i have a PhD, i made an 18 page list of resources about why AI sucks: docs.google.com/document/d/1...

Cover for _Modeling Religious Pluralism_. White cover, blue text. Edited by Simran Jeet Singh.

new book alert! at an affordable $26, it’s a volume with a ToC to die for, spearheaded by @simranjeetsingh.bsky.social

preorders here: global.oup.com/academic/pro...

Keep an eye out for Dr. Hanna Tervanotko’s new book, Signs and Meanings: Divination and the Production of Knowledge in Jewish Antiquity, which comes out later this year with University of California Press!

www.ucpress.edu/books/signs-...

Image of a book entitled End Times Fascism - and the fight for the living world. A wide burst on a yellow background with red letters.

One year after our original Guardian essay, Naomi Klein and I are excited to reveal the North American cover of our forthcoming book END TIMES FASCISM - and the Fight for the Living World. It will be on bookshelves on September 15th and is available for pre-order. More details below. bit.ly/4cbLfEr

AI overly affirms users asking for personal advice Not only are AIs far more agreeable than humans when advising on interpersonal matters, but users also prefer the sycophantic models.

A Stanford University study tested 11 major Al systems, and found *all of them* show high levels of overly agreeable, flattering behavior.

This creates a feedback loop: users like being affirmed → developers train Al to validate → Al gets even better at flattering at the expense of truth

April 2026 A trans Christian’s case against tech-bro transhumanism.

The April issue of Sojourners magazine' is live! Read it here:
sojo.net/magazine/apr...

NASA's Blue Marble picture of Earth, from 1972

It's only worth going back to the Moon if it makes us look properly again at Earth, and appreciate how beautiful, precious and fragile what we have here is. The most famous images from Apollo aren't about the Moon - they're pictures of Earth. We need to stop taking our home for granted.

Pop star Bad Bunny needed a Puerto Rican history scholar. UW–Madison had just the one. Bad Bunny collaborated with UW–Madison history professor Jorell Meléndez-Badillo on Puerto Rican narratives that accompany the new album “DeBÍ TiRAR MáS FOToS.”

Not at all surprised to learn that Bad Bunny has a historical adviser. His halftime show was a reminder that our history and culture are deeply intertwined with the rest of the western hemisphere. We should think of his performance as part of #America250. #SuperBowl
news.wisc.edu/pop-star-bad...

Okay the only thing I’ll say about the Compact article is field specific: the trope of “traditional” military history vs. “woke” critical theory needs to die.

How could we even write about the Roman military w/o addressing colonization, empire, masculinity, trauma, ethnicity?

Paul within Paganism: Restoring the Mediterranean Context to the Apostle Leading and rising scholars introduce a burgeoning new approach to the study of Paul, which situates the Jewish apostle to gentiles within the wider world of ancient Mediterranean religion.

It also appears in the offshoot from the PWJ school known as Paul Within Paganism (PWP). Adam's analysis would lead one to think that PWP must be somehow at odds with PWJ, but in fact these are two complementary programs of analysis. Many scholars overlap. www.fortresspress.com/store/produc...

19) Although NL laid out some important details about Pauline scholarship, I am not convinced by her main ideas and have several questions about BW's book. In my view, GF offers a more helpful and fruitful approach. Obviously, scholars still need to unpack many aspects of these recent studies.

NL's answer: Pauline letters are not as simple as other ancient (real?) letters, and they have an agenda that assumes (and wants to spread) Christ faith (that's why she also thinks they are later than Acts).

18) Someone from the audience asked NL to identify one ancient literary work (a letter) that she thought could reasonably be "authenticated" (from a real, historical person?), then note its characteristics and which of these characteristics were lacking in relation to Pauline letters.

17) BW points to different tensions between NL and GF: while NL argues that the practice of authenticity (i.e., “authenticating Paul’s letters”) begins in the Enlightenment, GF argues for a longer history of this practice.

NL leaves BW’s question regarding Marcion aside but asks: “Why treat Paul so uniquely from other biblical characters?”

16) NL argues that Seneca is a different case because he was a political figure known from various sources. In contrast, Paul is a biblical figure (known not from simple letters, but from complex, theologically driven letters).

15) NL thinks there is no authentic Pauline book, only a Marcionite book about Paul. BW argues that NL has a “more rigorous epistemological model for Paul than for Marcion.”

14) Margaret Mitchell (from the audience/Q&A) emphasizes that there is no “real Paul.” This language is not useful. Instead, there are different constructions of Paul: historical Paul, historical epistolary Paul, canonical Paul, pseudepigraphic Paul, etc. Panellists agree and adjust the language.

13) BW questions GF’s view that some “real Paul” wrote letters: “Which of the letters do you think originated from Paul? How?”

12) BW argues that “the hegemony of seven Pauline letters ought to be thrown off.” He adds that we need “more descriptive and less prescriptive approaches.”

NL asks BW: “Is it necessary to have a historical Paul?” Yet, she agrees with the criticism against the practice of authenticating Paul (i.e., “the politics of authenticity”).

11) NL questions BW’s view that the second-century reception of Paul is closer to the historical Paul: aren’t they more removed from a (supposed) historical Paul? She argues that it is hard to conceive Paul without resorting to literature we consider fictive.

10) GF is surprised by Livesey’s confidence regarding a Marcion school.

9) GF asks NL about chronological order while also adding: “Seneca, a forgery too?” BW also asks Livesey: “What about Seneca’s Moral Epistles?”

8) N. Livesey (NL) thinks that Paul is fully a construction—not a historical figure, only a biblical character.

He imagines: “Where do we get all this information about Paul in the 2nd century? I imagine people talking about Paul (e.g., collective memory, oral tradition // historical Jesus studies).”

BW thinks that the 2nd c. is a better place to start rather than with Luther or FC Baur. He further argues that Pauline studies should become more confident in exploring the 2nd century.

7) BW thinks that the evidence for a historical Paul is strong, even if he doesn’t believe that a historical Paul is necessary. He argues that the search for a historical Paul should focus on the 2nd century (on that early tradition).

6) G. Fewster (GF) thinks there was some [historical] Paul who wrote letters.