Biblical Studies

The Journal of the Bible and Its Reception (JBR) promotes the study of the reception history of the Bible in terms of both methodology and content. Published twice annually, JBR aims to shed light on the broader horizon of the impact of the Bible in a wide variety of academic fields and cultural settings. Articles focus on the field of Reception History, delivering new research results as well as up-to-date academic discourse. The journal also intentionally cultivates interdisciplinarity, covering a wide range of topics including reception of the Bible in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and other religions; in patristic, medieval, modern, contemporary, and postcolonial contexts; in film, music, literature, and visual arts; and in relation to politics, gender and sexuality, and a variety of other social and cultural issues.

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum's Encyclopedia of Camps and Ghettos, vol. III (Camps and Ghettos Under European Regimes Aligned with Nazi Germany), Indiana UP in association with USHMM, 2018.  The section on Romania contains over 150 articles authored by me on camps and ghettos for Jews, Rroma, Christian religious minorities, and Allied Prisoners of War in Romania, including Transnistria (1941-1944).

The study of biblical masculinities is now a clearly recognizable discipline in critical biblical gender studies. This book, the third in a series of SPP volumes that include Men and Masculinity in the Hebrew Bible and Beyond (ed. Ovidiu Creangă, 2010) and Biblical Masculinities Foregrounded (ed. Ovidiu Creangă and Peter-Ben Smit, 2014), takes stock of recent methodological and thematic developments, while introducing fresh new questions, expanding traditional approaches, and adding new texts to the corpus of masculinities in the Hebrew Bible.

The volume’s introduction (Ovidiu Creangă) celebrates the rich palette of approaches and disciplinary intersections that now characterize the study of Hebrew Bible masculinities, while calling attention to understudied topics. The next thirteen chapters dig deep into the methodological building-blocks underpinning biblical masculinity (Stephen Wilson); the theoretically essential distinction between queer and non-queer masculinities (Gil Rosenberg); the often-neglected yet essential representation of God’s masculinity (David J.A. Clines); the competing masculinities of God, Pharaoh, and Moses in historical and lesbian perspective (Caralie Focht and Richard Purcell); Queen Jezebel’s performance of masculinity (Hilary Lipka); Priestly and Deuteronomic fantasies of male perfection (Sandra Jacobs); the problem-ridden masculinity of Moses (Amy Kalmanofsky); the rhetoric of ‘queen-making’ in the prophetic literature (Susan E. Haddox); Jonah’s homosocial masculinity (Rhiannon Graybill); the scribal masculinity of Daniel (Brian C. DiPalma); the ephemeral masculinity of mortal men (Milena Kirova); the masculine agencies in the Song of Songs (Martti Nissinen); and the intertwining of money and masculinity in the Book of Proverbs (Kelly Murphy). In the final chapter, Stuart Macwilliam reflects on methodological opportunities, thematic expansions, and a future direction for biblical masculinities.

The Holocaust in Romania: what we know, what we still need to find out, Adrian Cioflâncã, Wilhelm Filderman Center for the Study of Jewish History in Romania Open ghettos as a new dimension of the Holocaust in Romania, Dr. Ovidiu Creangă, Historian, Claims Conference NY In dialogue with the authorities: petitions referring to the Jews deported to Transnistria (1941-1944), Ana Barbulescu-Head of Research, Eli Wiesel Institute Changing Sides, Changing History and Memory at the End of the Second World War: The Creation of the Public Discourse about the Holocaust in Transnistria in the Aftermath of the Event,

T h e RELATIONSHIP between the prose frame (Job 1-2 ; 4 2 :7-1 7) and the peetic dialogue (3:1-42:6) in the Book ofjob remains a thorny issue. On the one hand, there are a number of inconcinnities between the two sections that support the idea that they were not originally conceived as a unity. Indeed, the very language in whieh the two sections are w ritten-the prose in clear, classical Hebrew and the poetry in a difficult and uneven language that some have (questioned is Hebrewsupports this hypothesis.‫؛‬ On the other hand, as Matitiahu Tsevat put forceffilly, the "p ro lo g u e qua prologue is a work of genius."‫ة‬ In oth er words, the p ro se I would like to thank Jon D. Levenson for his thoughtful comments on an earlier draft ofthis article and ?eter Machinist for our many conversations about the Joban tradition and the problem ofJob-1 Naftali Herz Tur-Sinai, for example, argues that the poetry is an imperfect translation into Hebrew of a text originally written in Babylonian Aramaic (The Book ofjob: A New Commentary [rev. ed.; Jerusalem: Kiryath Sepher, ‫ل?%1‬ xxx-xl). There are a number of discrepancies between the two sections. For example, there is a stark contrast between Job's personality in the frame and his personality in the dialogue. And the theological gestions, indeed the perspective from which they are asked, change between the two sections. In the frame, the (questions come from God; in the dialogue, mostly from human beings. For a fuller list of discrepancies between the prose frame and the poetic dialogue, see Yair Hoffman, "The Relationship between the Frologue and the Speech-Gycles in Job," FT31 (1981) 160-?0, hero 162. For a recent review of the scholarship on the issue of the relationship between the prose frame and the poetic dialogue, see Carol A.

The present volume represents the work of Korean and Korean American biblical scholars from South Korea (Republic of Korea) and the United States. First and foremost, the contributors have made the volume possible. Much appreciation goes out to each contributor. Collectively, the volume has given voice and birth to a new consciousness. Culturally speaking, because Koreans and Korean Americans prefer to work and operate independently, this collective effort is a true milestone. As the current president of the Korean Biblical Colloquium (KBC), I express my deepest gratitude to John Kutsko and the Society of Biblical Literature Council for having envisioned the 2016 International Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature (IMSBL) in Seoul, South Korea with other leaders, including Yun Lak Chung (Anyang University), Koog-Pyoung Hong (Yonsei University), and especially Tai Il Wang (Methodist Theological University). The IMSBL in 2016 was a seminal venue for all Korean, diaspora Korean, and Korean American biblical scholars. I also express my deepest gratitude to Jione Havea, Monica Melanchthon, Bob Buller, and the editorial board of the International Voices in Biblical Studies for accepting this work for publication. Finding the right home for a new volume is no easy task. I want to thank the anonymous peer reviewers who offered helpful insights and input and also for endorsing this volume for publication. Much appreciation also goes out to Nicole Tilford. Lastly, but not least, the dedication and exceptional work of three graduate students, Isaiah Ahn, Joe Harris, and Jamila Bess-Johnson have been instrumental in bringing the present volume to completion.

This article reexamines the literary relationship between the prose frame (Job 1–2, 42:7–17) and the poetic core (3:1–42:6) of the book of Job. Building on previous work that identifies Job 1, 42:11–17 as an older and independent composition, I argue that the author of the poetic core composed Job 2, 42:7–10 as a narrative bridge and a theological pivot from the prose frame to the poetic core. Job 2, 42:7–10 narratively connects the prose frame to the poetic dialogue, principally through the introduction of Job’s friends, and broaches pivotal theological themes to prepare for the contentious dialogue to come.

Edward L. Greenstein, who has recently published a most accomplished translation of the biblical book of Job, gives an indication of the extent of the labor required to produce such a translation: “I have been deeply engaged by the challenges of the book of Job—its themes, literary affiliations, language, and poetics—for over four decades” (xvii). That Greenstein has more than endured what he rightly characterizes as “this intimate endeavor” (xvii), including especially “the painstaking work of original philological investigation” (xviii), demonstrates that he is not only a long-suffering “scholar of difficult language” but indeed a “lover of words,” and of the work of words (ix). Further proof of his love lies in the stated altruism of his goals (xvii). He has aimed “to make good sense of the text of Job” and “to convey something of the text’s poetics” (x, xxxvi). That is, he has tried to recreate in English something of the theological and literary genius of the ancient Joban writers, better than others have done previously. And fellow students of Job and lovers of words, including the present author, owe a debt of gratitude to Greenstein for his labor of love and this work of translation. For, true to his goals, the still enigmatic biblical book begins to make (stunning) good sense and, here and there, lays bare more of its (sinuous) literary genius in Greenstein’s new translation.

Job compares himself time and again to defeated and trapped animals in the poetic core of the Book of Job. God, in responding to Job, describes in loving detail, as would a proud parent her children, the animals that populate creation. This paper argues that the Joban Poet uses animal imagery to allow Job to express an evolving sense of his traumatized self and the world and God to affirm the beauty and vitality of creation and, indirectly, also of Job who has come to think of himself as a trapped and hunted animal.

This article argues that Esther, as befits her intersectional identity, employs a combination of tactics and strategies, as defined by Michel de Certeau, to navi- gate and dismantle the overlapping power structures of the Persian empire to deliver Jews from death.