of Horoscopic Astrology. This was actually a somewhat helpful source because it gave brief biographical sketches of some of the obscure 1st century astrologers I was citing (because they used the terms prognwsis or proginwskw).

Some final thoughts (that are hopefully helpful):
A dissertation is a long journey, but it helps if you focus on one chapter at a time. Once you finish  the introductory chapter, treat each chapter as a paper in its own right. However,
Keep the big picture in mind: in other words, be constantly asking yourself how that chapter fits in with your thesis. A couple times I got lost and actually had to remind myself what I was supposed to be proving!
Figure out formatting and abbreviations early on: I wasted a lot of time going back and fixing abbreviations to fit SBL standards (or, in some cases, making up my own if SBL didn't have it). Do this chapter by chapter and make sure you stay consistent.
Constantly update your bibliography: unfortunately, I waited until near the end, and let me tell you there's nothing more daunting that putting together a 30-page bibliography from scratch!
Proofread and have others proofread: this is a lesson I had to learn early on. By the time you're writing your dissertation, sloppy work with typos is not acceptable (in retrospect, I think I could have done better, both stylistically and technically, on all those papers and articles I wrote leading up to my dissertation). After the first chapter, I learned that I needed to proofread each chapter at least 6 times  (don't try to do 6 read-throughs all at once, trust me on this), and then I had 3 other people proofread for me as well (here's a tip: make a deal with another ph.d. student or two that you'll read their dissertation if they'll read yours).

And now, when all is said and done, I have the summer to revise my dissertation (thanks to feedback from my primary, secondary, and outside readers) and, if the Lord wills, eventually try to publish it. For now, I think I'll just take a deep breath and go read something totally unrelated to Academic Biblical studies, preferably something involving spaceships, aliens, and distant planets :)

 

Dissertation Defended!

By the grace of God and the mercy of my readers, I have successfully defended my dissertation! The prayers of my friends and acquaintances were gratefully appreciated. I am also grateful to those who went out of their way to support me, and to my three proofreaders. You all know who you are! This morning I will make some final changes before printing out copies for the library, but I have passed my defense and will be graduating with a Ph.D. in New Testament this month (this summer, though, I've got some more work to do to try to make this something that can especially contribute to scholarship).

The next few posts on this blog will be a discussion of doctoral work and dissertations.

My readers were Dr. David Alan Black (my advisor), Dr. David Beck (also from Southeastern), and Dr. Gene L. Green (from Wheaton). My title is "A Foreknown Destiny for the Socially Destitute: An Examination of 1 Peter's Concept of Foreknowledge in the Establishment of Social-Spiritual Identity."
My abstract is as follows:

begin abstract
"Much has been written on the social and spiritual status of the audience of 1 Peter. Scholarship has not, however, devoted much space to exploring how foreknowledge in the first section of 1 Peter relates to the development of social and spiritual identity. First of all, most scholars see the terms prognwsis (1 Pet 1:2) and proginwskw (1:20) as representing either God's foreordination or his previous commitment to a relationship with believers (i.e., "loving beforehand"). Secondly, virtually nobody has discussed how these two terms, together with the concept of foreknowledge in 1 Pet 1:10-12, factor into 1 Peter's argumentation and theology from 1:1-2:10.

This dissertation will attempt to demonstrate that foreknowledge in the first major section of 1 Peter acts as a word of comfort to offset the audience's status of social displacement, ultimately pointing them towards their new social status as a new community bound to Jesus Christ. In the process of developing this thesis, this study will explore both social scientific criticism and lexical semantics.

Regarding the former, this study will interact with John H. Elliott's A Home for the Homeless and its critics, defending Elliott's contention that 1 Peter's audience consisted of literal strangers (i.e., the socially displaced) while acknowledging that this concept of social displacement functions as a broader, spiritual paradigm regarding the relationship of the Christian to the world.

Secondly, this study will examine every occurrence of prognwsis (1 Pet 1:2) and proginwskw (1 Pet 1:20) in the literature of A.D. 1-100 and the Septuagint, demonstrating that he overwhelming sense of these words is "prescience" (knowledge of the future or the act of knowing the future). This study then examines 1 Pet 1:1-2, 10-12, and 20 within their immediate contexts in the epistle.

Finally, this study examines the concepts of foreknowledge and social identity within the broader scope of 1 Peter's theology. It is demonstrated how foreknowledge acts as a bridge from the state of displacement to the new state of the believer's social identity in Christ. In this way, foreknowledge acts as a word of comfort in 1 Peter, for both the present, negative circumstances of the epistle's audience and their ultimate destiny (bound up with Christ) have forever existed in the mind of God and are a part of his grand master plan."
end abstract

On the plus side, I believe this is the only study to date that actually looks at every single occurrence of prognwsis and proginwskw within the literature of the 1st century (A.D.). Also, this is one of the few studies that actually provides a substantial defense of Elliott's work (for the most part; there's one area I do disagree with him, but I mostly defend him). Some areas for improvement (among others) brought up by the readers include a tendency to overstate my case (to the potential alienation of some of the readers I'm trying to convince), not enough work on the communities of Asia Minor and their social makeup, not enough work on "foreknowledge" as a concept (including an examination of other words that refer to foreknowledge and also the need for more awareness of Greco-Roman discussions of foreknowledge during this period), and the need for more work discussing linguistic theory that would challenge my own methodology.

Also, my advisor strongly suggests that I need to have mastered Latin at this point rather than relying on translations (note to self: start working on that this summer!) He was pleased that I provided my own translations for most other languages, though. Let the reader note: you don't have to be a brilliant linguist (like my dissertation readers!) to be able to utilize German and French without relying on a translation. Honestly, I was one of the worst students in Southeastern's theological German class (I got a "conditional pass," which meant I had to do extra work that summer to pass the class), but I worked hard at developing adequate translations of my German sources within my dissertation, deliberately ignoring available translations (e.g., for Goppelt's classic commentary, I go with the German instead of the English). I stress again: I'm not the smartest with languages (much less than I used to think, in fact, despite growing up bilingual), but it's less a matter of intelligence and more a matter of willingness to spend a lot of time working through a work in its original language. (one other note: the old printed script German is extremely difficult to read! Seriously!!)

One final note: I am extremely grateful for a very balanced critique by my outsider reader. His comments are gracious and fair (despite the fact that I know there's at least two key points of my dissertation that are at odds with material he's published!) Dr Green's comments will form the basis of my revisions this summer (if the Lord wills, assuming I don't decide to run off and join the circus and leave academia behind forever! :) Fellow ph.d. students will know what I mean). I am also grateful for a very encouraging dialogue with Drs. Black and Beck. Overall, the defense was a very positive (though long!) experience (we started at 2 pm, and I think by the time Dr. Black was done with me it was about quarter to 4).

Prayer of an ABD, in preparation for the dissertation defense

Dear Heavenly Father,

Every good and perfect gift comes from you. The very fact that I am now about to defend my dissertation is due to your mercy and grace. Thank you for letting me get this far. Thank you for my advisor, who invested his time in my work. Thank you for my parents, my first Bible teachers. Thank you for my friends and their encouragement. Thank you especially for my local church, the love and encouragement they have shown me. Thank you for relatively good health throughout my education. And thank you for the teachers here at this school and all I have learned from them.

Facing my defense, I am naturally encountering some trepidation. May I not struggle with worry or fear, both of which would be contrary to your love. But may I rather have the confidence that your child should have, that my value to your kingdom lies not in degrees or academic accomplishments but in service to others and the proclamation of the Gospel.

Two requests I bring to you. First of all, in all the time I have spent studying 1 Peter, please grant that I "get it." In other words, that I have fairly represented the Apostle Peter and what he wrote under the inspiration of your Holy Spirit. If, after all that work, I have failed to understand Peter and his epistle, then my dissertation is a failure. Worse yet, if I lead others astray by my work, then I have become a potential hindrance to the church and its understanding of Scripture. Please Lord, may that not happen. Grant that, although my work may be far from perfect, I have at least "gotten" some of what Peter was trying to say and not grossly misrepresented him. Along with that, may this dissertation ultimately glorify you in its study of Scripture.

Secondly, help me in my defense. May I not be overly-sensitive when offered correction or rebuke, but may I also know the difference between personal opinion and areas where I clearly could have done better. Help me not to be arrogant on the one hand, but also not to be cowardly. May I listen to the council of my elders, and may the defense be a reasonably edifying experience for all involved. Bless my advisor, and bless both my secondary reader and my outside reader. Give them wisdom in their analysis. Thank you for their investment in reading and commenting on my dissertation.

In Jesus' name,
Amen.

Congratulations to Joseph Greene on his successful dissertation defense!

My friend and fellow student at Southeastern, Joe Greene, has successfully defended his dissertation. It was entitled "The Realization of the Heavenly Temple in John's Gospel: Jesus and the Spirit." Dr. Greene's doctoral adviser was Dr. Andreas J. Köstenberger, his secondary reader was Dr. David Beck, and his outside reader was Dr. Paul Hoskins (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary).

For those interested in this topic, Dr. Greene has a forthcoming article in the Journal of the Evangelical Theoligical Society entitled "The Spirit in the Temple: Bridging the Gap Between Old Testament Absence and New Testament Assumption." Look for it within the next year or so.

Dr. Greene's abstract of his dissertation is as follows (posted with permission):


[beginning of abstract]

This dissertation seeks to demonstrate that the Gospel of John’s “temple replacement” theme is more accurately described as a “temple realization” theme. When examined through the lens of Johannine pneumatology, Jesus comes into focus as the realization of the heavenly temple.

Many first-century Jews believed that the true temple was located in the heavens. The Jerusalem temple was considered an earthly focal point of that heavenly reality. The eschaton would realize the heavenly temple on earth and from this new temple would flow a world-wide restoration. In the post-A. D. 70 shadow of the destroyed temple, the Fourth Evangelist described Jesus as the embodiment of the heavenly/eschatological reality. While the destruction of the second temple removed a man-made gateway to heaven, Jesus’ removal to heaven (or “glorification”) was a return to his original heavenly habitation. From heaven, the eschatological Spirit would flow from the exalted Jesus to the people of his name. Jesus embodied the more transcendent reality of the heavenly temple and his return to heaven occasioned an expanded and internalized realization of God’s presence through the renewing Spirit.

In order to substantiate the above position, this dissertation adopts a biblical-theological approach to the Fourth Gospel and treats the canonical text in its final form as the primary source. Although the presence of the temple and Spirit themes will be demonstrated from the text itself, many secondary works will also be utilized as stepping stones from which these recognized themes will be given greater definition. Such a reading will not read greater definition “into” the text but rather read the themes in light of the religious/cultural context of the literary work.

The literature of the Second Temple period will serve as the primary-source window into the religious/cultural context of John’s Gospel. From the OT and Second Temple literature, this dissertation will establish: 1) The ubiquity of the concept that an earthly temple was a gateway to the true heavenly temple. 2) The expectation for Yahweh’s renewed presence with an eschatological temple from which restorative waters would flow throughout the earth. In addition, the eschatological temple was expected to realize something of the true heavenly temple. 3) The Spirit was a common depiction of Yahweh’s presence among his people, in the temple, and in the eschaton. 4) Many expected the Spirit to accomplish an intensified and expanded eschatological renewal in God’s people that would spread to the nations. 5) The Spirit-filled Messiah would usher in this eschatological age.

By establishing the widespread occurrence of the above antecedents, John’s utilization of these concepts becomes more historically probable. In his presentation, the Fourth Evangelist combined these antecedent notions and made implicit connections explicit. John’s ultimate goal in utilizing these concepts was to urge belief in Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God (John 20:31). For John, all the eschatological promises were focused upon Jesus the Messiah. Jesus is the eschatological center in heaven, from whom flows the living water of the Spirit.

In addition to the OT and Second Temple literature, John’s temple realization theme shares affinity with other NT writings. Revelation 21:22 describes the Lamb himself as the new temple in the eschaton. Other NT texts demonstrate the early and prevalent belief in the Messiah seated at the right hand of God’s heavenly throne as well as the belief that the Messiah would be the one who pours out the Spirit. The Fourth Evangelist simply pulls the eschatological promise of the new temple into the Messiah’s résumé since the eschatological temple was expected to be the source of renewing waters.

When the Fourth Gospel is read in light of these recognized concepts, John’s literary presentation argues that he incorporated and developed the above ideas into a heavenly temple realization theme.

A careful reading of John’s Gospel demonstrates the validity of the thesis. In the Book of Signs, the framework for a heavenly temple realization theme is set in the prologue, which prepares the reader to understand the Jesus story within a heavenly framework. Within this heavenly framework, John’s presentation progresses from Jesus as the tabernacle (John 1:14), to the new Bethel (John 1:51), to the temple (John 2:21), to Jerusalem and Gerizim being obsolete (John 4:21), and to Jesus as the eschatological temple from whom flows the promised Spirit (John 7:37–39). The Spirit-streams do “not yet” flow until Jesus returns to his heavenly glory. At that time, the eschatological water of the Spirit would be given—the efflux of the heavenly temple would flow throughout the earth via “those who believed in him.” John 11:48–52 provides a final ironic treatment of the Jerusalem temple, reinforcing that Jesus has fulfilled the temple and its cult. Those who believe in Jesus will be gathered together as the messianic children of God with the Messiah himself as the new cultic center.

John weaves his story such that Jesus fulfills the temple in the first half of his Gospel and the corollaries of that are spelled out in the second half as Jesus prepares the community for his departure. In the second half of John’s Gospel, the temple theme recedes because it is a type that supports Jesus’ identity. The type has given way to reality and that heavenly reality is the personal presence of the glorified Son. The reality of the personal presence of the Father and Son is mediated to the community through the Spirit. For this reason, the Spirit grows more personal and significant in the Book of Exaltation.

From heaven, the Son sends the Spirit-presence who is no longer a cultic manifestation as much as a realization of the familial presence of Father and Son. Temple imagery has been eclipsed by relational imagery signaling a true realization of the Father’s personal presence to his children. This language dominates the Farewell Discourse and its Paraclete passages. The Spirit Paraclete is sent from the glorified Jesus to realize the heavenly realities in the community. The messianic community is then tasked with testifying and spreading these heavenly truths throughout the world (John 20:21–22).

Throughout John’s Gospel, several interwoven themes and terms support a heavenly realization theme. For instance, the Fourth Evangelist applies “glory, presence, and name” terminology to Jesus throughout his Gospel, first in temple imagery and then in personal imagery. In the Farewell Discourse this terminology is used to describe the glorified Jesus realizing the divine presence in, and through, the disciples. The occurrence of this terminology supports a heavenly temple realization theme, especially in combination with the themes related to Jesus’ origin and return to heaven. Jesus’ return to heaven, “from above/heaven,” “ascending/descending,” and “sending” themes consistently set Jesus’ identity and origin in the heavens. Because these themes also assume that Jesus will continue a ministry that spans from heaven to earth, they offer collaborating support for Jesus realizing heavenly realities.

Johannine dualism and eschatology also cohere with a heavenly temple realization theme. Jesus bridges the spatial dualism to realize presently eschatological blessings. These blessings include the renewing waters of the Spirit flowing from Jesus, the heavenly temple.

[end of abstract]

If I may be allowed to put in a plug for our school, let me point out that there are a few things Southeastern excels at for doctoral studies, and on the top of the list is Johannine studies. Dr. Köstenberger has not only written the Baker Exegetical commentary for John, but also has recently produced a Johannine theology. In addition, Dr. L. Scott Kellum has also specialized in John, and his dissertation on the farewell discourse in John 13-16 has been published in the prestigious T&T Clark "Library of New Testament Studies" monograph series.

My own advisor, Dr. David Alan Black, has done a lot of work on a lot of topics but has especially made academic contributions in Greek, textual criticism, Synoptic studies, and Pauline studies (his dissertation on the concept of "weakness" in the Apostle Paul's writings was recently revised and re-published with Pickwick Publications). In addition, Dr. Maurice Robinson (the professor for whom I grade) is an expert on textual criticism and co-editor of the 2005 Byzantine Greek New Testament; he has just finished collating every single manuscript that contains the pericope adulterae. Look for a major forthcoming work by him on that topic.

And that's just a few of the many fine scholars at Southeastern! At least SEBTS should be strongly considered an excellent option for any readers considering doctoral or Th.M. work.

Congratulations to Alex Stewart (Revelation) and Michael Stover (1 Clement) on their successful defense!

I am pleased to report that two good friends of mine have just successfully defended their dissertation and thesis at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, one for a Ph.D. in Biblical Theology and the other for a Master of Theology.

1. First of all, congratulations to (soon-to-be) Dr. Alex Stewart for successfully defending his dissertation entitled “Soteriology as Motivation in the Apocalypse of John.” His advisor was Dr. David Alan Black, his secondary reader was Dr. Andreas J. Köstenberger, and his outside reader was Dr. Grant Osborne (author of the Baker Exegetical commentary on Revelation) from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.

What follows is a snippet of his abstract, posted with his permission:

“Recent research into the Apocalypse of John has made it clear that John did not primarily write the Apocalypse in order to provide a detailed time-table of events that would unfold thousands of years in the future. Instead, John wrote to affect and move his hearers at the end of the first century—to motivate them to reject idolatrous compromise with the surrounding cultural and political institutions and overcome through repentance, worship, witness, perseverance, and obedience.

How does the Apocalypse accomplish this motivation and persuade its hearers to adopt a course of action (overcoming) that would put their present lives, income, and security in jeopardy? . . . To be sure, classical rhetorical theory may be heuristically helpful, but if that is its main contribution, why exclude the heuristic contributions of modern theories of argumentation analysis? This dissertation seeks to remedy this gap in the study of John’s motivational argumentation by methodologically employing Stephen Toulmin’s model of argumentation analysis to study John’s explicit and implicit argumentation (chapter four). Toulmin’s model has revolutionized the modern study of argumentation analysis and has found wide utilization in a variety of disciplines.

In addition to the general conclusion that John primarily employs soteriology as motivation, this dissertation makes several other contributions to the study of the Apocalypse. First, it further strengthens the thesis that the Apocalypse of John is a thoroughly rhetorical text; i.e., it was not written primarily to convey theology or information about the future, but to motivate its hearers to concrete actions in the present. Second, it highlights the centrality of logos, or logical argumentation, in John’s argumentation. Despite the arguments of many previous scholars, logical argumentation is a central, not peripheral, element of John’s rhetorical strategy; albeit a logos dependent upon a shared meta-narrative and worldview. Third, it demonstrates the general applicability of Toulmin’s model of argumentation analysis to biblical texts, even such complicated texts as John’s Apocalypse. Although Toulmin’s model is relatively simple, it can be usefully applied to ancient texts to clarify, simplify, and synthesize the argumentation. Fourth, it confirms that the Apocalypse displays a genuinely inaugurated eschatology and soteriology with both presently possessed and future, non-possessed elements.”

Alex has been a good friend of mine in the doctoral program, and he has the privilege of teaching overseas in Europe beginning this summer and continuing for the foreseeable future. Best wishes, Alex!

2. Secondly, congratulations to Michael Stover for successfully defending his Th.M. thesis entitled “The Dating of First Clement.” Michael Stover has put a lot of research into this issue (his thesis was 200+ pages, slightly long for a master’s thesis!) and examines in-depth the evidence for the earlier, middle, and later dates for 1 Clement, ultimately arguing for the middle date. Michael’s thesis has significance for both patristic and New Testament studies, since Clement cites much of the New Testament and thus may be used as a terminus ad quem for the dating of certain NT books.

Michael’s academic advisor was also Dr. David Alan Black. His secondary readers were L. Scott Kellum and Ed Gravely.

Michael has been a good friend of mine here in North Carolina and I wish him the best for his future. Good job, Michael!

Although I am totally biased in this regard, I view Southeastern as one of the best places for New Testament studies, not least because of the work of Drs. Black and Köstenberger. They promote a high standard of scholarly excellence, and many of their students go on to make contributions to scholarship (Alex, for example, has already been published in both Tyndale Bulletin and Trinity Journal). For students considering doctoral work in New Testament, we have, among others, Dr. Black who has made major contributions in Greek studies (as well as having written one of the best beginner Greek textbooks, in my humble but biased opinion), Dr. Köstenberger, who has written one of the top commentaries on John (the Baker Exegetical; also in my humble but biased opinion), Dr. Maurice Robinson, textual critic and editor of the Byzantine/Majority text (2005) of the NT, Dr. Benjamin Merkle, who has made contributions in the studies of the Pastoral Epistles and New Testament theology, and Dr. L. Scott Kellum, who has written a monograph on the Gospel of John. This is, of course, a small fraction of our scholars at Southeastern!

I am planning to finish my own dissertation within a year and hope that I can live up to their standards, and the standard set by Alex and Michael’s work. Congratulations, gentlemen!

Congratulations to Keith Campbell and his successful dissertation defense on "The Appropriation of the Psalmic Lament in the Synoptic Gospels: A Study in Characterization"

A few months ago I had the privilege of sitting in and listening to the successful defense by Keith Campbell of his dissertation entitled "The Appropriation of the Psalmic Lament in the Synoptic Gospels: A Study in Characterization." His primary reader was Dr. Andreas Köstenberger, his secondary reader was Dr. Heath Thomas (OT--specialty is Lament), and his outside reader was Dr. Joel F. Williams (New Testament--Cedarville University, book editor for JETS). His abstract is as follows:

"In 2007, Stephen P. Ahearne-Kroll published The Psalms of Lament in Mark‘s Passion: Jesus‘ Davidic Suffering (SNTSMS 142) wherein he explores Mark‘s appropriation of the Psalmic Lament in characterizing Jesus. While previous scholars tended to conflate Mark‘s appropriation of the Lament Psalms indistinguishably into his appropriation of his Isaianic Servant motif, Ahearne-Kroll establishes, among other things, that Mark portrays Jesus in the passion distinctly as the David Psalmic Lamenter par excellence. This dissertation, by building upon the works of OT and NT scholars from Hermann Gunkel to Joel Marcus, advances Ahearne-Kroll‘s work by, first, exploring how Mark appropriates the Psalmic Lament in relation to his use of other psalmic literature, in relation to his characterization of Jesus‘ opponents, and in relation to his use of Isaiah‘s Servant motif. Second, this dissertation advances Ahearne-Kroll‘s work by exploring the degree to which Matthew and Luke detect and appropriate Mark‘s use of the Psalmic Lament to characterize Jesus and Jesus‘ opponents, in relation to other psalmic literature, and in relation to Isaiah‘s Servant motif."

Dr. Campbell has a great future awaiting him in ministry. He has the privilege of co-authoring with Dr. Köstenberger the forthcoming Exegetical Greek Guide to the New Testament: Mark (eds. Kostenberger and Murray Harris; Broadman and Holman Academic, forthcoming, 2014). In addition, he has an article in the latest BBR (July 2011). Also, beginning this fall, he will begin teaching as Visiting Prof. of Christian Studies and Theology at Shanghai Normal University this Fall.

Great job, Keith!

My kingdom for those dissertations . . .

One of the challanges of dissertation work is seeking out and acquiring previously defended dissertations that deal with your own topic. In reality, the "seeking out" part is fairly easy, with the advent of modern search engines and a little help from your school's librarian. The "acquring" part, however, is extremely difficult, especially when a key dissertation is unpublished, exists only in two schools in the entire world, both of those schools are on different continents from your own, and neither of those schools is willing to lend you a copy! This is exactly the situation I am finding myself in with one particular dissertation on 1 Peter.

In light of that, I'd like to direct the reader to two schools that make their dissertations free and available to any researcher (they are, of course, only for personal use, and copyright laws apply; they may not be reposted without permission). The first, the University of Edinburgh (http://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/) has an impressive array of dissertations in New Testament Studies, some of the more interesting include Holly Carey's dissertation "Jesus' Cry from the Cross: Towards a First-Century Understanding of the Intertextual Relationship Between Psalm 22 and the Narrative of Mark's Gospel"; Margaret Gavin Sim's dissertation "Towards a Relevance Theoretic Approach to the Particle 'ina" in Koine Greek"; and Hon Lee Kwok's dissertation "Use of Isaiah in the Pauline Letters with Special Reference to his Conception of being an Apostle to the Gentiles." I would encourage any students researching these areas to check out these dissertations.

The second school, Virginia Tech (http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/findetd.html), is not really as useful for Biblical Studies  per se, but may still be helpful for Christian students researching ethics, science, communication theory, etc.

This raises the question: why don't more schools make their students' dissertations avaiable for research? Granted, all doctoral candidates want to publish their work eventually, but for every thesis published, there remains quite a few more that are not published that nevertheless make a genuine contribution to scholarship (else they would never have been approved). Perhaps I am missing something here, but the University of Edinburgh's approach seems to makes sense for 3 reasons: first, it promotes the school. Due to my access to U of Edinburgh's dissertations, the school has risen to prominence in my mind. Granted, I'm no expert on British universities, and I'm hardly in a position to recommend a British school to any prospective students. Nonetheless, simply through my interactions with their website, U of E has still has suddenly become the only British University that I know anything about.

Secondly,  those who have successfully defended their dissertation would naturally want their research accessible to scholarship. A dissertation that exists in only two copies, sitting on a shelf in the library of a lesser-known school, can hardly be termed "accessible." It is quite possible that many decent dissertations lie neglected, collecting dust, while scholarship is deprived of of their work. An electronic database, such as that of U of Edinburgh, solves that problem.

Thirdly, there are those like me who cannot afford to fly to South Africa, Germany, and Paris (three countries outside of the US that contain dissertations I desperately would like to get my grubby hands on) any time soon and who fear that they may miss out on a valuable work of scholarship. For dissertations in the US, of course, one solution is ProQuest (http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/disexpress.shtml), provided you're willing to shell out 40 dollars or so. Still, it's most likely cheaper than taking a trip to the other side of the country to get ahold of a dissertation (I've purchased valuable dissertations through ProQuest and can attest that it is definitely a useful outlet).

One other thought. I would think that having these dissertations available electronically would actually deter plagerism, for it would seem that it would be easier to plagerize a source that only exists in or two libraries than a source that exists online (as a grader, I can speak with experience that it's fairly easy to catch plagerism in papers if the source is online, even in pdf format; simply enter a couple lines of text in "Google" and see if anything matches)

I encourage my readers to be on the lookout for any other schools that provide easy access to their dissertations or research. Drop me an e-mail, and that schools' website will be posted, along with other helpful resources, on my "Resources for Students" sidebar.