scholarly journals ‘What is Language but a Sound We Christen?’ Poetic Retellings as an Improper Surprise for Biblical Reception History

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 248-271
Author(s):  
Samuel Tongue
Keyword(s):  
Cultural History ◽  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Reception History ◽  
Biblical Text ◽  
Historical Interpretation ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
Critical Scholarship ◽  
Literary Space ◽  
History Of ◽  
Historical Practices

Although overtly poetic interaction with biblical material has often been deemed beyond the pale in critical biblical scholarship, much work in reception history now positions such literature as part of the afterlife of a biblical text. While this is a welcome turn, this article argues that acts of poetic biblical retelling and recycling are more disruptive, troubling the ways in which critical scholarship operates. Utilising Timothy Beal’s thinking around the ‘cultural history of scripture’ and analysing Roland Boer’s sceptical attitude toward reception-historical practices, the first section teases out the nuances of how certain modes of biblical interpretation are deemed primary (and thus more legitimate) and others secondary (and thus anachronistic).
As such, the second section introduces poetic retellings of biblical material that foreground how poetry is a literary space where knowledge is articulated in particularly performative idioms. Reading poems from Kei Miller and Michael Symmons Roberts that appropriate biblical material, this analysis demonstrates that the poetic retelling of biblical material is an act of writing that refuses secondary status and cannot be simplistically yoked to traditional modes of exegesis. In this way, poetry problematizes the originary-secondary binary in reception-historical interpretation and, at the same time, recasts historical-critical exegesis as another form of ‘supplemental’ writing. This opens up the discipline to rethink some of its most protected interpretative paradigms and engage more fully with other forms of biblical ‘supplement’ across the disciplines.


Reception History and Beyond: Toward the Cultural History of Scriptures

2011 ◽  
Vol 19 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 357-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Beal
Keyword(s):  
Cultural History ◽  
Cultural Production ◽  
Reception History ◽  
Religious Studies ◽  
Historical Approach ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
History Of ◽  
Biblical Texts ◽  
Cultural Turn

After highlighting the substantial gains made by the reception historical approach, this article proceeds to point out some of its inherent limitations, particularly when applied to biblical texts. In attending to the material-aesthetic dimensions of biblical texts, media, and ideas of the Bible, especially in dialogue with anthropological, material-historical, and media-historical approaches, these limitations become acute and call for a harder cultural turn than is possible from a strictly reception-historical approach. This article proposes to move beyond reception history to cultural history, from research into how biblical texts and the Bible itself are received to how they are culturally produced as discursive objects. Such a move would involve a double turn in the focus of biblical scholarship and interpretation: from hermeneutical reception to cultural production, and from interpreting scripture via culture to interpreting culture, especially religious culture, via its productions of scripture. As such, it would bring biblical research into fuller and more significant dialogue with other fields of comparative scriptural studies, religious studies, and the academic humanities and social sciences in general.

Reception History and the Interpretation of Revelation

2020 ◽  
pp. 375-393
Author(s):  
Ian Boxall
Keyword(s):  
Visual Art ◽  
Textual Criticism ◽  
Reception History ◽  
Biblical Text ◽  
Music Drama ◽  
History Of Interpretation ◽  
History Of ◽  
Biblical Texts

The chapter describes the discipline of reception history as the study of the ongoing use, interpretation, and impact of a biblical text. If the history of interpretation has often focused on the ways biblical texts are understood in commentaries and theological writings, reception history also considers how a book was received in spirituality and worship, in music, drama, literature, visual art, and textual criticism. Criteria for selecting and organizing materials useful for reception history are discussed, and there is a review of recent attempts to provide broad overviews of Revelation’s reception history, along with specific examples of the value of the discipline for interpreting Revelation.

Reception Theory, H. R. Jauss and the Formative Power of Scripture

2012 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony C. Thiselton
Keyword(s):  
Reader Response ◽  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Reception History ◽  
The Self ◽  
Reception Theory ◽  
1 Corinthians ◽  
Reader Response Theory ◽  
The Bible ◽  
History Of ◽  
Hans Georg Gadamer

AbstractFormation constitutes the key link between reception theory, Jauss and scripture. The Bible shapes readers by showing them what lies beyond the self. Hans Robert Jauss (1921–97) remains the effective founder of reception theory or reception history. He was a literary theorist, who specialised in romance literature. Following Hans-Georg Gadamer, he insisted that texts carry ‘a still unfinished meaning’, and focused on their historical influence. The exposition of how communities or thinkers have received texts includes de-familiarisation; sometimes the ‘completion’ of meaning, as in much reader-response theory; and instances of when a text ‘satisfies, surpasses, disappoints, or refutes the expectations’ of readers. Reception theory can often trace continuity in the reception of texts, as well as disjunctions, reversals and surprises. It offers a more disciplined approach to scripture than most reader-response theories. Clearly horizons of expectation play a major role in the interpretation of biblical texts. I suggest six direct parallels with biblical interpretation. (1) Like Francis Watson and others, Jauss rejects any value-neutral objectivism in interpretation. (2) The readers’ horizon of expectation derives partly from earlier readings of the text. (3) Horizons can move and change, and thus transform readers as these change. (4) Biblical genres display all of Jauss’ accounts of the responses of readers. For example, parables of reversal may surpass what the Christian believer expects, or disappoint the unbeliever. (5) Like Gadamer, Jauss emphasises the importance of formulating constructive questions in approaching texts. (6) Jauss’ ‘levels of reading’ correspond closely with Bakhtin's notion of polyphony. I compare Ormond Rush's work on reception and otherness, and Luther's insistence that the Bible often confronts us as our adversary to judge and to transform us. Finally, we illustrate the history of reception from Ulrich Luz on Matthew, from Childs on Exodus, and from my commentaries on 1 Corinthians and 1 and 2 Thessalonians.

A Century in the Making: Receiving the Samaritan Pentecost (Acts 8:4–25) in the Pentecostal and Charismatic Traditions

Pneuma ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-198
Author(s):  
Martin W. Mittelstadt
Keyword(s):  
Family History ◽  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Reception History ◽  
History Of

Abstract In this address, I outline a history of pentecostal/charismatic reception. I explore different ways that pentecostal/charismatic believers have received, appropriated, and used Acts 8 throughout our history. I propose that a reception of more than one hundred years of pentecostal musings over Acts 8 provides a snapshot of our extended pentecostal family. I suggest up front that this family history exposes pentecostal/charismatic notions about the nature of biblical interpretation. I conclude with general observations from my research and suggest further implications for students and scholars interested in reception history.

scholarly journals Making the States’ Translation (1637): Orthodox Calvinist Biblical Criticism in the Dutch Republic

2017 ◽  
Vol 110 (3) ◽  
pp. 440-463
Author(s):  
Dirk van Miert
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Thomas Hobbes ◽  
Dutch Republic ◽  
Biblical Text ◽  
Biblical Criticism ◽  
New Science ◽  
The Past ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
History Of

In the study of the history of biblical scholarship, there has been a tendency among historians to emphasize biblical philology as a force which, together with the new philosophy and the new science of the seventeenth century, caused the erosion of universal scriptural authority from the mid-seventeenth century onwards. A case in point is Jonathan Israel's impressive account of how biblical criticism in the hands of Spinoza paved the way for the Enlightenment. Others who have argued for a post-Spinozist rise of biblical criticism include Frank Manuel, Adam Sutcliffe, and Travis Frampton. These scholars have built upon longer standing interpretations such as those of Hugh Trevor-Roper and Paul Hazard. However, scholars in the past two decades such as Anthony Grafton, Scott Mandelbrote and Jean-Louis Quantin have altered the picture of an exegetical revolution inaugurated by Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), Spinoza (1632–1677), and Richard Simon (1638–1712). These heterodox philosophers in fact relied on philological research that had been largely developed in the first half of the seventeenth century. Moreover, such research was carried out by scholars who had no subversive agenda. This is to say that the importance attached to a historical and philological approach to the biblical text had a cross-confessional appeal, not just a radical-political one.

Exploring Metaphors for the Reception History of the Lord’s Prayer

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-65
Author(s):  
David Clark
Keyword(s):  
Jesus Christ ◽  
Reception History ◽  
Historical Consciousness ◽  
Original Form ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Biblical Text ◽  
Lord's Prayer ◽  
History Of ◽  
Entire History ◽  
Biblical Texts

AbstractIn his work Nomadic Text: A Theory of Biblical Reception History, Brennan Breed argues that texts are nomads which – existing without original form and without original context – have no homeland to claim as their own. Their entire history has been marked by unpredictable movement and variation. He therefore proposes that the study of reception history should primarily be an exploration of the potentiality of textual meanings. The suggestion that meaning progresses without relationship to hermeneutical antecedents, however, runs contrary to Gadamer’s assertion that the contemporary effect (Wirkung) of a text always exists in unity with its historical effects. Following Gadamer, the reception historian may still explore hermeneutical potentiality – but does so with a sense of historical consciousness. In this light, the nature of a biblical text may be more suitably characterized by the metaphor of an emigrant rather than that of a nomad. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the usefulness of these divergent metaphors in our attempt to define both the nature of biblical texts and the task of the reception historian. Our test case will be the early interpretation history of the Lord’s Prayer. Given that the original form and context of this prayer are irretrievable, Breed’s theory is applicable in many respects. Yet it will also be seen that in the early reception history of the Lord’s Prayer there are also patterns of synchronic continuity. Amidst diverse agendas of theology and praxis, we find that interpretations of the Lord’s Prayer were consistently rooted in an inherited conceptualization of Jesus Christ – what we will call a canonical remembrance of his life and proclamation.

scholarly journals Die Bybel: Teks en ondermyning

2003 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip J. Nel
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Reception History ◽  
Biblical Text ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Religious Text ◽  
History Of

The Bible: Text and subversionThis article explores both the subversive dimension of the biblical text, in particular the Old Testament, as the ramifications thereof for the concept of a religious text. It argues that interpretation has been historically and fundamentally part and parcel of the genesis and reception history of the biblical text. The texts of Job and Jonah have been chosen for their explicit subversive strategies. The article shows that if the biblical text exploits strategies of subversion, it also contravenes the traditional opinion subscribing to a referential meaning of texts. A subversive text cannot simultaneously deny and confirm a constant (fixed) and an immutable reality. The article argues that biblical scholars should reconsider other perceptions of the religious text to avoid the destructive criticism of referential meaning in postmodern studies. One option to be considered is the view of a text as performative communication.

Returning To China: Biblical Interpretation in Postcolonial Hong Kong

1999 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Archie C.C. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Biblical Studies ◽  
Colonial Rule ◽  
Biblical Text ◽  
Hybrid Identity ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
British Colonial ◽  
New Framework

AbstractThe paper aims to construct a new framework for biblical studies from the context of postcolonial Hong Kong. While present biblical scholarship has largely depended on historical-critical exegesis, biblical scholars of Asia have begun to conceive a different approach to the Bible, because of not only a new context of reading, but also a radically different cultural-political location of the reader. This location, as it is now being formulated, is a reading between East and West, between the dominant interpretation and scholarship of the formerly colonial and Western cultures and the newly arising consciousness of emerging postcolonial identities in the histories and cultures of Asia. After about some 150 years of British colonial rule, the identity of being a people of Hong Kong is highly hybridised. It is a hybrid identity of being cultural Chinese and yet pragmatically British, both a strong sense of identification with China and an unexplainable fear of being national Chinese. Such location of a reader transforms one's understanding of a biblical text such as Isaiah 56-66 and sheds a new light on the meaning of the return in some of its major passages.

scholarly journals Biblical Interpretation in the Russian Orthodox Church: An historical and hermeneutical perspective

2001 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 352-365
Author(s):  
A. Negrov
Keyword(s):  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Russian Orthodox ◽  
Orthodox Church ◽  
Biblical Hermeneutics ◽  
Russian Orthodox Church ◽  
Russian Orthodoxy ◽  
Biblical Scholarship ◽  
History Of ◽  
History Of Biblical Interpretation

for an understanding of biblical interpretation within the Russian Orthodox Church. Its purpose is not to advocate pro or contra Russian biblical scholarship, but to place the emphasis on the history of biblical interpretation in the Russian Orthodox Church and on Orthodox biblical hermeneutics. Two considerations are specifically pertinent to the study of this topic. First, the history of biblical interpretation is surveyed from a sole and specific perspective - from within a· historico-dogmatic development of the Russian Orthodox Church from the Kiev period of its history (9_13th century) till the Synodal period (1721-1917). Second, it is true that once originated, the Biblical Study in Russian Orthodoxy went its own way and developed its own fundamental principles of interpretation. Although many principles correlated and corresponded with general principles of biblical interpretation, in essence they form "Russian Orthodox Hermeneutics". This paper seeks to establish an outline of the essential elements of Orthodox biblical hermeneutics as they developed in the history of interpretation.

The Writings and Canon

2018 ◽  
pp. 462-472
Author(s):  
Donn F. Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Biblical Interpretation ◽  
Reception History ◽  
The Future ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Biblical Faith

This chapter provides a summary of the Writings, describing the contribution this division makes to the Hebrew canon and to subsequent biblical interpretation. Acknowledging that the Writings are often perceived as amorphous, filled with diversity and difference that prevents a perception of order and purpose, the chapter asks whether these very characteristics witness to other intentions: (1) that diversity and difference are necessary for living out biblical faith; (2) that all biblical praxis (worship, discernment of wisdom, governance, envisioning the future, etc.) requires a relationship with both Torah and Prophets of the biblical canon. The Writings are seen to be a generator of questions and relationships with scripture, and to represent the first instance of canonical reception history, that is, the history of the impact and shaping of scripture in the subsequent history and faith of the community.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document