Saul M. Olyan

Household and family religion in antiquity

List of Figures vii Notes on Contributors x Series Editors Preface xiii Acknowledgments xv Map xvi 1 Introduction 1 John Bodel and Saul M. Olyan 2 Theorizing the Religion of Ancient Households and Families 5 Stanley K. Stowers 3 Family Religion in Second Millennium West Asia (Mesopotamia, Emar, Nuzi) 20 Karel van der Toorn 4 The Integration of Household and Community Religion in Ancient Syria 37 Daniel E. Fleming 5 Family, Household, and Local Religion at Late Bronze Age Ugarit 60 Theodore J. Lewis 6 Family Religion in Ancient Israel and its Surroundings 89 Rainer Albertz 7 Family Religion in Israel and the Wider Levant of the First Millennium bce 113 Saul M. Olyan 8 Household Religion, Family Religion, and Womens Religion in Ancient Israel 127 Susan Ackerman 9 Ashdod and the Material Remains of Domestic Cults in the Philistine Coastal Plain 159 Rudiger Schmitt 10 Household Religion in Ancient Egypt 171 Robert K. Ritner 11 Household and Domestic Religion in Ancient Egypt 197 Barbara S. Lesko 12 Household Religion in Ancient Greece 210 Christopher A. Faraone 13 Family Matters: Domestic Religion in Classical Greece 229 Deborah Boedeker 14 Ciceros Minerva, Penates , and the Mother of the Lares : An Outline of Roman Domestic Religion 248 John Bodel 15 Comparative Perspectives 276 John Bodel and Saul M. Olyan Bibliography 283 Index 314

Sexual Orientation and Human Rights in American Religious Discourse

Sexual orientation is a topic of intense debate within Americas religious traditions. Debate about sexual orientation has had a significant impact on the formation of public policy, as spokespersons who locate themselves squarely within religious traditions have articulated positions both pro and con in recent discussions concerning gays in the military, civil rights protections for gays and lesbians, gay marriage, parenting and foster parenting, and even benefits for partners of gay and lesbian employees of major corporations and institutions. This volume, which stems from a 1995 conference at Brown University, is intended to promote both academic and public understanding of the different positions that exist on sexual orientation and public policy dimensions within four major American religious traditions. In the first part of the book, writers from the Jewish community, the Roman Catholic church, Mainline Protestant churches, and African-American churches explore the history and tradition of their communities on same-sex orientation, discuss the moral stance they advocate, and consider the legal and public policy implications of that stance. For each of these traditions, two opposing views are represented, and a respondent frames the issue in a larger context. Included are papers by such distinguished writers as David Novack, Judith Plaskow, Charles E. Curran, and Margaret Farley. The book concludes with essays by Michael McConnell and Andrew Koppelman exploring how our society might find a modus vivendi in a state position of neutrality on the moral status of homosexuality.

The Ascription of Physical Disability as a Stigmatizing Strategy in Biblical Iconic Polemics

Physical disabilities such as blindness, lameness, muteness and deafness are sometimes ascribed to “idols” in biblical polemic as a means to devalue them. This paper explores the ascription of physical disability as one of a number of stigmatizing strategies used by biblical writers to denigrate iconic worship. I am particularly interested in what the attribution of physical disability contributes to iconic polemic that might be lacking in other stigmatizing strategies such as emphasizing the material or manufactured nature of “idols.”

Ben Sira's Relationship to the Priesthood

Ben Siras view of the cult and his relationship to the priesthood are issues which have received much attention from scholars, yet there is no consensus on either question. Most critics cannot escape from the conclusion that Ben Sira had at least an interest in cult and priesthood. Some have argued that he harbored even a domineering interest in cultic worship, but others, like R. Smend and R. Pfeiffer, are ambivalent: they claim on the one hand that Ben Sira had an intense interest in things cultic, but on the other that he kept “a meaningful distance” from the cult (Pfeiffer). In other words, though his interest was intense, the ritual itself really meant very little to Ben Sira. The contradiction in this statement is evident. In a recent monograph, J. Marbock argued that although Ben Sira had a personal love for temple ceremony, he attributed to cultic law and ritual a very subordinate position. J. G. Snaith has made similar claims about Ben Siras view of the cult.

Is Isaiah 40-55 Really Monotheistic?

AbstractIsaiah 40-55 is often understood as a work bearing witness clearly and unambiguously to a “novel,” “consistent” and “extreme” monotheism, the monotheistic biblical work par excellence. Yet the author of this article challenges such claims in light of texts such as Isa 40:1-8 and 40:25-26, which recognize the existence of the heavenly host and the volition (40:25-26) or agency (40:1-8) of its members, and in view of Isa 51:9-11, which alludes clearly to the mythic conflict between Yhwh and the sea dragon as a reality. A statement such as “besides me there is no god” (45:5) must, therefore, be interpreted in light of these texts, which are all too frequently ignored by those who speak of Second Isaiah’s “radical” monotheism. “Besides me there is no god” is more likely a claim about Yhwh’s incomparability and unique power and agency than about his sole existence. If there is anything radical and unprecedented about Isaiah 40-55, it is the poet’s rhetoric, which seems to suggest a new meaning and more restricted use for the word “god” ().Though the host remain a heavenly reality for Second Isaiah, serving Yhwh as they have always done, they are no longer called gods.

Social inequality in the world of the text : the significance of ritual and social distinctions in the Hebrew Bible

Der vorliegende Band beinhaltet 15, z.T. noch unveroffentlichte Aufsatze von Saul M. Olyan. Der Autor beschaftigt sich mit Klassifikationen in biblischen Texten und ihren sozialen Auswirkungen. Besonders widmet er sich den Klassifizierungen die Ungleichheiten in der Umwelt des Textes hervorrufen. Solche Unterschiede sind zum Beispiel mannlich/weiblich, tot/lebendig, fremd/einheimisch oder rein/unrein. Die Artikel beschaftigen sich dabei mit biblischen Texten, die von der Konigszeit uber das Exil bis hin zur romischen Epche datiert werden.Dabei legt Olyan ein besonderes Augenmerk auf die Menschen, die bei diesen Unterscheidungen die minderwertige Rolle spielen oder gar ganz von der Gemeinschaft ausgeschlossen sind. Einen weiteren Schwerpunkt stellen Ubergangsriten dar, die einen Wechsel des Status markieren, z.B. Beschneidung, Rasur, Bestattung.

In Conversation With Joshua A. Berman, Created Equal: How the Bible Broke With Ancient Political Thought (Oxford University Press, 2008).

This contribution emerges out of a session devoted to a critical assessment of the book that took place at the 2009 SBL Annual Meeting. It includes Joshua Berman, “ Created Equal : Main Claims and Methodological Assumptions,” Susan Ackerman, “Only Men are Created Equal, ”Norman Gottwald, “Between Diachronic and Synchronic Approaches,” Saul M. Olyan, “Equality and Inequality in the Socio-Political Visions of the Pentateuch’s Sources,” and Joshua Berman, “A Response: Three Points of Methodology”

What do we really know about Women’s Rites in the Israelite Family Context?

What we know about the roles of women in Israelite family religion is a topic in need of reassessment. In this article, the author evaluates a number of common claims which have been made about family religion and gender. These include the idea that goddess worship was especially important to women; that Judean pillar figurines were used primarily or exclusively by women in their ritual activities; that the religious practices of ancient Israelite women overlapped little with those of men; and that birth-related ritual contexts were a special preserve of women.

Why an altar of unfinished stones ? Some thoughts on Ex 20,25 and Dtn 27,5-6

YHWHs altar of burnt offerings was to be built with unfinished stones according to Deuteronomy 27:5 et Jos 8:31 (and by implication, Exodus 20:25). A satisfactory explanation for the proscription of finished stones (ashlar) has yet to be presented. The A. suggests that the ban is most convincingly explained as one expression of a concern broadly attested in biblical sources: to separate the deity and his space, conceived as holy, from forms of physical alteration understood to produce defilement of that space. Full and complete stones are required for YHWHs altar of burnt offerings