This is a detailed investigation into the nature of Nebuchadnezzar's animalising affliction in Daniel 4 and the degree to which he is depicted as actually becoming an animal. PeterAtkins examines two predominant lines of interpretation: either Nebuchadnezzar undergoes a physical metamorphosis of some kind into an animal form; or diverse other readings that specifically preclude or deny an animal transformation of the king. By providing an extensive study of these interpretative opinions, alongside innovative assessments of ancient Mesopotamian divine-human-animal boundaries, Atkins ultimately demonstrates how neither of these traditional interpretations best reflect the narrative events. While there have been numerous metamorphic interpretations of Daniel 4, these are largely reliant upon later developments within the textual tradition and are not present in the earliest edition of Nebuchadnezzar's animalising affliction. Atkins' study displays that when Daniel 4 is read in the context of Mesopotamian texts, which appear to conceive of the human-animal boundary as being indicated primarily in relation to possession or lack of the divine characteristic of wisdom, the affliction represents a far more significant categorical change from human to animal than has hitherto been identified.

Ask the animals, and they will tell you. Birds, beasts, and creeping things swarm throughout the Bible’s pages. Despite their prevalence, most biblical scholars have viewed them merely as metaphors, passive objects, or background embellishment to the human experience. This collection seeks to move beyond this traditional view of biblical animals by engaging the growing interdisciplinary field of animal studies. Contributors Peter Joshua Atkins, Jared Beverly, William P. Brown, Margaret Cohen, Jacob R. Evers, Michael J. Gilmour, William “Chip” Gruen, Dong Hyeon Jeong, Brian Fiu Kolia, Anne Létourneau, Robert R. MacKay, Suzanna R. Millar, Timothy J. Sandoval, Robert Paul Seesengood, Ken Stone, Brian James Tipton, Arthur W. Walker-Jones, and Jaime L. Waters showcase the breadth and depth of inquiry that animal studies can foster in biblical studies as well as what animal studies can gain from a more rigorous engagement with biblical texts. Together the essays offer an animal hermeneutic that supports the flourishing of all creatures.

Good Figs, Bad Figs begins by reviewing how the Old Testament depicts YHWH exercising judgment in Israel. Three broad categories of judicial action are identified: selective, unselective, and national. It is noted that more than one of these may be juxtaposed within the same text, and that each is a corollary of a wider theological frame of reference. The rest of the study focuses on the concept of judicial differentiation in the book of Jeremiah. Jeremiah 1 - 20 announce wrath upon all Judah, while chs. 30 - 33 prophesy restoration for the entire Diaspora. Elsewhere, however, YHWH's judicial action is more nuanced. Jer. 21 - 24 differentiates between those who stay in Jerusalem and those who surrender (21.1-10), between Israel's leaders and people (23.1-8), and between the exiles and non-exiles (24.1-10). Jeremiah 27 - 29 also distinguishes between exiled and non-exiled communities, but adds a 'people and prophets' polarity. Finally, Jer. 37 - 45 offers hope to those who surrender (38.1-3) or remain in the land (42.1-22), alongside salvation oracles for two individuals who do not conform to these conditions (39.15-18; 45.1-5). Three main conclusions are drawn. Firstly, the polarities of judgment and salvation in Jer. are more varied than has generally been appreciated. Secondly, this diversity of perspective is theologically significant; it is suggested that each polarity offers a valid though incomplete lens through which to interpret God's judicial action. Thirdly, the concepts of judicial differentiation and non-differentiation may offer a helpful framework in which to read the book of Jeremiah as a whole.

Among the many strategies of persuasive speech, biblical prophets often employ a rhetoric of horror. Prophets use verbal threats and graphic images of destruction to terrify their audience. Contemporary horror theory provides insight into the rhetoric of horror employed by the prophets. In this book, Amy Kalmanofsky applies horror theory to the book of Jeremiah and considers the nature of biblical horror and the objects that provoke horror, as well as the ways texts like Jeremiah work to elicit horror from their audience. Kalmanofsky begins by analyzing the emotional response of horror as reflected in characters' reactions to terrifying entities in the book of Jeremiah. Horror, she concludes, is a composite emotion consisting of fear in response to a threatening entity and a corresponding response of shame either directed toward one's self or felt on behalf of another. Having considered the nature of horror, she turns to the objects that elicit horror and consider their ontological qualities and the nature of the threat they pose. There are two central monstrous figures in the book of Jeremiah-aggressor God and defeated Israel. Both of these monsters refuse to be integrated into and threaten to disintegrate the expected order of the universe. She then presents a close, rhetorical reading of Jeremiah 6 and consider the way this text works to horrify its audience. The book concludes by considering fear's place within religious experience and the theological implications of a rhetoric that portrays God and Israel as monsters.

Analyzes the variety of religious practices employed to communicate with deities and to interpret the divine response, including intuitive divination (prophecy), technical divination and prayers.

A textual commentary on Jeremiah 32 whose textlinguistically-oriented methodology helps to uncover far more haplography in the Septuagint Vorlage than hitherto suspected..

Essays on women, men, gender roles and humor as social critique.