Reviews of

Archive for the ‘Wipf and Stock’ Category

The Social World of Deuteronomy

In Ancient Israel, Cascade Books, Deuteronomy, Don C. Benjamin, Feminist Biblical Criticism, HB/OT, Mark Glanville, Wipf and Stock on March 10, 2017 at 10:15 am

9781498228701

2017.03.06 | Don C. Benjamin. The Social World of Deuteronomy: A New Feminist Commentary. Cascade: Oregon, 2015. ISBN: 9781498228701.

Review by Mark Glanville.

Don C. Benjamin’s commentary on Deuteronomy, The Social World of Deuteronomy: A New Feminist Commentary (2015), is one of a number of recent commentaries on this book, including those by Daniel I. Block, (2012), Jack R. Lundbom (2013), and Eckart Otto (German, 2012-17). Benjamin’s commentary is unique, first, in that its primary methodology is to bring insights from the social sciences to bear upon the text, and, second, in that a feminist hermeneutic that is sensitive to the voices of women and other populations that are given a “small voice” in the text of Deuteronomy strongly shapes both the interpretative method and the content focus of the book. Read the rest of this entry »

The Concept of Canonical Intertextuality and the Book of Daniel

In Amanda Davis Bledsoe, Book of Daniel, Canonical Intertextuality, HB/OT, Hebrew Bible, Intertextuality, Jordan M. SCHEETZ, Wipf and Stock on March 3, 2014 at 8:15 pm

CCIBD

2014.3.5 | Jordan M. Scheetz. The Concept of Canonical Intertextuality and the Book of Daniel. Eugene, Oreg.: Pickwick, 2011. ix + 174 pp. ISBN: 9781608995165.

Review by Amanda Davis Bledsoe, University of Munich.

Many thanks to Wipf and Stock for providing a review copy.

In this book, Scheetz constructs “the concept of canonical intertextuality,” using the book of Daniel as a case study. He identifies this methodology as using a particular collection of texts that have been intentionally placed together (i.e., canon) and ordered so that, when read intertextually, the “texts exegete one another through their order and overall placement together, giving a big picture that would not have been possible if textual units had been left by themselves” (p. 34). More specifically, the goal of this concept of canonical intertextuality is “to understand the actual composition of the text of scripture that is at the same time a text and many texts” (p. 31). Read the rest of this entry »