Before the long weekend (spent with family and a great time) I had the worst cup of coffee I can remember (thank goodness for small mercies). We went to Taupo where Barbara had appointments. The Coffee Club is convenient and prominent on the main road opposite the lake. Location, location, location.
We stopped at The Coffee Club, it was a beautiful spring morning with the remains of last night’s wind driven waves making the lake look more like a sheltered seaside bay. Barbara’s soy cappuccino was horribly expensive, though she said it was “fine, quite OK”. My “long black” came in a huge mug, filled almost to the brim with scalding hot water used to dilute the bitter taste of some coffee made from second hand grounds, or possibly they just let the hot water run through the single shot head until the giant mug was full. I have had better instant coffee, when occasionally I have made the mistake of thinking a church was serving proper french-press coffee, but they had really used instant.
I can not recommend strongly enough that (if you actually like coffee) you stay away from The Coffee Club, Taupo. Though I guess if you don’t like coffee the food and tea might be wonderful ;)
Richard Beck pulled out this (timely?) quote from Mere Christianity
Finally, though I have had to speak at some length about sex, I want to make it as clear as I possibly can that the centre of Christian morality is not here. If anyone thinks that Christians regard unchastity as the supreme vice, he is quite wrong. The sins of the flesh are bad, but they are the least bad of all sins. All the worst pleasures are purely spiritual: the pleasure of putting other people in the wrong, of bossing and patronising and spoiling sport, and back-biting, the pleasures of power, of hatred. For there are two things inside me, competing with the human self which I must try to become. They are the Animal self, and the Diabolical self. The Diabolical self is the worse of the two. That is why a cold, self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute.
–C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
At the conference I attended in Sydney recently one of the stimulating conversations I enjoyed was around ways to present Bible commentary in a digital medium for non-specialist readers in the 21st C. The Amos – Hypertext Bible Commentary was already beginning to show its age even when it was first published in a stable peer-reviewed edition.
[The pictures and other design elements were planned for a 800×600 screen, and mobile phones were not considered as a delivery system.]
Move forward a decade and responsive design (that will work on both hires screens and on portable devices) seems basic, and indeed one must envisage mobile devices as most likely the hardware of choice for accessing such a work.
This leads to the interesting possibility of packaging the commentaries as apps, and thus potentially breaks the funding barrier. Few people in the developed world or even middle class people elsewhere would balk at spending a couple of dollars for a Bible commentary.
The other interesting idea came from a presentation on visualising biblical studies ideas, and the thought that it would be nice to have a drill down menu that worked a bit like Prezi.
I like the idea, but am having trouble “seeing” how it might work. The Prezi below is my attempt to play with this concept… What advantages, disadvantages, alternatives, possibilities etc. do you see?
The indefatigable Jim West pointed to this fascinating announcement from De Gruyter. Publoris like “ordinary” self-publishing services like Lulu offers a basic service with choices for the level of editorial involvement. Thus far nothing new. Except that in some sense this venture carries the imprimatur of De Gruyter, though not their editorial or peer review. Will such works offer their authors academic credit?
At first sight the answer is clear. They will not. And yet, if the involvement of De Gruyter is sufficient to attract some good work, and if these works get reviewed in serious journals, they will gain academic credit for their authors. (At least in the NZ Performance Based Research Funding assessments, the academic evaluation of research outputs I am most familiar with, reviews and such measures “count” for more in the long term than publishing with a prestigious house.)
Hence my title. Is academic self-publishing really a contradiction in terms, or a return to an earlier (purer?) form of academic publishing. Already we have “patrons” paying for the publication of works (if only authors’ institutions) why not a return to the “good old days” of self-publishing?
How does this look from where you work? Do you think the De Gruyter name has sufficient “clout” to get the library sales and reviews self-published works will need? Or has De G merely opened a vanity press more obviously and explicitly than others have yet done?
In the circles I move in it often seems to be assumed that Gay Christians (at least the ones who do not agree to “settle” for celebacy, nor “recognise” that God “must” be calling them to celebacy – and who consequently support gay marriage) “must” be soft on Scripture.
I have recently been following Allan Hooker’s blog while I never agree with everything anyone says (not even myself) I find much that he writes makes sense, and he seems to care deeply about reading Scripture in faith and not merely “against the grain”. In this he reminds me of some of the Feminist biblical scholars who influenced my Bible reading most a few decades ago.
Whatever your attitude to the questions around Scripture and sexuality I recommend his blog. (His most recent post, as I write this, is on Genesis 1 )
Being invited to give the 22nd Annual William Menzies Lectureship (five lectures) and Asia Pacific Theological Seminary’s agreement that I could tackle the title “God as Mother?” was an honour and also a privilege (that they agreed despite some hesitations over the topic. Spending time in Baguio, in the Philippines, was great fun. It is a beautiful place, but even more conversations with staff and students over meals and during breaks, as well as listening to the other papers, was stimulating and encouraging.
Now the lectures have been published as:
“God as Mother? Ideas to clarify before we start,” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies, 17,2, 2014,107-118.
“Biblical Talk of the Motherly God,” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies, 17,2, 2014, 119-137.
“Jesus and the Father,” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies, 17,2, 2014, 139-150.
“Speaking the Unspeakable: nearly 1,500 years of Christian Theology and Worship,” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies, 17,2, 2014, 151-161.
“Experiencing God as Motherly,” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies, 17,2, 2014, 168-170.