Biblical Theology Bulletin: Journal of Bible and Culture

Modern archaeological scholarship typically overlooks the experiences of people with disabilities, assuming that ancient societies, like contemporary ones, focused on the able-bodied. However, recent developments in the field have demonstrated the possibility of uncovering previously hidden aspects, such as prostheses and votive offerings related to disabilities at healing shrines. Nevertheless, excavations and material culture interpretations still often neglect the lived experiences of individuals with disabilities in antiquity. This article proposes a novel approach that integrates disability studies and mobility design into archaeology to shed light on the lives of the disabled. It applies these concepts to examine access to temples for people with disabilities in ancient Greece, Egypt, and Canaan/Israel, serving as a proof of concept to show that archaeologists can uncover insights into disability by understanding the theological underpinnings of religious site construction.

In this article, I survey exegetical approaches to the “blind and lame,” using disability studies and close readings to expose ableist bias. I also present my reading, in which I propose that the blind and lame are disabled persons whom David hates not just because of who they are, but also because of the fears they provoke. He is afraid. Disabled bodies can be unpredictable, untamable, and uncertain. David has no idea what his enemies are capable of, because “blind” and “lame” are vague and amorphous labels. Parading blind people and lame people on the ramparts does not display the weakest people in a strong city but displays people of unknown strengths.

Armed conflict situations are more than just sites of violence, destruction, scars, torture, rape, and death; they are also sites of disability production through direct causes and indirectly through disruption of societal services, which would otherwise prevent disabilities. In this paper, the David Narrative in 2 Samuel is reread as an armed conflict text centered on power, disempowerment, and control issues. In this rereading, the imagery of disability is viewed as a symbol of terror to instill fear and deter rebels and traitors.

Fertility is a complex and contentious topic in biblical theology, touching upon social, cultural, and gender identity issues in the ancient world. It intersects with factors like gender, age, disability, and socio-economic status, notably in the context of slavery. Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar’s story, particularly Genesis 16, highlights the link between slavery and fertility. This study examines John Chrysostom’s interpretation of their narrative (ca. 349–407 CE) to explore these intersections. Chrysostom views fertility and infertility as social, moral, and theological concepts linked to divine intervention. He portrays Abraham as the ideal husband, Sarah as the ideal wife, and Hagar as a deviant slave woman. Theologically, he transforms slavery from a social status to an ontological state and criticizes Jewish identity. Chrysostom’s interpretation supports late antique slaveholding values, making infertility discourse a complex tool with intersectional dynamics in his biblical reception framework.

Early Christianity relied heavily on walking, yet New Testament Studies has largely neglected the cultural significance of walking in the ancient world and its connection to Early Christian communication. Walking, often seen as a conscious cultural act, is often overlooked in scholarly discourse, with the focus primarily on its symbolic aspects. Drawing from interdisciplinary research in classics, cultural studies, and social science, this study aims to explore how early Christian bodily movement and communication have been perceived and culturally appropriated in European and North American scholarship. It presents three case studies: the portrayal of disabled bodies’ movements in healings, the interpretation of Jesus and his disciples as itinerant wanderers, and the examination of walking in Pauline literature as a means of profiling missionary success.

In the Gospel of Luke, the social gathering of the meal appears again and again. It is a setting for Jesus’ interactions as well as a topic of conversation. Drawing on theories of disability and masculinity, this article examines the various meal scenes in Luke 14. The focus is on Jesus’ advice to the host about who to invite and who not to invite when hosting a meal (vv. 12–14). This saying constructs a complex and intersecting web of potential guests. Those that should not be invited, belong to the social world of the privileged man: his brother, friend, relative and rich neighbor. Representing different levels of his radius of trust, they all have something to give back. The preferred guests in Jesus’ parable, however, are those who lack the resources to give anything back, due to bodily disability and lack of means: “The poor, the crippled, the lame and the blind” (Luke 14:14, NRSV). The article thus examines how health, economic ability, and gender intersect. The ideal meal in the Gospel of Luke negotiates the complex social web of the ancient world. We suggest that disability and masculinity are key issues and scrutinize these categories to rethink the social make-up of ideal communities as suggested by Luke.