And in discussing obscure matters that are far removed from our eyes and our experience, which are patient of various explanations that do not contradict the faith we are imbued with, let us never, if we read anything on them in the divine scriptures, throw ourselves head over heels into the headstrong assertion of any one of them. Perhaps the truth, emerging from a more thorough discussion of the point, may definitively overturn that opinion, and then we will find ourselves overthrown, championing what is not the cause of the divine scriptures but our own, in such a way that we want it to be that of the scriptures, when we should rather be wanting the cause of the scriptures to be our own.

— Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis, 1.18.37; trans. E. Hill, 1990

Last month, the Bible and Interpretation website published an op-ed piece in which Roland Boer comes out ‘against “reception history”’ (and, implicitly, the Blackwell Bible Commentaries series for popularizing the term; see footnote 1). Ironically, the occasion for this criticism seems to be Boer’s completion of Cave Droppings: Nick Cave and Religion (to be published by Equinox in 2012), a book that those of us involved in the Blackwell Bible Commentaries might consider an exercise in reception history to the extent that ‘Cave has written novels, plays, poetry and, above all, music which often engages with the Bible in creative ways’ (Boer). Whence the disconnect between Boer’s attention to ‘Nick Cave and his interpretations of the Bible’ and his stance ‘against “reception history”’?

Read the rest on the Blackwell Bible Commentaries website.

Ever heard somebody claim that Christianity is largely to blame for sexism, or at least has done nothing to oppose it? While many Christians and institutional churches have certainly engaged in more than their share of sexist behavior, a strong tradition of Christian egalitarianism runs deep. Consider Clement of Alexandria:

Let us understand that the same virtue pertains to men and women. For if there is one God for both, there is also one Pedagogue for both. One church, one self-restraint, one modesty, a common food, a common marriage bond, breath, sight, hearing, knowledge, hope, obedience, love, all are alike. Those who have life in common, grace in common, and indeed salvation in common also have virtue and a way of life in common. … Therefore also the name “human” is common to men and women.

— Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 6.100.2–3, trans. Roberts and Donaldson, quoted from Nonna Verna Harrison, God’s Many-Splendored Image (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2010)

Clement was not, of course, an egalitarian in the modern sense—he probably would have opposed the idea of a female bishop, for example—but theological understandings like his laid the foundations that would eventually lead to modern gender egalitarianism.

Some scholars—Michael Fishbane is probably the one who first springs to mind—use the term “inner-biblical exegesis” to describe a biblical passage’s allusions to or outright interpretation of another biblical passage. It turns out, however, that identifying when “inner-biblical exegesis” has happened is trickier than you might think. Consider, for example, James 5:11, “You have heard of the endurance of Job, and you have seen the purpose of the Lord, how the Lord is compassionate and merciful.” Has James actually read the book of Job? Have the recipients of his letter, whom James says have heard of Job, actually read the book of Job? Have they heard the book of Job read to them, or have they had the story of Job told to them? I don’t know that James 5:11 gives us enough data to know—but anyone who has attended Sunday school and then grown up to read the Bible for himself or herself understands this distinction.

In Traditions at Odds: The Reception of the Pentateuch in Biblical and Second Temple Period Literature (New York and London: Clark, 2010), John Choi addresses himself to this question with regard to “the echo of Pentateuchal elements in non-pentateuchal texts,” as he puts it (p. vii). Choi’s study is meticulous and his thesis is provocative. This post offers more content »

Higgaion readers may already know that my current scholarly project is writing Genesis 1–21 through the Centuries for the Blackwell Bible Commentaries series. Fewer people know—well, until right now, at any rate—that I have recently also taken up the responsibility for maintaining the Blackwell Bible Commentaries website. We’ve recently “rebooted” the site by converting it from static HTML pages to a WordPress-powered site. I hope that this will generate increased content postings by series authors; I know that it will make my behind-the-scenes job of maintaining the site considerably easier.

If you’re at all interested in the reception history of the Bible, pay a visit to the site, and add our news feed to your favorite RSS reader. If you don’t know what reception history is, start with the essays on the “Reception History” page.