Band 11, Heft 1

Visual receptions of the Eden serpent throughout the history of Western art have reflected various interpretive attempts to understand the nature of this creature. In the investigation of these receptions, five iconographic categories emerge: the female-headed serpent, the demonic serpent, the dragon-like serpent, the etiological serpent, and the zoological serpent. Of these categories, all but the female-headed serpent survives in modern children’s Bible illustration. Due to the cultural prevalence of children’s Bibles and the tendency of images to inform later readings of texts, these visual receptions of the Eden serpent hold significant interpretive power for the child. Survivals of demonic, dragon-like, and etiological iconographic categories in modern children’s Bibles limit the interpretive possibilities of the child’s subsequent reading of the biblical text. The child is predisposed to regard the serpent as a demonic figure or a fantastical creature, or to regard Genesis 3 as a purely etiological tale, proscribing other interpretive possibilities. In contrast, the survival of the zoological serpent in modern children’s Bibles highlights the interpretive tensions within the Hebrew text of Genesis 3. Rather than proscribing certain interpretations of the Eden serpent, the survival of the zoological serpent in modern children’s Bibles invites the child to interact with the interpretive gaps and ambiguities in both text and image.

This paper considers the theophany at Penuel-Peniel /Εἶδος Θεοῦ (Genesis 32) and its use by Athanasius of Alexandria. The biblical text itself is quite enigmatic, forcing the readers to entertain a variety of interpretive solutions. Athanasius continues, unsurprisingly, the venerable tradition of Christological exegesis – identifying, that is, the mysterious man with the Word of God incarnaturus – but seems to reinforce the inherited Christophanic exegesis by taking advantage of a textual ambiguity that only occurs in the LXX text. This further allows him to highlight, repeatedly, the dogmatic import of the biblical text, showing that, once the divine appearance to Jacob is understood Christologically, the theophany can only be accounted for by confessing the Son as “proper” (ἴδιος) to the Father, inseparable from him according to essential propriety (κατὰ τὴν ἰδιότητα τῆς οὐσίας), ὁμοούσιος with the Father.

While there exists a robust scholarship on the cultural influences and public uses of the Bible in early American history, the historical development of biblical scholarship in America remains relatively understudied. The prevalent view suggests that biblical scholarship in America had its critical awakening with the importation of German Higher Criticism to northeastern divinity schools in the nineteenth century. This essay makes a corrective intervention by looking at Cotton Mather’s unpublished Biblia Americana (1693–1728), the first comprehensive Bible commentary to be authored in British North America. More specifically, the essay examines Mather’s response to critical interrogation of the canon and the Biblia’s numerous revisions of King James translation in light of recent philological scholarship. What connects these two issues is that they both concern the “givenness” of the Bible, which, in Mather’s day, was being fundamentally challenged. Behind the discussions about the canonicity of diverse books and over how to render the Hebrew and Greek texts into modern languages always lurked fundamental questions regarding the divine authority, integrity, and perspicuity of the Bible. Examining a broad range of examples from across the Biblia, the essay demonstrates how Mather’s work defies clear-cut categorization as either precritical or critical. In response to the intellectual currents of the early Enlightenment, Mather pioneered a new type of deeply learned, historically conscious but apologetically-oriented biblical criticism in America. The Biblia clearly reflects the challenges brought on by the deepening historicization of Scripture and the destabilization of texts and meanings through a new type of criticism. More widely read in current European scholarship and in many ways more curious and daring than any other early American exegete, Mather joined the infinitely complex and open-ended quest for better translations. Moreover, he was the first in New England to seriously address hard questions about the canon of the Bible and its historical development. But he always did so with the aim of providing constructive answers to these debates that would ultimately shore up the authority of Scripture, stabilize the scriptural foundation for what Mather regarded as the core of Reformed orthodox theological beliefs, and offer improved interpretations of the biblical texts, which would lend themselves even better to devotion and illuminate for Christians, with the help of the most up-to-date scholarship, the full riches of God’s Word.

The popular Left Behind series has been credited with mainstreaming dispensational premillennialism, or fragments of that ideology, in U.S. popular culture. The less popular, but critically acclaimed HBO series The Leftovers , based on the novel of the same name by Tom Perrotta, attests to the ideology’s popularity while defamiliarizing its notions of Rapture and Messiah/Antichrist. While Left Behind apologizes for the ideology and strives to make the metanarrative’s identity attractive, entertaining, and thrilling, The Leftovers takes a “not quite” Rapture as its “what if” fictional starting point. The result embraces mystery, rather than apologetic certainty, and ordinary human life, rather than the supernatural. Fulfilled prophecy becomes confusion, coping, and possibly delusion. The metanarrative becomes unstuck fragments. Election (exceptional national and individual identities), miracle, and messiah are demythologized. Theodicy occurs only on a human level. At the same time, however, The Leftovers takes its “what if” seriously and sympathetically. Despite skepticism, its characters also understand the appeal of Rapture, Messiah, and the like as they too look for something sacred.

The imagery of Nebuchadnezzar’s divine affliction in Daniel 4 is as complex as it is fantastic. A variety of literary images interweave to present the king’s affliction in explicitly animalising terms. Despite this complexity, most visual depictions of the text focus on a largely similar image – that of Nebuchadnezzar eating grass or living naked in the wild. However, in a 17th-century English tapestry series associated with Thomas Poyntz, an altogether different scene is envisioned. Nebuchadnezzar is portrayed as fully clothed in the city of Babylon and, even more intriguingly, is explicitly depicted with both birds’ claws and feathers. This paper outlines trends in visually depicting Nebuchadnezzar’s affliction in art and then examines the tapestry’s visual portrayal of Daniel 4. In so doing, it is observed how the tapestry is distinctive in representing both the divine pronouncement and seeming enactment of this affliction in one image, as well as discerning the influence of lycanthropic interpretations of Daniel 4. Finally, this paper returns to read the biblical narrative in light of this unusual visual representation and observes how it draws the reader’s attention to two often overlooked textual features: the absence of other characters within this specific scene, and the rapidity with which Nebuchadnezzar’s affliction commences.