Loading...QUESTION:
How do you go about reading books? Which methods do you use in order to read as much as possibile? How do make plans how much to read? Do you highlight things in books? Do you you’re your own comments? Summaries? Any other tips?
RESPONSE:
Ah, this is an interesting question. As it turns out, there’s not an easy answer. That’s because there are many different ways I read books, depending on what kind of book it is. I realize we’re talking about books dealing with scholarship – not Victorian novels! But I read different books differently depending on what it is, what it’s about, and what I want/need to get out of it.
When I was in graduate school I had a friend who insisted that anyone should be able to read an entire book of scholarship every day. I had trouble believing him, but in fact it’s true. In fact, when you get good at it, you can read much more than that. It all depends on what you are reading it for; that affects how you go about it.
If I am reading a book in a field that I am basically unfamiliar with, or not intimately familiar with, and it’s an important book filled with data and key insights, I will read the whole thing, cover to cover, and highlight the key lines. I will then go back, chapter by chapter, and take copious notes on what I’ve read. Then I have both my notes for review and a highlighted copy of the book for future reference. This I do for all books that I think are highly significant.
FOR THE REST OF THIS POST, log in as a Member. Click here for membership options. If you don’t belong yet, JOIN NOW!!
What do you think of N.T Wright’s ‘The Resurrection of the Son of God’? Could you maybe do a critique of it
Well, Tom Wright and I do not see eye to eye on too many things, including on the question of whether historians can establish the *probability* that Jesus was raised from the dead……
Two items:
1. How I read books: I am usually reading a few books at a time, from different areas of interest, one requiring very serious study (with notes and such), another book in a totally different field or just fiction, and then a book dealing with a hobby or a personal interest. I tend to have a short attention span (adult ADHD) so I do better if I break up my reading. I’m not in a university class so I’m not under pressure to cram. I’m 71, and often wonder why I’m doing this. I should be reading Pollyanna devotional books instead…I’m just absorbed by NT scholarship !!!
2. I want to revisit a question I asked in another blog…I just found the relevant Bible text and it relates to Gnostic writings.
I asked earlier if there were any hints of gnosticism in the gospels since Jesus often took his deciples off to the side to speak privately or spoke in mysterious parables….are those hints of gnostic practice regarding special secret mysterious knowledge?
The text is in Mark 13 and also in Matthew and probably Luke.
It is of the Parable of the Sower. The portion I’m interested in, and can’t understand, is this:
“The disciples came to him and asked, ‘Why do you speak to the people in parables?’ He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets (mysteries) of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. This is why I speak in parables:
Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand’ …. and then Jesus quotes from Isaiah.
He continues on and then explains the meaning of the Parable to his disciples but does not explain to the crowds…to the people.
Is that a form of secret teaching as in gnostic tradition, or is Jesus doing something else.
I do not have a clue and do not understand Jesus’ purpose. I always though Jesus intended for his followers and his listeners, the people, to understand…not to be confused
Any thoughts on this from your historical perspective or is this more of a theological issue?
Thank you
Are you referring to the parable of the sower in Mark 4? (Not 13) Mark is quite explicit: Jesus teaches in parables precisely *so* people won’t understand! No, I don’t think this is necessarily gnostic, as I indicated earlier. It is a standard motif in a lot of philosophical and religious contexts. In Mark’s context, it is all part of the so-called “messianic secret” where no one can understand who Jesus is throughout the narrative. Gnostics later also used similar secrecy ideas, but they were not the only ones to do so.
Sorry…Mark 4, Matthew 13…yes…the sower….I’m still not sure why Jesus would want to do that….I need to work on this concept of the “messianic secret.” Thank you…glad your conference was good.
Hi Bart, could you expand on that in a separate post? Why would Jesus want to hide his message and/or confuse people about it? Or is that simply a later explanation made up by the Gospel authors in order to justify why so many people obviously did NOT get the message?
Yes, it’s part of the messianic secret in Mark. No one “gets” who Jesus is, and he keeps his identity and his message a secret (or tries to). That gets changed in Matthew and Luke.
OK, so what do you read for fun and relaxation?
Mainly 19th century novels just now. I’m on a Trollope kick. But I’m also reading Reynolds Price, A Whole New Life. Reynolds was a friend, whose spinal cancer left him paralyzed, before I got to know him; and this book is about his experience with it.
Hi Bart,
This might be a bit off-topic but have you read/skimmed the new book by Prof Tabor on the historic Paul (‘ Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity’) ? If yes, what do you think about the conclusions he draws? I’m reading it right now and I think it’s very interesting so far (and it really doesn’t seem as far-fetched as maybe some of of his other books) but I’m not an NT scholar …
Thank you.
Haven’t read it yet! But I did get it….
I’m reading Jame’s Tabor’s book now. Very interesting ideas. There is one early chapter dealing with what he calls “The Cosmic Family”…totally new to me. Would like your thoughts when you can. Also started your Jesus apocalyptic prophet book (very good)…I remember some of the guys you mention in the beginning…even went to a Hal Lindsey lecture in the early 1970’s…big big deal then. Listened to Harold Camping back then also…I’ve changed a lot !!!
Bart,
Sounds like your approach to reading mirrors my own, though I don’t claim your level of expertise as a scholar. I’m not even close in that regard. I do wonder about some of your public statements (judgments really) about other, equally gifted writers like Morton Smith and Bob Eisenman. Have you actually given them a fair shake in assessing their contributions to scholarship, whether as historians or biblical adjudicators?
D.C. Smith
Yes, I’ve read both Morton Smith and Robert Eisenman; I think all serious scholars need to be taken seriously, even where you disagree with them. Morton Smith was a bona fide giant in the field!
How was the SBL Chicago meeting?
I’ll post something on it, in a few minutes!
Thank you! That helps.
thank you, this is really interesting. I’m always working on reading/memory techniques.
I don’t have your book on Peter, do you discuss the Jewish medieval ideas that Simon Peter was actually a “secret agent” of the Sanhedrin that was sent in order to separate nascent movement away from Judaism? That he is the author of several liturgical poems?
Thanks so much!
Nope, I don’t go into that.