Masculinity and the Bible

Abstract

Most characters in the Bible are men, yet they are hardly analysed as such.Masculinity and the Bibleprovides the first comprehensive survey of approaches that remedy this situation. These are studies that utilize insights from the field of masculinity studies to further biblical studies. The volume offers a representative overview of both fields and presents a new exegesis of a well-known biblical text (Mark 6) to show how this approach leads to new insights.By presenting the field of masculinity studies, the volume performs a service for those working in biblical studies and related disciplines, but do not have explored this approach yet. At the same time, the volume shows, by surveying the past two decades of publications in the field, what results have been achieved so far and where open questions remain. In the exegesis of Mark 6, it becomes clear that one of these challenges, the often very specific and intersectional character of masculinity, can be addressed successfully when consciously combining approaches such as narrative and ritual analyses.

What is the Human Heart?

“…Since the heart is not only a concrete body organ but also an abstract spiritual entity, we hypothesize that according to the tenets of Conceptual Metaphor Theory it should be conceptualized in relation to some basic material concrete entities. For now, there exist a number of works that are focused on the study of Biblical metaphors, among the most recent are Haddox (2016), Smit (2017), Zimran (2018), Sherwood (2018), Veremchuk (2022). The far more exhaustive list is given in Lancaster (2021) and in the online compendium of Biblical metaphors (biblicalmetaphor.com).…”

Food and Gift: On the ‘Words of Institution’ in the Gospel of Mark

“… 18. On Mk 6, see Smit 2017a: 57-66 and Ebner 2004. On the characterization of both Herod and Pilate, see, e.g., Winn 2014b.…”

Animality and Biblical Masculinities in Conflict: Moses and the Golden Calf (Exodus 32)

“…The recent application of masculinity studies to biblical exegesis has made it possible to balance and complete the analyses that began in the 1970s within the critical framework of feminism, tracing the cultural constructions of gender in the Holy Scriptures. The seminal works by Eilberg-Schwartz (1994) and Clines (1995, 2002), along with more recent ones by Creangă and Smit (2014), Haddox (2016), and Smit (2017) have detected a series of compositional patterns in the principal male figures that is capable of constituting an embryonic paradigm of masculinity of undeniable influence in Western culture. Despite the incessant revisionism that has been carried out by some of the current criticism from this paradigm (DiPalma 2010; Hentrich 2017; Olson 2016; Wilson 2015), these parameters for measuring masculinity continue to be a reference point for the classification of “hegemonic masculinity” (Carrigan, Connell, and Lee 1987), whose value lies not only in its ability to determine a principle of ideal masculinity linked to the sacred text but also in erecting itself as a dominant model from which a cohort of “complicit,” “marginal” and “subordinate” masculinities (Connell 2005) derive and against which they react and compete, all of which are also present in the Holy Scriptures.…”