Volume 4, Issue 1

The episode of the Bethlehem massacre (Matt 2:16-18) uses many levels of intertextuality as a rhetorical device, to solicit an emotional response powerful enough to influence the reader’s worldview. What effect do these intertexts have on Matthew’s readers? How is this affective appeal concerning Rachel’s tears intended to impact the reader’s response to Matthew’s story? Rachel weeping is an emotionally charged image that somehow merges two opposites: hope and sorrow. The intertextuality of this figure can influence readers encouraging them to criticize imperial ideologies that have used violence against innocent people in the past, and oppose those which do so currently.

Henri de Lubac has proclaimed that medieval exegetical texts contain a “whole mental universe” within their pages. While full of promise, de Lubac’s statement also points to the problem of how modern readers may profitably engage the unfamiliar mental universe of such texts. The distinctive scholastic practice of structuring a composition by divisio textus can function as a helpful guide not only for understanding the structure of medieval texts but also for understanding the interpretive logic employed by medieval commentators. By focusing on Thomas Aquinas’ lectura ad Ephesios , this paper demonstrates how the divisio textus can help identify important aspects of a commentator’s interpretive logic. The article then turns to examine Aquinas’ interpretation of predestination in Eph 1:5–6a to demonstrate the significance of the divisio textus for understanding medieval exegetical and interpretive decisions at both the macro- and micro-level. The article concludes that the divisio textus can be a helpful tool for uncovering the “mental universe” contained within medieval exegetical texts.

This article documents one strain of Mormon thought concerning the Woman of Endor narrative in 1 Samuel 28, in which the woman was interpreted as a prophetess enabled to raise the dead through her spiritual gifts. Church leaders eventually condemned this narrative because of its similarities with Spiritualist exegesis and American Christianity’s use of the narrative to condemn Spiritualism as necromancy. Through establishing an orthodox reading of the passage, leaders strengthened the boundaries separating the two faiths – boundaries that many Spiritualists had argued were at best blurry and overlapping.

This article concerns the creative reinterpretation of two biblical texts in the thought of Joseph Stalin: 2 Thessalonians 3:10 and Acts 4:32 and 35. Indeed, “anyone unwilling to work should not eat” became the hermeneutical frame through which the text from Acts 4, “everything they owned was held in common (…) They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need,” was reinterpreted. Already from 1917, the text of 2 Thessalonians was used by Lenin to define what would soon be called socialism, in distinction from communism (the distinction was itself a Bolshevik innovation). Stalin would make much greater use of the text, extending the sense of those not working – the idle capitalists and bourgeoisie – to those who lagged behind in the project of creating socialism. Further, it became the interpretive key for reworking the communist slogan, “from each according to ability, to each according to need” (itself a gloss on Acts 4) into a slogan for socialism, “from each according to ability, to each according to work.” These two forms of the slogan became the means to distinguish socialism from communism. The result of this process of biblical reinterpretation was the appearance of both biblical texts – one quoted and one glossed – in the “Stalin” Constitution of 1936. Throughout I seek to understand Stalin’s thought on the basis of his writings, without taking sides in the perpetual polarization over his legacy.

The reception of Esther has often been fraught with attempts to make the book more palatable to the audience receiving it and to interpret the book in a manner more consistent with the values of that community. This is evidence in cinematic adaptations of the book, where the story is transformed to better suit the genre expectations of the Biblical epic and the perspectives of the intended viewers. By examining two films based on Esther – Esther and the King (1960) and One Night with the King (2006) – some of the interpretive issues surrounding the tone and content of the Biblical source become apparent. If Esther is best understood as a carnivalesque work, as many scholars have suggested, then the expectations of this kind of work have not been met in the cinematic adaptations. Given the importance of film in contemporary Biblical reception, these new readings of Esther are perhaps particularly influential, at least within the restricted communities who view these movies. Likewise, analysis of these changes highlights the values of the makers of these films and the audiences who consume them.

This article focuses on two newspaper advertisements written by Holocaust survivor and author Elie Wiesel, which were published shortly before his death in 2016. These controversial advertisements, appearing in the US and the UK, addressed recent tensions in the Middle East, referencing the books of 2Kings and Esther. The article explores Wiesel’s relationship to contemporary politics, traditions of biblical interpretation, and ideas of sacred temporality. I argue that these advertisements present a vivid case study of the potential difficulties posed by framing contemporary conflicts via biblical archetypes. Specifically, I suggest that they challenge us to develop an awareness of instances in which biblical reception can mythologize suffering by subsuming novel and complex events into premeditated narratives.

In the attempts to understand the ideology underpinning the terror attack in Norway 22nd July 2011, and the growth of far-right extremism in Europe more generally, Christianity and the uses of the Bible are a largely neglected feature. In this article, I examine the way in which the Bible is used in Anders Behring Breivik’s manifesto, arguing that this provides an important example of the role of Christianity in far-right discourse. I show that the Bible functions as a legitimating device, glossing violence as defense of a Christian Europe; as a motivational instrument, positing God as a fellow fighter; and, as an origin for Europe. The Bible is situated in a pre-modern state where its signifying powers are policed. At the same time, it is wrenched out of this solidified framework, cut up and pasted into the manifesto hypertext in order to serve as a contemporary ally to an anti-Muslim and anti-multicultural cause.