• About

The Dunedin School

~ (2009 – 2014)

The Dunedin School

Tag Archives: sheffield

NEWS RELEASE: Tesco Plc Announces Expansion into University Market at Sheffield

17 Tuesday Dec 2013

Posted by The Dunedin School in Biblical Studies, Capital

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

Biblical Studies, sheffield, Tesco

Tesco Plc has announced an innovative proposal, now in its “pre-planning” stage, in which the supermarket chain will expand into the University Humanities Sector.

TescoUniversity will open for enrolment in the 2014/15 academic year, with an initial branch planned in Sheffield and further branches planned in London and Cambridge.

Vice-President Kath Embers stressed the synergies which would result from the initiative. “While universities have attempted to become more market-oriented in their approach, only in the private sector do we find the supporting corporate structure and skill-set available to positively transform tertiary education into a fully fledged market-driven product.”

“Sheffield TescoUniversity promises to provide high-end user-driven results in this space, going forward together.”

tescobiblicalstudies

The announcement has met with a mixed response from academics. While existing university faculty members in the Sheffield area have expressed their “dismay” at the development, there was nothing but praise from recent recipients of honorary doctorates from TescoUniversity.

“It’s about time these ivory tower types earned an honest living by teaching something that everybody understands, rather than some high-faluting theory about feminizing or some sort,” commented the new Dean of Humanities, Dr Barry McFettrick, former Assistant Manager of Tesco Furniture and Kitchen.

The Humanities has been targeted by the company as the academic area which has “thus far responded least to the reality of the market in the modern world” and so “offers the greatest potential for positive growth and development.”

Ms Embers outlined some details of the proposal at a press conference held yesterday, in which the Humanities would be organised into a series of “aisles,” ranging from the more “meaty” disciplines such as Economics and Tourism Studies, to the less substantial “confectionary aisle” which would include “sundry items” such as Philosophy and Biblical Studies.

“But even in disciplines which have traditionally offered little of end-user value, such as Biblical Studies, we intend to offer a range of courses which reflect our market-driven approach. In fact, we are in the process of negotiating an exciting joint-venture which we hope should eventuate in the establishment of the L. Ron Hubbard Centre of Religion,” announced Ms Embers.

“For example, in Biblical Studies, we are developing a strategic staircase to reorient the field towards a profit-focus while retaining all the advantages of the traditional discipline. It is not our intention to make significant changes to what has for many centuries been a successful product venture, so in most cases the changes will be undetectable. For instance, the Introduction to the Gospels will still be taught, but will be rebranded as an Introduction to the Prosperity Gospel.

“Students are always asking us what good will these courses do them in the real world. But at Sheffield TescoUniversity, we hope to produce graduates who can ask precisely the opposite question: ‘What good will we possibly find in the real world following an education at Sheffield TescoUniversity?’”

Read Further:
Don’t shut down Biblical Studies at Sheffield Facebook Group
SBL Announcement
Save Biblical Studies
Sheffield Student Union

Religion and the Media: A New Project from the University of Sheffield

26 Thursday Jan 2012

Posted by Deane in Academics, Biblical Studies

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Centre for Freedom of the Media, CFOM, James Crossley, Religion and the Media, sheffield

PWhat An Unholy Welcome to Britain!rofessor James Crossley, in association with the Centre for Freedom of the Media (CFOM) at the University of Sheffield, has commenced a website to examine what goes on at the intersection of religion and media.

The Religion and the Media blog “will be dedicated to updates, news and analysis of a wide range of issues relating to religion and the media”. The critique of the media’s treatment of religion is especially welcome in a country like the U.K., where liberal sneering or feel-good reductionism usually substitutes for informed commentary or analysis. 

In Religion and the Media’s inaugural post, from 24 January 2012, James Crossley explains:

This new blog is going to be dedicated to all things media and religion, usually with some connection to issues relating to media freedom, linked as it is with the Centre for Freedom of Media at the University of Sheffield. In addition to news and updates, there will be regular analysis from a variety of people both linked to the Centre in someway and guest bloggers.

Professor James Crossley, International Biblical Scholar, Vienna 2007

Professor James Crossley, International Biblical Scholar, Vienna 2007

James Crossley was recently appointed to a Chair in the Biblical Studies Department at the University of Sheffield. His title of Professor of Bible, Culture and Politics reflects his ongoing interest in the reception and effect of the Bible in society, in particular in late capitalism and under the global impact of neoliberalism. Among the books which he has authored or edited that reflect this particular research interest are Jesus in an Age of Terror: Scholarly Projects for a New American Century (BibleWorld; Sheffield: Equinox, 2008), Judaism, Jewish Identities and the Gospel Tradition: Essays in Honour of Maurice Casey (BibleWorld; Sheffield: Equinox, 2010); and Jesus in an Age of Neoliberalism: Quests, Scholarship and Ideology (BibleWorld; Sheffield: Equinox, forthcoming May 2012). Crossley also publishes widely in New Testament studies, including an important recent philological contribution concerning the semantic range of things able to be done with the human “fist”, in “Halakah and Mark 7.3: ‘with the hand in the shape of a fist'” (New Testament Studies 58 (2012), 57-68).

Exposing Scandalous Misrepresentation of Sheffield University’s Biblical Studies Department and a Bucket Full of Blitheringly False Accusations: ‘Bewithering is Becoming Bewildering’*

12 Thursday Nov 2009

Posted by stephanie louise fisher in Academics, Biblical Studies

≈ 19 Comments

Tags

Asbury Theological Seminary, Ben Witherington, Christianity Today, Old gentlemen's agreements, sheffield

It all started with the threatened closure of the biblical studies department at Sheffield University – at least the undergraduate programme – with staff offered early redundancies and no fresh faces to replace them. When the students, both religious and secular, found out, they united against the decision, and letters flooded in from around the world, written to the Vice Chancellor, Professor Burnett, supporting the department and asking for reconsideration. As Professor Maurice Casey, Emeritus Professor of New Testament Studies, University of Nottingham, wrote: “I hope you are aware that this would lead to the wreckage of a quite outstanding feature of British education.” He elaborated, “the Department has a fully justified reputation for research excellence throughout the world, because of the exceptional combination of creativity and independence of mind shown by members of staff in their publications and at academic conferences. These qualities enable them to make an outstanding contribution to British education as well. At a time in their lives when students frequently form and change their views of ideology, morals and everything that matters most, and should learn how to do so, this Department’s students are exceptionally free to maintain their views or change them. The staff contribute to this process as they should, by assessing different points of view in an independent manner by means of evidence and argument, with proper awareness also of what we do not know, and they support students regardless of their point of view. England cannot afford to lose a department like this.” Other letters, with similar endorsements made it screamingly obvious that the department had an outstanding international reputation recognised by scholars from all religious and non religious perspectives.

Finally, it appears the upper bureaucratic powers saw the light. The VC shone through and the department has survived. Thank God (apologies to Simon Holloway**). The department had after all, been awarded the top rating (24 pts) in the QAA Teaching Review. However, it appears that at least one international academic didn’t deem the department worthy of support. In fact this academic has had some rather appallingly serious, false accusations against the department, attributed to him in Christianity Today:

Other faculty [at Sheffield] were “bent on the deconstruction of the Bible, and indeed of their students’ faith,” according to Ben Witherington, a New Testament scholar at Asbury Theological Seminary.

This scandalous allegation is all the more alarming considering the Biblical Studies Department’s “Aims and Objectives” outlined in the 2009-10 undergraduate handbook. These might compare with Asbury Theological Seminary’s “statement of faith”. One of Sheffield’s “aims” is to “develop tolerant, professional, and informed attitudes to a variety of approaches to biblical texts”.

The question was, not whether or not this “New Testament scholar” was aware of the methodological concept of ‘deconstruction’, which he appeared not to be, but did he actually say it? So I asked him – as you do – but as there wasn’t any other forum, I asked him in the comments on one of his blog posts … a post about a book called ‘Three Cups of Tea’. He responded respectfully, saying “This is not the venue for addressing this matter. I’ve had an email exchange with David Clines about this and its been sorted”. Ah, “sorted”. As Jorunn Okland a recent member of the Sheffield staff, and now Professor of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies in the Humanities at the University of Oslo helpfully points out on James Crossley’s blog, “old gentlemen’s agreements at the back room is still what counts!” and she added, “Such agreements clearly are more important than public discussion, clear and transparent arguments, apologies, clarifications and the like. But this is perhaps representative of how things work in evangelical christianity?”. So it would seem. Nevertheless, I was delighted, naturally, but couldn’t help wondering … “We can look forward to a public apology from someone soon then”. Horrified, I received a rather terse dismissal: “I doubt there will be a public apology. There are too many wounded in action to account for. Honestly Stephanie, Sheffield did not act wisely in not hiring folks like Loveday Alexander or Andrew Lincoln once they were gone, as they at least nurtured people in their Christian faith” Wounded in action? I thought it was the wounded in action, the staff and students of the department, who deserved an apology … from someone. Besides, Sheffield had not been allowed to hire anyone new, as the powers that be had deemed it necessary to phase out the department completely. As for “nurturing people in their Christian faith”, Mike Koke correctly observed in a comment on James Crossley’s blog again, that “there are always University chaplains and Christian organizations available to nurture faith”.

I was shocked that there would be no apology and obviously the comments attributed to him in “Christianity Today” would not be withdrawn. He appeared to endorse everything they said and hadn’t tried to deny saying them. Ben reassured me “You shouldn’t be shocked. Do a little historical research. Start with F.F. Bruce and the original purpose and focus of the Biblical Studies Faculty at Sheffield. Then compare that to where we are now.” Astonishing I know, but I do know quite a bit about the history of the department and have known the current department for a little while now. I even like to attend the post graduate seminars there. Ben is also under the impression that he can give us all elementary lectures in history and consistently misreads what is said to him – misreading Dr James Crossley of the Sheffield staff for over four years now – and giving us all a little summary of Ralph Martin’s career, someone who retired from the department in 1996 and hasn’t had anything to do with it since! I think Ben assumes that universities should function in the same way ideologically as they did at their conception.

When I suggested he might not know what good critical historical scholarship was, he flew at me, accusing me of not having read his academic work. I corrected him – I have read some of his work. Indeed, I am fully aware of his theories on the authenticity of the Turin Shroud, the authenticity of the James Ossuary, and the theory that the assumed ‘beloved disciple’, whom the New Testament NEVER actually describes as “the beloved disciple”, let alone identifies, being Lazarus. I often wonder if, should he realise that any of these theories were wrong, he would ever concede his error? He has after all, made quite a success of himself with these sensational ideas. Indeed, I know quite a little bit about Ben. I also reminded him that it is “CRITICAL” historical scholarship of which I think he might have no understanding.

Critical historical scholarship … Asbury Theological Seminary, Ben’s employer, is a very conservative institution which is “called to prepare theologically educated, sanctified, Spirit-filled men and women to evangelize and to spread scriptural holiness throughout the world through the love of Jesus Christ, in the power of the Holy Spirit and to the glory of God the Father”. It also endorses the inerrancy of Scripture, whatever that is. Ben at least, only pays lip service to academic freedom. In the Sheffield Biblical Studies departmental handbook, the objectives include having students to “have acquired abroad understanding of Biblical Studies and the variety of approaches used to study the Bible”, to “have acquired detailed knowledge of individual biblical books”, to “have had the opportunity to take modules introducing them to some of the major scholarly issues in the study of the Bible and its understanding in the modern world”, to “be able to relate the Bible to broader cultural and intellectual contexts” and to “be able to assess critically scholarly argument about the Bible and be able to offer informed and reasoned arguments of their own”. There is quite a difference between Asbury and Sheffield.

He then proceeded to make more alarmingly false accusations, including “Sheffield has deliberately avoided hiring people of faith” which is scandalously untrue, as the most recent appointment is a committed Christian from the London Theological School who was chosen on academic qualities alone. Besides, the model for appointments that Asbury Theological Seminary uses isn’t allowed in British independent universities – thank God (apologies again to Simon Holloway*). The Sheffield University Equal Opportunities Policy and Code of Practice for Staff states that “The University will give fair consideration to all applicants for employment, supported through transparent procedures … ensuring appointments are based on individual merit” and “treating one person less favourably than another on the grounds of disability, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion or belief or age is always illegal”. Italics, mine of course.

Later, echoing a comment on this initial conversation thread on James Crossley’s second post on the matter, Ben preached “Going forward one of the questions that ought to be seriously discussed is the issue of sensitivity to and tolerance of theological differences in the students and a thoughtful addressing of issues when students feel that pejorative comments about the Bible or about their faith are at the least not fair, and hardly value neutral.” But all with these allegations fired, where is the evidence? Who are these more than just one or two “disgruntled students”, and when did they attend Sheffield? And “pejorative comments about the Bible or about their faith”? Is this perhaps a reflection of his lack of ability to think critically? As I said above, one of the department’s aims is to “develop tolerant, professional, and informed attitudes to a variety of approaches to the biblical texts”. What is meant by “pejorative comments” anyway? Maybe the conclusion the student may arrive at that the Bible might not be the inerrant document they once thought it to be? These accusations could be potentially dangerous for Ben if someone took action on them. Perhaps he was talking about more than just “one or two disgruntled students” from the distant past, who “have felt both their faith and the Bible and its historical substance disrespected”, and they were not reflecting the current department at all. I discussed this conversation with friends who began to post on the matter, and I informed Ben of these responses.

SUDDENLY … The conversation on Ben’s blog comments DISAPPEARED!!! My! Did he realise he was wrong? Or did he consider the conversation inappropriate for his ‘Beliefnet’ blog? Whatever the reason, he made serious allegations against Sheffield which can no longer be seen. Dare I cast doubt on the academic integrity of Professor Ben Witherington? Kingsley Barrett, a conservative Christian, under whom he studied in Durham back in the 70s, always respected those who disagreed with him and merely asked for arguments with evidence. It’s a shame that principle doesn’t appear to have rubbed off on Ben. Regrettably, I am not holding my breath for any apology.

(This blithering scandal of Ben Witherington’s comments in “Christianity Today” has been discussed elsewhere on the blogs including those of: James Crossley (x3), Jim Linville, Jim West, and Pat McCullough, some of whom copied extracts of the original blog conversation which has now mysteriously disappeared from Ben’s blog.)

(*Roland Boer commented on James Crossley’s blog, “bewithering is becoming bewildering”)

(**Simon Holloway, a non-Christian student in Sydney, was one of those who originally posted about the controversy because he was “livid” that Ben Hinks, a Christian student at Sheffield, had thanked people for their “support, action” and, God forbid, “prayers”.)

Sexy New Hebrew Dictionary: The Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew – the Abridgement of the (unfinished) Dictionary of Classical Hebrew

03 Tuesday Nov 2009

Posted by Deane in Hebrew

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, Hebrew, sheffield

Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew
Yes, it’s out this week from Sheffield: The Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Even though volumes 7 and 8 of the unabridged Dictionary of Classical Hebrew are yet to be released, the abridged version can now be ordered. This is the most exciting news in Semitic lexicography for some time -the first Classical Hebrew-English dictionary built up from original research.

And unlike the case for most dead languages, The Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew just keeps finding new words!

“The CDCH thus contains not only the c. 8400 Hebrew words found in the standard dictionaries, but also a further 3340+ words (540 from the Dead Sea Scrolls, 680 from other ancient Hebrew literature, and 2120+ proposed words for the Hebrew Bible not previously recognized by dictionaries). All the words in the full Dictionary of Classical Hebrew are to be found in the CDCH.”

That’s hot.

Top Posts

  • J.N. Darby's End-Times Family Tree: Is Dispensationalism from the Bible or Evangelical Tradition?
  • Lawrence Krauss to Dispel Nonsense, from Creationism to Aliens: Free Public Lecture in Dunedin: Yes, Free!

Categories

  • Academics
  • Atheism and Agnosticism
  • Biblical Studies
    • Angels
    • Eschatology
    • Evil
    • Giants
    • Gnosticism
    • God
    • Hebrew
    • Hebrew Bible
    • Historical Criticism
    • Jesus
    • New Testament
    • Paul
    • Rabbinics
    • Reception History
    • Textual Criticism
  • Buddhism
  • Christianity
    • Theology
  • Conferences & Seminars
  • Dunedin School
  • Ecology
  • Ethics
    • Relativism
  • History
  • Islam
  • justice
  • Language
    • Metaphor
    • Reference
    • Rhetoric
    • Slang
    • Symbol
    • Translation
  • Living
  • News
  • Politics
    • Violence
  • Religion
    • Cults
    • Death
    • Exorcism
    • Faith
    • Fundamentalism
    • Healing
    • Prophecy
    • Purification
    • Rationalization
    • Visions
    • Worship
  • Texts
    • Cartoons
    • Comics
    • Film
    • Fine Art
    • Games
    • Greek
    • Internet
    • Literature
    • Media
    • Music
    • Philosophy
    • Photography
    • Pornography
    • Television
  • Theory
    • Capital
    • Children's rights
    • Continental Philosophy
    • Dialogic
    • Feminist Theory
    • Gender Studies
    • Intertextuality
    • Marx
    • Narratology
    • Postcolonialism
    • Psychoanalysis
    • Queer
    • Racism
    • Reception
    • Sex
    • Spectrality
    • Transhumanism
    • Universalism
  • Uncategorized
  • Zarathustrianism

Archives

  • September 2014
  • December 2013
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009

Recent Comments

  • Vridar » “Partisanship” in New Testament scholarship on Exposing Scandalous Misrepresentation of Sheffield University’s Biblical Studies Department and a Bucket Full of Blitheringly False Accusations: ‘Bewithering is Becoming Bewildering’*
  • Arthur Klassen on The Antichrist Revealed! John Key has been Prophesised in the Word of God!!
  • Anusha on Cinema as Exorcism (six): On Soft-Selling Lars von Trier’s Melancholia
  • Cary Grant on J.N. Darby’s End-Times Family Tree: Is Dispensationalism from the Bible or Evangelical Tradition?
  • Christian Discernment on The Antichrist Revealed! John Key has been Prophesised in the Word of God!!
  • fluffybabybunnyrabbit on Complementarians and Martial Sex: The Jared Wilson / Gospel Coalition Saga
  • lisawhitefern on The Antichrist Revealed! John Key has been Prophesised in the Word of God!!

Blogroll

  • Anthrocybib (Jon Bialecki and James Bielo)
  • Auckland Theology, Biblical Studies, et al
  • Dr Jim's Thinking Shop and Tea Room (Jim Linville)
  • Forbidden Gospels (April DeConick)
  • Genealogy of Religion (Cris)
  • Joseph Gelfer
  • Otagosh (Gavin Rumney)
  • PaleoJudaica (Jim Davila)
  • Religion and the Media (University of Sheffield)
  • Religion Bulletin
  • Religion Dispatches
  • Remnant of Giants
  • Sects and Violence in the Ancient World (Steve A. Wiggins)
  • Sheffield Biblical Studies (James Crossley)
  • Stalin's Moustache (Roland Boer)
  • The Immanent Frame
  • The New Oxonian (R. Joseph Hoffmann)
  • Theofantastique

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • The Dunedin School
    • Join 47 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Dunedin School
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...