Choices and Decisions

[seung]

24 minutes ago, Sloproth said:

So do you think there's hope?

With a sprinkling of caution and with plan B tucked away somewhere nearby, yes

[Sloproth]

5 hours ago, seung said:

With a sprinkling of caution and with plan B tucked away somewhere nearby, yes

Well I sincerely hope your hope will be rewarded.

[seung]

Maybe, just maybe... good news this week?

[xypathos]

Certainly hope so.

[seung]

I'm off the waitlist at UVA! Ecstatic!

[Eshtah]

1 hour ago, seung said:

I'm off the waitlist at UVA! Ecstatic!

Congratulations!!!! I am so happy for you! 

[menge]

3 hours ago, seung said:

I'm off the waitlist at UVA! Ecstatic!

Congrats! Glad it worked out for you.

[Sloproth]

8 hours ago, seung said:

I'm off the waitlist at UVA! Ecstatic!

Super happy for you! Glad someone got off the list. Congrats!

[the.waiting.game]

Admitted off the Emory waitlist--will be going!

[mmmm12]

25 minutes ago, the.waiting.game said:

Admitted off the Emory waitlist--will be going!

Congrats! Did they mention how many have accepted thus far? 

Edited April 5, 2017 by mmmm12

[Abdelazar]

43 minutes ago, the.waiting.game said:

Admitted off the Emory waitlist--will be going!

Congratulations! Which subfield?

[the.waiting.game]

27 minutes ago, mmmm12 said:

Congrats! Did they mention how many have accepted thus far? 

Thanks! He didn't tell me how many. All I know is that there's a lot of back and forth going on between the GDR and the grad school. He said there's recently been movement, so maybe things will keep moving! Good luck! If I learn anything, I'll keep y'all posted.

8 minutes ago, Abdelazar said:

Congratulations! Which subfield?

Thank you!! I'm in American Religious Cultures.

[MurrahMustang]

Hi everyone. First time poster here. I would appreciate any advice or insights into my decision on a doctoral program.  I have been accepted to Florida State's Religions of Western Antiquity program, and I am waitlisted in Baylor's program in New Testament.   Although my main area of interest is New Testament and Christian origins, the program at FSU is more appealing to me because of its emphasis on the Jewish background of the NT (Josephus, DSS, etc.). I already have an MA in Biblical Studies with an emphasis in NT, and I would like to strengthen my knowledge of the Jewish and Greco-Roman backgrounds of the NT. Also, I've published one peer-reviewed article on Josephus, and I'm interested in expanding this research, so I'm interested in studying with David Levenson. 

From what I've gathered on Baylor's website, each of the seminars they offer focuses on a different book or corpus of the NT, but none focuses specifically on second Temple Judaism or Greco-Roman history/religion. (If there are any Baylor students here, please let me know if this is wrong.)

On the other hand, Baylor is obviously a much more prestigious program, has a more well-known faculty, and offers a bigger stipend ($6,000 more per year than FSU). Several of my former professors and scholar friends have told me I'd be crazy not to choose Baylor if they offer me admission. If anyone has any thoughts on this decision, I'd be interested in reading them, especially from people with experience in either of these programs. Thanks!

[Epaphroditus]

7 hours ago, MurrahMustang said:

Hi everyone. First time poster here. I would appreciate any advice or insights into my decision on a doctoral program.  I have been accepted to Florida State's Religions of Western Antiquity program, and I am waitlisted in Baylor's program in New Testament.   Although my main area of interest is New Testament and Christian origins, the program at FSU is more appealing to me because of its emphasis on the Jewish background of the NT (Josephus, DSS, etc.). I already have an MA in Biblical Studies with an emphasis in NT, and I would like to strengthen my knowledge of the Jewish and Greco-Roman backgrounds of the NT. Also, I've published one peer-reviewed article on Josephus, and I'm interested in expanding this research, so I'm interested in studying with David Levenson. 

From what I've gathered on Baylor's website, each of the seminars they offer focuses on a different book or corpus of the NT, but none focuses specifically on second Temple Judaism or Greco-Roman history/religion. (If there are any Baylor students here, please let me know if this is wrong.)

On the other hand, Baylor is obviously a much more prestigious program, has a more well-known faculty, and offers a bigger stipend ($6,000 more per year than FSU). Several of my former professors and scholar friends have told me I'd be crazy not to choose Baylor if they offer me admission. If anyone has any thoughts on this decision, I'd be interested in reading them, especially from people with experience in either of these programs. Thanks!

I'm not at either school, but it seems to me from FSU's website that its program doesn't really emphasize the Jewish "background" of the NT; instead, it focuses on the study of ancient Judaism for its own sake and the study of ancient Christianity (not the same as NT) for its own sake. If your primary research interest is something within the NT canon, then Baylor would seem to be a better fit, even if they don't have much backgrounds coursework. They probably have a Classics department where you could take some courses. It really depends on what you want to research and where and what you see yourself teaching after your PhD. If your goal is to primarily teach NT and Christian Origins within its Jewish/Greco-Roman milieu, I would choose Baylor. If your goal is rather to teach something like ancient mediterranean religions, then FSU is the way to go.

[turktheman]

8 hours ago, MurrahMustang said:

Hi everyone. First time poster here. I would appreciate any advice or insights into my decision on a doctoral program.  I have been accepted to Florida State's Religions of Western Antiquity program, and I am waitlisted in Baylor's program in New Testament.   Although my main area of interest is New Testament and Christian origins, the program at FSU is more appealing to me because of its emphasis on the Jewish background of the NT (Josephus, DSS, etc.). I already have an MA in Biblical Studies with an emphasis in NT, and I would like to strengthen my knowledge of the Jewish and Greco-Roman backgrounds of the NT. Also, I've published one peer-reviewed article on Josephus, and I'm interested in expanding this research, so I'm interested in studying with David Levenson. 

From what I've gathered on Baylor's website, each of the seminars they offer focuses on a different book or corpus of the NT, but none focuses specifically on second Temple Judaism or Greco-Roman history/religion. (If there are any Baylor students here, please let me know if this is wrong.)

On the other hand, Baylor is obviously a much more prestigious program, has a more well-known faculty, and offers a bigger stipend ($6,000 more per year than FSU). Several of my former professors and scholar friends have told me I'd be crazy not to choose Baylor if they offer me admission. If anyone has any thoughts on this decision, I'd be interested in reading them, especially from people with experience in either of these programs. Thanks!

FSU doesn't have the name recognition that many other schools that have had programs for decades now. I can pass along what I've heard from professors at Baylor and FSU when I was working through the application decision through PM if you'd like. I would just encourage you to reach out to a few professors to inquire about recent job placement from each school. Personally, I think for what you want to do, FSU has a solid program. You mention Levenson and your own interests in Josephus. I've only heard very positive things about Levenson from faculty at my school. He's a well-known scholar among those who know NT/Early Church and late Second Temple Judaism. Matt Goff is tremendous. If you haven't done Aramaic yet, he would likely be your instructor. His DSS work on sapiential literature and the Book of the Giants is great stuff, and he like Levenson is well-known. I don't know much about Kelly, but her faculty profile indicates she's working on disability studies in the early church/NT. This is an ever increasing field of interests and is a hot-topic now. In classics, you have Marincola's work on Greek historiography and Slaveva-Griffin's on neo-platonism. So, you have solid professors at FSU that can lead some truly interesting dissertation topics.

A dissertation on disability in Josephus and Philo would be great pulling together of faculty strengths, but I don't think a dissertation on Paul's pneumatology would fit well. If you are at all interested in something like the latter or similar, FSU would not be a good fit. I think Baylor would be better able to work with people wanting to research and write on more-or-less NT Theology--broadly speaking. At the same time, Longenecker has worked on more historical matters than his colleagues. In his book on the Jerusalem collection, he does offer a bit of a correction to Friesen's economic scales (I haven't seen anyone adopt Longnecker's corrections), and he has the new book on crosses at Pompeii (I haven't read it yet). Gaventa has been around forever, and she is the most well-known of Baylor's faculty, but she doesn't do much in backgrounds. Parsons does interact quite a bit with physiognomy and the progymnasmatia handbooks, esp. Theon. I would consider this background for exploring rhetorical analysis of NT/early church. Parsons has also applied his research on progymnasmata to discuss disabilities in Luke-Acts--or at least the rhetoric of disability. Novakovic's DSS work is solid, and she has published some key translations from what I remember. Iverson overlaps somewhat with Parson's concern with narratology, but I'm honestly not familiar with his work beyond the edited volume he did with Skinner who is at Loyola Chicago. I do know Baylor offers a seminar on backgrounds as part of its class rotation, but I couldn't comment more on that (I'm sure other are able to do so).

 

All that considered, I would likely pick Baylor over FSU for one reason: better financial aid package. If finances were equal, it would be a very tough decision. For backgrounds, I think FSU edges Baylor out both in Second Temple and early Church. If you wanted to do narrative approaches to NT, Baylor it is. You won't get any of that from FSU. What you will get at FSU, however, is solid opportunities to incorporate Greco-Roman philosophical schools, religions, literature, etc. and Second Temple literature and history into your research of the NT and early church.    

[Kuriakos]

13 hours ago, MurrahMustang said:

Hi everyone. First time poster here. I would appreciate any advice or insights into my decision on a doctoral program.  I have been accepted to Florida State's Religions of Western Antiquity program, and I am waitlisted in Baylor's program in New Testament.   Although my main area of interest is New Testament and Christian origins, the program at FSU is more appealing to me because of its emphasis on the Jewish background of the NT (Josephus, DSS, etc.). I already have an MA in Biblical Studies with an emphasis in NT, and I would like to strengthen my knowledge of the Jewish and Greco-Roman backgrounds of the NT. Also, I've published one peer-reviewed article on Josephus, and I'm interested in expanding this research, so I'm interested in studying with David Levenson. 

From what I've gathered on Baylor's website, each of the seminars they offer focuses on a different book or corpus of the NT, but none focuses specifically on second Temple Judaism or Greco-Roman history/religion. (If there are any Baylor students here, please let me know if this is wrong.)

On the other hand, Baylor is obviously a much more prestigious program, has a more well-known faculty, and offers a bigger stipend ($6,000 more per year than FSU). Several of my former professors and scholar friends have told me I'd be crazy not to choose Baylor if they offer me admission. If anyone has any thoughts on this decision, I'd be interested in reading them, especially from people with experience in either of these programs. Thanks!

The NT colloquium rotates between Jewish backgrounds, Greco-Roman backgrounds, and early Christianity. For example, one year I had a colloquium on Josephus and Historiography, the next on Pompeii and Roman Domestic Life/Religion, and the next on the Adversus Iudaios tradition in the 2nd through 4th centuries. The specific topics change each year. 

[sacklunch]

On 4/8/2017 at 2:07 AM, MurrahMustang said:

Hi everyone. First time poster here. I would appreciate any advice or insights into my decision on a doctoral program.  I have been accepted to Florida State's Religions of Western Antiquity program, and I am waitlisted in Baylor's program in New Testament.   Although my main area of interest is New Testament and Christian origins, the program at FSU is more appealing to me because of its emphasis on the Jewish background of the NT (Josephus, DSS, etc.). I already have an MA in Biblical Studies with an emphasis in NT, and I would like to strengthen my knowledge of the Jewish and Greco-Roman backgrounds of the NT. Also, I've published one peer-reviewed article on Josephus, and I'm interested in expanding this research, so I'm interested in studying with David Levenson. 

From what I've gathered on Baylor's website, each of the seminars they offer focuses on a different book or corpus of the NT, but none focuses specifically on second Temple Judaism or Greco-Roman history/religion. (If there are any Baylor students here, please let me know if this is wrong.)

On the other hand, Baylor is obviously a much more prestigious program, has a more well-known faculty, and offers a bigger stipend ($6,000 more per year than FSU). Several of my former professors and scholar friends have told me I'd be crazy not to choose Baylor if they offer me admission. If anyone has any thoughts on this decision, I'd be interested in reading them, especially from people with experience in either of these programs. Thanks!

I have heard similar comments over the years that support Baylor being slightly more prestigious than FSU. But I'm not sure it's well-founded. Funding being equal (unfortunately, it's not), I would actually lean in favor of FSU for your interests. As you mentioned, David Levenson is a big name, bigger than anyone at Baylor, at least for Josephus. Who at Baylor do you want to work with?

[Kuriakos]

43 minutes ago, sacklunch said:

I have heard similar comments over the years that support Baylor being slightly more prestigious than FSU. But I'm not sure it's well-founded. Funding being equal (unfortunately, it's not), I would actually lean in favor of FSU for your interests. As you mentioned, David Levenson is a big name, bigger than anyone at Baylor, at least for Josephus. Who at Baylor do you want to work with?

I would agree that if one really wanted to focus on STJ and not NT/EC, then Baylor is not the best fit. Baylor desperately needs to hire a STJ specialist, but the Religion department has some legacy divisions that make that difficult. 

[MurrahMustang]

Thanks so much for the responses everyone! 

On 4/8/2017 at 11:04 AM, turktheman said:

I can pass along what I've heard from professors at Baylor and FSU when I was working through the application decision through PM if you'd like.

Yeah, if you don't mind, I'd be very interested in your conversations and perspectives. I've certainly had lengthier discussions with FSU than Baylor, but I'm interested in hearing about your experiences with both.

On 4/8/2017 at 4:06 PM, Kuriakos said:

The NT colloquium rotates between Jewish backgrounds, Greco-Roman backgrounds, and early Christianity. For example, one year I had a colloquium on Josephus and Historiography, the next on Pompeii and Roman Domestic Life/Religion, and the next on the Adversus Iudaios tradition in the 2nd through 4th centuries. The specific topics change each year. 

This is good to know and definitely makes me more interested in Baylor. 

4 hours ago, sacklunch said:

Who at Baylor do you want to work with?

Longenecker would be the main person I'd want to work with, although Novakovic has published at least one article on historiography and the Historical Jesus, which is one of my main interests. But the overall point of your post tends to support my own leanings towards FSU (funding being equal).

[sacklunch]

9 hours ago, MurrahMustang said:

Thanks so much for the responses everyone! 

Yeah, if you don't mind, I'd be very interested in your conversations and perspectives. I've certainly had lengthier discussions with FSU than Baylor, but I'm interested in hearing about your experiences with both.

This is good to know and definitely makes me more interested in Baylor. 

Longenecker would be the main person I'd want to work with, although Novakovic has published at least one article on historiography and the Historical Jesus, which is one of my main interests. But the overall point of your post tends to support my own leanings towards FSU (funding being equal).

I don't know Longenecker, nor should I given my interests. Some of his publications listed on Baylor's website and, especially his recent book, would, however, raise eyebrows in some scholarly sectors. When I look at the publications of Levenson, I imagine a very different reaction. I don't think it's terribly productive to criticize Longenecker for (what I assume to be) deep theological commitments in his work. But others will. Even if you do not count yourself among whatever camp Longenecker may or may not locate himself, others will. But because others will, this can all work in your favor. It just depends on where you hope to work. 

Edited April 10, 2017 by sacklunch

[Kuriakos]

48 minutes ago, sacklunch said:

I don't know Longenecker, nor should I given my interests. Some of his publications listed on Baylor's website and, especially his recent book, would, however, raise eyebrows in some scholarly sectors. When I look at the publications of Levenson, I imagine a very different reaction. I don't think it's terribly productive to criticize Longenecker for (what I assume to be) deep theological commitments in his work. But others will. Even if you do not count yourself among whatever camp Longenecker may or may not locate himself, others will. But because others will, this can all work in your favor. It just depends on where you hope to work. 

What recent work strikes you as theological? 

[MurrahMustang]

44 minutes ago, Kuriakos said:

What recent work strikes you as theological? 

I'm interested in your response to this as well. Feel free to PM me if you don't want to discuss it publicly. I mentioned Longenecker mainly because of his historical interests in the Pauline collection and Pompeii.

[sacklunch]

I was thinking of his recent book. I have heard two classicists (professors) poke fun at the notion that Christian artefacts survive from Pompeii ("only a Christian would propose such nonsense"). I'm not saying Longenecker is wrong; I don't know the material record well enough (though to be honest my initial reaction is very skeptical). The point I was making was scholars who approach such topics from other disciplines such as classics would be alarmed and, I think, immediately question his motives. cheers.

[Kuriakos]

3 hours ago, sacklunch said:

I was thinking of his recent book. I have heard two classicists (professors) poke fun at the notion that Christian artefacts survive from Pompeii ("only a Christian would propose such nonsense"). I'm not saying Longenecker is wrong; I don't know the material record well enough (though to be honest my initial reaction is very skeptical). The point I was making was scholars who approach such topics from other disciplines such as classics would be alarmed and, I think, immediately question his motives. cheers.

There is no apologetic motive which is clear from reading the book (and what really would be the apologetic benefit anyway???!?). The book acknowledges the previous consensus and argues the way a book taking a minority position should. I, personally, do not think the book proves its thesis, but what it does do successfully is show how the consensus that there were no Christians in Pompeii is often predicated on sloppy arguments (like confusing two artifacts for example). 

[axiomness]

Three more days...

Edited April 12, 2017 by axiomness