Abstract This article explores Ayako Miura’s Deiryū Chitai [“Mudflow Zone”] as a case study of the reception of the story of Job in Japanese literature. Despite the absence of righteous suffering as a theme, and its structural dissimilarity from the biblical book, this work should be read as a Joban adaptation where personal suffering is replaced by systemic suffering, and personal righteousness by social justice. Miura’s Job is the patient Job of the New Testament (Jas 5:11), but this Job, while accepting his lot in life without complaining, does not turn a blind eye to injustice around him. Miura’s message is that, in the face of one’s own suffering, whatever the cause, a Christian must not forget to love one’s neighbor. Not only does the story depict the struggle of a destitute man who, out of unconditional love, never gives up trying to rescue a victim of social injustice, but it also extols the lives of those who transform themselves to become serviceable and restore justice in the world. Set against the Exodus story of bondage and liberation, the work bespeaks the transformative power of a Christian life.
{"title":"On the Banks of Muddy Waters: Ayako Miura’s Soulful Adaptation of the Story of Job","authors":"S. Takagi","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2020-0020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2020-0020","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores Ayako Miura’s Deiryū Chitai [“Mudflow Zone”] as a case study of the reception of the story of Job in Japanese literature. Despite the absence of righteous suffering as a theme, and its structural dissimilarity from the biblical book, this work should be read as a Joban adaptation where personal suffering is replaced by systemic suffering, and personal righteousness by social justice. Miura’s Job is the patient Job of the New Testament (Jas 5:11), but this Job, while accepting his lot in life without complaining, does not turn a blind eye to injustice around him. Miura’s message is that, in the face of one’s own suffering, whatever the cause, a Christian must not forget to love one’s neighbor. Not only does the story depict the struggle of a destitute man who, out of unconditional love, never gives up trying to rescue a victim of social injustice, but it also extols the lives of those who transform themselves to become serviceable and restore justice in the world. Set against the Exodus story of bondage and liberation, the work bespeaks the transformative power of a Christian life.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88817279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Joseph Smith’s interpretation of the Lukan agony in the garden fits with Anglophone Protestant commentaries that were popular during his day. In the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C), the Lukan sweat-like-blood simile is understood as if literal, and Jesus atones in Gethsemane. This was standard fare in exegesis in England and America in the late 1600s, 1700s, and early 1800s. What Smith did was re-cast common interpretation as prophetic and dominical while probably defending the verses, known to be absent from the other Gospels and sometimes suspected to be an interpolation into Luke. On the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, he had an ancient Amerindian prophet-king named Benjamin predict Jesus’ hemorrhage more than a hundred years in advance, and he had none other than the risen Christ verify it in a direct revelation in D&C 19. These references to Luke 22:43–44 in Smith’s extra-biblical writings have created a further apologetic imperative to defend his defense of the Bible, one reason for the LDS Church’s King James Version onlyism.
{"title":"Luke 22:43-44 and the Mormon Jesus: Protestant Past, KJV-Only Present","authors":"Grant Adamson","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-0016","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Joseph Smith’s interpretation of the Lukan agony in the garden fits with Anglophone Protestant commentaries that were popular during his day. In the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C), the Lukan sweat-like-blood simile is understood as if literal, and Jesus atones in Gethsemane. This was standard fare in exegesis in England and America in the late 1600s, 1700s, and early 1800s. What Smith did was re-cast common interpretation as prophetic and dominical while probably defending the verses, known to be absent from the other Gospels and sometimes suspected to be an interpolation into Luke. On the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, he had an ancient Amerindian prophet-king named Benjamin predict Jesus’ hemorrhage more than a hundred years in advance, and he had none other than the risen Christ verify it in a direct revelation in D&C 19. These references to Luke 22:43–44 in Smith’s extra-biblical writings have created a further apologetic imperative to defend his defense of the Bible, one reason for the LDS Church’s King James Version onlyism.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83815235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The scriptural citations of early Christian theologians have often been enlisted in scholarly reconstructions concerning the development of the canon. The underlying assumption in many such reconstructions appears to have been that the frequent quotation of a writing indicates a corresponding level of authority for that writing. More recent scholarship has challenged this assumption by drawing attention to the specific rhetorical contexts in which scriptural quotations are employed. The current work contributes to this trajectory of research and the field of reception history more generally by considering citations of the Epistle to the Hebrews among the second- and third-century Christian writers who utilize the epistle most frequently, namely, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Clement, and Origen. The utilization of the Epistle to the Hebrews by these authors bears much greater resemblance, I argue, to the compositional and citational practices of their Greek predecessors than to the canon lists created by Christian theologians in the fourth century and beyond. The evaluation of these citations within the framework of later debates about canon, therefore, serves to flatten the diversity of approaches evident among the citations of Hebrews prior to the fourth century. Careful examination of citations from the Epistle to the Hebrews in the second and third centuries reveals that the various ways in which the document was quoted were frequently determined by the immediate rhetorical context in which those quotations were employed rather than by debates about the epistle’s authority.
{"title":"Quoting Before Canon: The Various Forms of Authority Attributed to the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Second and Third Century","authors":"David Young","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2020-0015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2020-0015","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The scriptural citations of early Christian theologians have often been enlisted in scholarly reconstructions concerning the development of the canon. The underlying assumption in many such reconstructions appears to have been that the frequent quotation of a writing indicates a corresponding level of authority for that writing. More recent scholarship has challenged this assumption by drawing attention to the specific rhetorical contexts in which scriptural quotations are employed. The current work contributes to this trajectory of research and the field of reception history more generally by considering citations of the Epistle to the Hebrews among the second- and third-century Christian writers who utilize the epistle most frequently, namely, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Clement, and Origen. The utilization of the Epistle to the Hebrews by these authors bears much greater resemblance, I argue, to the compositional and citational practices of their Greek predecessors than to the canon lists created by Christian theologians in the fourth century and beyond. The evaluation of these citations within the framework of later debates about canon, therefore, serves to flatten the diversity of approaches evident among the citations of Hebrews prior to the fourth century. Careful examination of citations from the Epistle to the Hebrews in the second and third centuries reveals that the various ways in which the document was quoted were frequently determined by the immediate rhetorical context in which those quotations were employed rather than by debates about the epistle’s authority.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82377350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1515/jbr-2021-frontmatter2
{"title":"Frontmatter","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-frontmatter2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-frontmatter2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85970160","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article examines the famous “city on a hill” sermon delivered by John Winthrop at the start of colonial Massachusetts Bay. It focuses on belief-formation, looking at how Winthrop reverse-engineered the covenant in two senses. First, he found a blueprint for a godly society in the Pentateuch. Moreover, scholars have missed Winthrop’s reversal of the covenant-formation process. In the Pentateuch, God approached Israel with a covenant offer—setting the terms of the agreement and setting the supernatural verification that the covenant was ratified. However, when Massachusetts Bay entered the covenant, Winthrop reversed the order: he approached God, he set the terms of the covenant and the standard of verification that God ratified the covenant. America’s “founding covenant,” though taken by many as a parallel with biblical Israel, is actually its opposite. In reverse-engineering the covenant based on the Pentateuch, Winthrop also altered the role of God and his people. One of the benefits flowing from covenant obedience, Winthrop argued, would be victory in battle against Native Americans.
{"title":"Reverse-Engineering the Covenant: Moses, Massachusetts Bay and the Construction of a City on a Hill","authors":"M. Rowley","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-0012","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the famous “city on a hill” sermon delivered by John Winthrop at the start of colonial Massachusetts Bay. It focuses on belief-formation, looking at how Winthrop reverse-engineered the covenant in two senses. First, he found a blueprint for a godly society in the Pentateuch. Moreover, scholars have missed Winthrop’s reversal of the covenant-formation process. In the Pentateuch, God approached Israel with a covenant offer—setting the terms of the agreement and setting the supernatural verification that the covenant was ratified. However, when Massachusetts Bay entered the covenant, Winthrop reversed the order: he approached God, he set the terms of the covenant and the standard of verification that God ratified the covenant. America’s “founding covenant,” though taken by many as a parallel with biblical Israel, is actually its opposite. In reverse-engineering the covenant based on the Pentateuch, Winthrop also altered the role of God and his people. One of the benefits flowing from covenant obedience, Winthrop argued, would be victory in battle against Native Americans.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89221953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article examines differences within the theological basis of early nineteenth-century Prussian conservatism. By exploring the usage of the Old Testament in the writings of conservative thought leaders Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach, and Friedrich Julius Stahl, this article contributes to scholarship of both traditions of biblical interpretation and that of the relation of theology and political theory. The focus of this article centers on three concepts of the Old Testament and their implementation in conservative political doctrine. I will discuss Hengstenberg’s concept of biblical historicity and unity of Scripture, Gerlach’s use of the Old Testament as the source of a role model for just religious wars and a theocratic concept of law, as well as Stahl’s bible-based political philosophy of history and the resulting model of political order. Thus, the basis for different, resulting concepts of church, state, and nation that were merged into an overall religion-based political conservative doctrine in pre-1848 Prussia are analyzed.
{"title":"Creation, Fall and Political Order — Prussian Conservatism and the Old Testament","authors":"Laura C. Achtelstetter","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-0009","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines differences within the theological basis of early nineteenth-century Prussian conservatism. By exploring the usage of the Old Testament in the writings of conservative thought leaders Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg, Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach, and Friedrich Julius Stahl, this article contributes to scholarship of both traditions of biblical interpretation and that of the relation of theology and political theory. The focus of this article centers on three concepts of the Old Testament and their implementation in conservative political doctrine. I will discuss Hengstenberg’s concept of biblical historicity and unity of Scripture, Gerlach’s use of the Old Testament as the source of a role model for just religious wars and a theocratic concept of law, as well as Stahl’s bible-based political philosophy of history and the resulting model of political order. Thus, the basis for different, resulting concepts of church, state, and nation that were merged into an overall religion-based political conservative doctrine in pre-1848 Prussia are analyzed.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74422394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Understandings of the new American nation as a “Second Israel,” and a prevalent political discourse devoted to the narratives of the Old Testament, were a distinct trait of the early United States. Indeed, the images and narratives of the Old Testament were as common in the formative decades of the United States, in the words of the great historian Perry Miller, as “the air that the people breathed.” This attachment to the Old Testament, and the fact that American nationalism and twentieth century Zionism crystalized around the biblical history of the Israelites, bears considerably on the relationship of the two nations. The “special” bond between the modern countries, which is commonly understood in terms of pragmatism, interests, and shared ideologies, thus rests on a deep cultural connection. The American public’s consistent backing of the State of Israel (one that far surpasses the constituency of evangelical Christian Zionists), which politically translates into a robust, lasting and bi-partisan support that defies the arithmetic of appeals to Jewish voters (or donors) seems puzzling at times. It becomes more intelligible in light of the centuries-long tradition of American public speech describing the nation as a new incarnation of biblical Israel. This usable biblical past, which continues to influence American culture in meaningful ways, adds an important dimension for our understanding of the “special relationship” between the United States and Israel.
{"title":"The Old and the New Israel: The Cultural Origins of the Special Relationship","authors":"E. Shalev","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-0006","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Understandings of the new American nation as a “Second Israel,” and a prevalent political discourse devoted to the narratives of the Old Testament, were a distinct trait of the early United States. Indeed, the images and narratives of the Old Testament were as common in the formative decades of the United States, in the words of the great historian Perry Miller, as “the air that the people breathed.” This attachment to the Old Testament, and the fact that American nationalism and twentieth century Zionism crystalized around the biblical history of the Israelites, bears considerably on the relationship of the two nations. The “special” bond between the modern countries, which is commonly understood in terms of pragmatism, interests, and shared ideologies, thus rests on a deep cultural connection. The American public’s consistent backing of the State of Israel (one that far surpasses the constituency of evangelical Christian Zionists), which politically translates into a robust, lasting and bi-partisan support that defies the arithmetic of appeals to Jewish voters (or donors) seems puzzling at times. It becomes more intelligible in light of the centuries-long tradition of American public speech describing the nation as a new incarnation of biblical Israel. This usable biblical past, which continues to influence American culture in meaningful ways, adds an important dimension for our understanding of the “special relationship” between the United States and Israel.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83661103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article discusses the co-evolution of nationalism and Protestantism in the course of the sixteenth century in England; the influence of the Hebrew Bible’s concept of “the people of Israel” as a community of fundamentally equal members on the emerging English national consciousness (the first national consciousness to develop, in turn influencing all subsequent nationalisms); and the reinterpretation of the core passages of the Hebrew Bible, in English translations up to the King James version, in terms of the emerging national consciousness. Completely independent at their historical sources, nationalism and Protestantism reinforced each other in the crucial English case through the translation of the Hebrew Bible. This, on the one hand, nationalized Protestantism in England and, on the other, led to the incorporation of the biblical concept of the people of God in the new, secular concept of nation.
{"title":"Old Testament and Nationalism: Hebrew Bible, Jewish People, English Nation","authors":"Liah Greenfeld","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-0007","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article discusses the co-evolution of nationalism and Protestantism in the course of the sixteenth century in England; the influence of the Hebrew Bible’s concept of “the people of Israel” as a community of fundamentally equal members on the emerging English national consciousness (the first national consciousness to develop, in turn influencing all subsequent nationalisms); and the reinterpretation of the core passages of the Hebrew Bible, in English translations up to the King James version, in terms of the emerging national consciousness. Completely independent at their historical sources, nationalism and Protestantism reinforced each other in the crucial English case through the translation of the Hebrew Bible. This, on the one hand, nationalized Protestantism in England and, on the other, led to the incorporation of the biblical concept of the people of God in the new, secular concept of nation.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86930873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract As an originally political term, study of the concept of “covenant” has long demonstrated the intersection of biblical studies and political theory. In recent decades, the association between covenant and constitution has come to the forefront of modern political thought in attempts to find the origins of certain democratic ideals in the descriptions of biblical Israel, in order to garner either religious or cultural authority. This is exemplified in the claims of Daniel J. Elazar that the first conceptual seeds of American federalism are found in the covenants of the Hebrew Bible. Taking Elazar’s work as a starting and end point, this paper applies contemporary biblical scholarship to his definition of biblical covenant in order to reveal the influences of his own American political environment and that of the interpreters he is dependent upon. The notion that biblical covenant or its interpretation remains a monolithic or static concept is overturned by a survey of the diverse receptions of covenant in the history of biblical scholarship from the late 19th to the late 20th centuries, contrasting American and German interpretive trends. As such, I aim to highlight the reciprocal relationship between religion and politics, and the academic study of both, in order to challenge the claim that modern political thought can be traced back to biblical conceptions.
作为一个原本的政治术语，对“约”概念的研究长期以来一直显示出圣经研究与政治理论的交集。近几十年来，契约和宪法之间的联系已经成为现代政治思想的前沿，试图在圣经以色列的描述中找到某些民主理想的起源，以获得宗教或文化权威。丹尼尔·j·伊拉萨尔(Daniel J. Elazar)声称，美国联邦制的第一个概念种子是在希伯来圣经的契约中发现的，这就是例证。本文以以拉撒的著作为起点和终点，运用当代圣经学者的观点来分析他对圣经契约的定义，以揭示他所处的美国政治环境以及他所依赖的诠释者对他的影响。《圣经》的契约或其解释仍然是一个单一的或静态的概念，这一观点被一项调查所推翻，这项调查调查了从19世纪末到20世纪后期圣经学术历史中对契约的不同接受，对比了美国和德国的解释趋势。因此，我的目的是强调宗教与政治之间的相互关系，以及对两者的学术研究，以挑战现代政治思想可以追溯到圣经概念的说法。
{"title":"“We the People of Israel”: Covenant, Constitution, and the Supposed Biblical Origins of Modern Democratic Political Thought","authors":"Sophia Johnson","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-0005","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As an originally political term, study of the concept of “covenant” has long demonstrated the intersection of biblical studies and political theory. In recent decades, the association between covenant and constitution has come to the forefront of modern political thought in attempts to find the origins of certain democratic ideals in the descriptions of biblical Israel, in order to garner either religious or cultural authority. This is exemplified in the claims of Daniel J. Elazar that the first conceptual seeds of American federalism are found in the covenants of the Hebrew Bible. Taking Elazar’s work as a starting and end point, this paper applies contemporary biblical scholarship to his definition of biblical covenant in order to reveal the influences of his own American political environment and that of the interpreters he is dependent upon. The notion that biblical covenant or its interpretation remains a monolithic or static concept is overturned by a survey of the diverse receptions of covenant in the history of biblical scholarship from the late 19th to the late 20th centuries, contrasting American and German interpretive trends. As such, I aim to highlight the reciprocal relationship between religion and politics, and the academic study of both, in order to challenge the claim that modern political thought can be traced back to biblical conceptions.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73805247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This issue draws attention to the importance of Old Testament scholarship to conceptions of nationhood in Protestant political thought. Inclusive of biblical studies, history, theology, and political thought, this issue discusses hermeneutical as well as political tensions that are inherent to the reception of the Old Testament within political theology. These tensions primarily concerned the role of covenant, reason and the natural order, spilling into what would be recognized today as supersessionism, antisemitism and in some cases, even racism. Within that, it remains important to distinguish political contexts as the historical role of Protestant traditions and their current significance to right-wing uses of biblical imaginaries of the nation differs between Germany, the Netherlands as well as Anglo-American countries.
{"title":"Old Testament Imaginaries of the Nation in German, Dutch, and Anglo-American Protestant Political Thought","authors":"S. Johnson, Mariëtta Van der Tol","doi":"10.1515/jbr-2021-0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2021-0025","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This issue draws attention to the importance of Old Testament scholarship to conceptions of nationhood in Protestant political thought. Inclusive of biblical studies, history, theology, and political thought, this issue discusses hermeneutical as well as political tensions that are inherent to the reception of the Old Testament within political theology. These tensions primarily concerned the role of covenant, reason and the natural order, spilling into what would be recognized today as supersessionism, antisemitism and in some cases, even racism. Within that, it remains important to distinguish political contexts as the historical role of Protestant traditions and their current significance to right-wing uses of biblical imaginaries of the nation differs between Germany, the Netherlands as well as Anglo-American countries.","PeriodicalId":17249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Bible and its Reception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73217834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：