JBL 109/2 990) 259-267

JEREMIAH 9:22-23 AND 1 CORINTHIANS 1:26-31 A STUDY IN INTERTEXTUALITY

GAIL R. O'DAY
Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322

In both contemporary literary criticism and current biblical studies, there is a growing interest in intertextuality as a literary and hermeneutical category. Intertextuality refers to the ways a new text is created from the metaphors, images, and symbolic world of an earlier text or tradition.1 The interaction between a received text and a fresh social context brings a new textual and symbolic world into being. 2 Intertextuality provides the hermeneutical lens through which to read the newly created work. In biblical studies, canonical criticism, as practiced by both B. S. Childs and J. A. Sandersbut particularly by Sanderspresupposes the conceptual framework of intertextuality.3 Shared texts and traditions, used and reused throughout the history of a particular faith community, provide the critical interpretive pieces in this method.4 The single most important contribution to the study of intertextuality in scripture is the work of Michael Fishbane.5 The importance of Fishbane's
1 Most of the discussion of intertextuality in literary criticism derives from T. S. Eliot's seminal essay, "Tradition and the Individual Talent," Selected Essays 1917-1932 (New York: Harcourt Brace & Co., 1950). Other influential studies of intertextuality include Harold Bloom, The Anxiety of Influence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975); John Hollander, The Figure of an Echo: A Mode of Allusion in Milton and After (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981); and Jonathan Culler, "Presupposition and Intertextuality" in The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981) 100-118. 2 Toni Morrisons recent novel, Beloved (New York: Knopf, 1987), is a masterful example of the varieties and possibilities of intertextuality. Both the novel's title and its superscription are drawn from Rom 9:25 (which is itself a quotation from Hos 2:23). The tension between rejection and belonging that the Romans verse articulates forms the infrastructure of this haunting novel. Neither Hosea nor Paul had the torment of African-American slaves in view, but their words provide Morrison with an anchor for her story. See Margaret Atwood's review of Beloved in The New York Times Book Review 92 (Sept. 13, 1987) 1, 49-50. 3 Brevard Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979); idem, Old Testament Theology in a Canonical Context (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985); and James A. Sanders, Torah and Canon (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972); idem, From Sacred Story to Sacred Text (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987). 4 For an example of the exegetical implications of this method, see Sanders, "Extravagant Love," New Blackfriars 68 (1987) 278-84. 5 Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985).

259

260

Journal of Biblical Literature

work cannot be overemphasized. Although Fishbane does draw explicit con 6 nections between his work and literary critical discussions of intertextuality, he, like the authors he studies, is not interested in theoretical constructs. Instead, he works with remarkable methodological clarity, precision, and thoroughness to uncover the richness of inner biblical exegesis in the Hebrew scriptures. Fishbane reminds us that the most characteristic feature of Jewish imagination is its textual-exegetical dimension. All significant speech is "Scriptural or Scripturally oriented."7 Paul, the Jewish apostle to the Gentiles, shared in this textual-exegetical imagination. Fishbane makes two points about inner biblical exegesis which help establish the context for Paul's own intertextual work.8 First, "there is no authoritative teaching which is not also the source of its own renewal."9 That is, it is the essence of biblical texts to be reinterpreted. Second, inner biblical exegesis is not simply "literary or theological playfulness," but "arises out of a particular crisis of some sort."10 The occasional character of Jewish inner biblical exegesis is thus well suited to the occasional character of Paul's epistles. In this paper I want to study one particular example of intertextu ality in Paul: the relationship between Jer 9:22-23 and 1 Cor L26-31.11 I I will begin with a brief analysis of the text of Jer 9:22-23, which is the re ceived text in this intertextual relationship. My exegesis is based on the Hebrew text of Jer 9:22-23. As we look ahead to Paul's use of Jeremiah, how ever, we must allow for oral apperception and reinterpretation, both by Paul and the Jewish community of his time. Paul's use of Jeremiah 9 is mediated by the LXX translation of the Hebrew text. This means that the question of intertextuality is multileveled. It is not simply an individual interpreter and his or her text, but the individual interpreter with the community's text. Paul's textual-exegetical imagination is shaped by the Greek-speaking com munity's handling of Hebrew tradition. The play of tradition in the LXX

Fishbane provides a summary of this work in "Inner Biblical Exegesis Types and Strategies of Interpretation in Ancient Israel," in Midrash and Literature (ed G H Hartmann and S Budick, New Haven Yale University Press, 1986) 19-37 6 See Fishbane's use of the categories of S Eliot's essay in "Inner Biblical Exegesis," 34-36 7 Ibid , 31, 34 8 Fishbane himself would not consider Paul m these categories Fishbane is concerned only with the Hebrew canon, and he does not consider what Paul does with scripture to be biblical See Biblical Interpretation, 10 9 Fishbane, "Inner Biblical Exegesis," 19 10 Ibid , 34 11 For a study of Pauline intertextuality, see Richard Bevan Hays, Echoes of Scripture m the Letters of Paul (New Haven Yale University Press, 1989) As the title suggests, Hays's study is particularly informed by the work of John Hollander

O'Day: A Study in Intertextuality

261

translation as a factor for intertextuality becomes apparent when we note that Jer 9:22-23 has a doublet in 1 Sam 2:10 (LXX). The heart of Jer 9:22-23 is a teaching about boasting that has strong sapiential elements in vocabulary, theme, and form.12 The teaching breaks into two basic parts: negative (v. 22) and positive (v. 23). The hinge between the two parts is the adversative DN . The first part of the text (v. 22) consists of three parallel statements of warning: Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom. Let not the mighty man glory in his might. Let not the rich man glory in his riches. Each warning is introduced by the negative b$ and the verb ^, the hithpael of bbl. Each verb is then followed by a tightly balanced triad of wisdom, might, and riches. This triad occurs only in Jeremiah in the Hebrew Bible.13 The threefold repetition of the negative reflexive verb and the threefold use of the personal possessive pronoun to modify wisdom/might/ riches ( 3 I V\1y) together underscore that anthropocentric boasting is to be excluded. Wisdom, might, and riches refer to both distorted individual identity and well-being and distorted societal identity and well-being. The word "might" (3), for example, refers not only to individual physical strength (Judg 8:2) but also to military and political power (1 Kgs 15:23; Isa 11:2).14 In this precise rhetorical structure, then, Jeremiah uses the motifs of the wisdom tradition to critique 'all the sources of security and well-being upon which the royal establishment is built." 15 The second part of the text (v. 23) consists of a positive redefinition of boasting in terms of knowledge of God (v. 23a) and a double motivation clause to support this redefinition (v. 23bc). The redefinition of boasting is introduced by the words "Let the one who glories, glory in this, that he/she understands and knows me." This positive urging uses the same verb form as the negative verbs in v. 22, ^. The presence of the same verb as the text moves from negative to positive shows that the issue is not with the verb itself but with the object of the verb.16 When the object is oneself, boasting is rejected. The object of bbr\D^ thus changes in v. 23a from one's own wisdom,
12 Artur Weiser, Das Buch Jerema (ATD 20/21, Gottingen Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1969) 89, Ernst Kutsch, "Weisheitsspruch und Prophetenwort Zur Traditionsgeschichte des Spruches Jer 9 22-23," BZ F 25 (1981) 161-79 13 Walter Brueggemann, "The Epistemological Crisis of Israel's Two Histories (Jer 9 22-23)," m Israelite Wisdom Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien (ed J G Gammie et al, Missoula, Scholars Press, 1978) 93 Brueggemann's essay on Jer 9 22-23 is the most thorough treatment available on this text 14 William Holladay, Jeremiah 1 (Hermeneia, Philadelphia Fortress, 1987) 317 15 Brueggemann, "Israel's Two Histories," 93, see also Holladay, Jeremiah 1, 317 16 Brueggemann, "Israel's Two Histories," 103 nn 47, 48

262

Journal of Biblical Literature

might, and riches to understanding and knowing "me," that is, Yahweh. Just as a positive use of W?nrP replaces the earlier negative usage, so too the first person pronoun used for God replaces the earlier possessive pronouns. Anthropocentric pronouns are replaced by theocentric pronouns in the move from negative to positive. The double motivation clause C? . . "O) begins with the establishment of a positive triad to counterbalance the negative triad of v. 22. Wisdom, might, and power are replaced by God's steadfast love ("), justice (tDD^D), and righteousness (njTTC). Distorted sources of human identity are super seded by the true sources of the community's identity that are grounded in God's faithful character and acts (nfcty). God's steadfast love, justice, and righteousness are the source of identity and well-being, of security and gover nance. These are the only grounds for boasting. The final transformation of boasting and glory is accomplished by the verb ) in the second half of the motivational clause. Steadfast love, justice, and righteousness are God's delight, that in which God glories. The move from self-delight and self-glory to God's delight and glory is thus complete. The move from the first to the second half of Jer 9:22-23 is accomplished by the adversative DN n 5 that begins v. 23. This adversative receives the rhetorical stress of the pericope. 17 It serves to contrast the negative triad with the positive triad and to emphasize the move from anthropocentric to theo centric boasting. The framing of the teaching in Jer 9:22-23 deserves one final comment. This wisdom teaching is introduced by a messenger formula and concludes with a repetition of the words, "says the Lord." In all probability this frame is a secondary addition to the text.18 Jer 9:22-23 is thus itself an exercise in intertextual (intertraditional) 19 exegesis. The messenger formula frame is added to a wisdom teaching to create a new text of divine revelation. This exegetical act of framing serves to reinforce the theocentric message at the heart of the text. II We can now turn to 1 Cor 1:26-31. The relationship between Jer 9:22-23 and 1 Cor 1:26-31 is not difficult to establish. An explicit reference to Jer 9:23 appears in 1 Cor 1:31, introduced by the technical formula, "as it is written." 20 This reference is not the full extent of the relationship

Ibid., 92. Ibid., 91. Note that the messenger formula frame is absent from 1 Sam 2:10 (LXX). 19 This use of the messenger formula to frame the wisdom saying can best be understood under the rubrics of Fishbane's discussion of the traditioning process and generic transforma tions in ancient Israel; see Biblical Interpretation, 6-9, 500-503. 20 See Bruce Metzger, "The Formulas Introducing Quotations in the NT and Mishna," JBL
18

17

O'Day: A Study in Intertextuality

263

between the two texts, however. Rather, it serves as an explicit invitation to read Paul's text in concert with Jeremiah.21 As I hope to show, this reading provides fresh insight into exegetical details of Paul's text and into its larger structure and theological message. 1 Cor 1:26 has been of perennial interest to NT scholars for what it has been said to reveal about the sociology of the early Christian community. Its words that "not many were wise, powerful, of noble birth" have been used to paint a portrait of the humble origins of the early church. Recent sociological work on early Christian communities, building on a broader base than this single verse, has reconstructed a much more complex social history.22 Yet the almost romantic hold of this verse on the minds of interpreters and trans lators remains strong. Despite the evidence that some members of the com munity were among the higher social classes, interpreters seem unwilling to relinquish their ideological commitment to the proletarian constituency of the early Christian communities.23 In 1973 Wilhelm Wuellner wrote an important article on 1 Cor 1:26, challenging its traditional translation. Wuellner identified the grammatical markers in the verse (particularly the . . . and / patterns) and argued that the verse should be translated as an interrogative, not an indicative as is almost universally the case.24 I believe that Wuellner's argu ment is suggestive, although it has received very little attention. Translated as an interrogative, v. 26 would read, "Look to your call, brothers and sisters, were not many of you wise according to the flesh, were not many strong, were not many of noble birth?" The anticipated answer, Wuellner suggests (again indicated by grammatical markers), was "Yes!" Wuellner writes, "Verse 26b made the Corinthians respond somewhat like this: 'Why, yes, of course, many of us . .. were (or, are) indeed endowed with wisdom, power, and noble
70 (1951) 297-307, and Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "The Use of Explicit Old Testament Quotations in Qumran Literature and in the New Testament," NTS 7 (1960-61) 297-333. 21 Two recent commentaries on 1 Corinthians provide the most extensive discussions of the relationship between the Jeremian and Pauline texts: Roy A. Harrisville, 1 Corinthians (Augs burg Commentary on the New Testament; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1987); and Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987). Fee suggests that Jer 9:23-24 serves as the framework of the argument (p. 78), but, as I shall show, the text has a much larger function. 22 Gerd Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983); and Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983). 23 I am grateful to Wayne Merritt, Professor at the Interdenominational Theological Center of Atlanta, for his response to an earlier version of this paper. His comments helped me to articulate more carefully the relationship between sociology and theology in 1 Cor 1:26-31. 24 Wilhelm Wuellner, "The Sociological Implications of I Corinthians 1:26-28 Recon sidered," SE VI (ed. E. A. Livingstone; Berlin: Akademie, 1973) 666-672. At the time Wuellner wrote his article, he noted (p. 667) that the Jerusalem Bible was the only major translation to punctuate the verse as an interrogative. The New Jerusalem Bible has since abandoned the inter rogative punctuation.

264

Journal of Biblical Literature

25

heritage. What about it?'" If we read the verse in this way, we are able to see it as an example of the Pauline irony that is so characteristic of 1 Corin 26 thians 1-4, Paul confronts the Corinthians with the paradox of their social location and theological identity. The most important implication of Wuellner's work is that it allows us to give v. 26 a fresh reading. Close attention to the grammar and syntax of this verse encourages us to reexamine its content and function. Wuellner's reading of v. 26 enables him to question the dominant reading of the social location of the Corinthian Christians and thereby to offer a fresh theological reading of the text.27 The issue is not whether v. 26 has sociological content and import. Questions of social status divided the Corinthian community, and Paul's words in v. 26 reflect the complex reality of that social situation. Rather, the issue is whether a prior commitment to a particular view of the Corinthians' social location precludes a full hearing of the theology of this verse. If Paul is acknowledging in v. 26 that many of the Corinthians were wise, rich, and of noble birth, he does so with a theological purpose. In v. 26 Paul was disabusing the Corinthians of the anthropocentric categories ( ) on which they had falsely based their individual and communal iden tities (cf. 4:8-9). The key to Paul's theological argument lies in the negative triad of wise/powerful/noble birth (//). Wuellner recog nizes the importance of the triad and attempts to trace the three terms back to God's three gifts to humankind in Gen l:26-28. 28 This linkage is strained, however, and ignores the clue that Paul himself provides in v. 31 to the origin of the triad. The Corinthian triad of wise/powerful/noble birth derives directly from the Jeremian triad of wise/strong/rich in Jer 9:22.29 The Pauline text repli cates the three terms of the Jeremiah triad, the exact order of the triad, and its function to critique false sources of security. That Paul derives this triad from Jer 9:22 is confirmed in the repetition of the triadic elements in w. 27-28. In that repetition the same order of elements is maintained, but the middle term is now instead of . ' is found in the LXX of Jer 9:22, and Paul thus moves closer to the original wording of the genera tive Jeremiah text in his repetition. Wise/powerful/noble birth are thus not simply descriptions of social location, but are essential elements in a theo logical critique.
Wuellner, "Sociological Implications," 668. For a discussion of irony in 1 Corinthians 1-4, see Karl A. Plank, Paul and the Irony of Affliction (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987). 27 Wuellner, "Sociological Implications," 671. 28 Ibid., 671-72; see also Wuellner, "Ursprung und Verwendung der -, -, Formel in 1 Kor 1,26," in Donum Gentilicum: New Testament Studies in Honor of David Daube (ed. E. Bammel et al.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1978) 165-84. 29 Fee links this triad to Jeremiah 9 (First Epistle to the Corinthians, 80).
26 25

O'Day: A Study in Intertextuality

265

This understanding of v. 26 also helps to correct a misreading of w. 27-29. When the triad of v. 26 is read as an indicative announcement of the community's situation that is, you were (are) not wise/strong/of noble birth then the triad of w. 27-28 (foolish/weak/lowly birth; // ) is read as a positive articulation of the community's status. If the com munity is not wise/strong/rich, they are therefore foolish/weak/lowly. In such a reading, the foolish/weak/lowly Corinthian community is chosen by God to shame the world and invert its values. This reading is dubious on grammatical grounds, however, because it disregards the initial interrogative of v. 26 and the / pattern that is used to indicate contrast. 30 It is also theo logically dubious, because for Paul it is the cross, not the divided and divisive Corinthian community, that shames the world.31 Jer 9:22-23 once again leads the way to a fresh reading. The adversative in 1 Cor 1:27 has a function similar to the DK ^5 of Jer 9:23 and receives comparable rhetorical stress. Just as the DN "O in the Jeremiah text empha sized the radical contrast between negative and positive boasting and the negative and positive triads, so too the here emphasizes a similar con trast. The introduces Paul's presentation of the consequences of defin ing oneself according to the negative triad of wise/strong/rich (noble birth). Verses 27-28 do not affirm that God chooses the community to invert the world's values. On the contrary, the terms foolish/weak/lowly birth refer to that which God chooses over against the wise/strong/rich community to check its anthropocentric boasting. The word against such boasting is made explicit in v. 29, which in many ways is a summary of Jer 9:22. Anthropo centric boasting ( ) is excluded in the presence of God. Verses 27-29 thus function as an expanded warning to the community, not a commendation. The parallels between Jer 9:22 and 1 Cor 1:26-29 can be pursued in yet another direction. All three terms in the opening triad of v. 26 and its expan sion in w. 27-28 reflect particular issues that threaten to divide and disrupt the Corinthians. The first term in the triad, wisdom, and its counterpoint, fool ishness, together are the central topic of chaps. 1-4. Wisdom is indeed one of the central causes of boasting in the community (e.g., 4:6). The second set, strong/weak, constitutes the heart of Paul's argument in chaps. 8-10, where the growing breach between strong and weak Christians threatens the unity of the church. Finally, the third element, noble/lowly birth, receives its full embodi ment in the controversy over the Lord's Supper in chap. 11. The celebration of the Eucharist is marred in Corinth by economic and class divisions.32

Wuellner, "Sociological Implications," 669. See K. E. Bailey, "Recovering the Poetic Structure of 1 Cor 1:17-2:2: A Study in Text and Commentary," NovT 17 (1975) 265-96. Bailey notes the theological contradiction in 1:26 but solves the problem by bracketing the phrase "remember your call" as a parenthetical comment. 32 See Theissen, Social Setting, chaps. 3 and 4.
31

30

266

Journal of Biblical Literature

In Paul's use of the triad from Jer 9:22, then, we see illustrated Fishbane's observation that inner biblical exegesis arises out of a particular crisis of some sort. Paul did not engage in exegesis of Jeremiah for the sake of inter pretive creativity. He read the Corinthian situation through the lens of Jeremiah (or mutatis mutandis, Jeremiah through the lens of the Corinthian situation) because of the exigency of the situation. Jer 9:22 offered a critique of the false sources of security that threatened to alienate the Jerusalem com munity from its covenantal identity and responsibility, and Paul found that critique compelling and crucial for his own situation. The authoritative word of Jeremiah spoke anew in a fresh social context. Ill In the Jeremiah text, the DN "O in v. 23 marked the transition from negative to positive, from anthropocentric to theocentric. In the 1 Corin thians text, the warning of w. 27-29 that is introduced by marks the same transition. After the section, the focus turns to positive boasting and to God in w. 30-31. The first positive statement, as is also the case in Jer 9:23a, is a positive statement about knowledge and wisdom. Jeremiah located the true source of the community's identity in the understanding and knowledge of God; Paul locates the source of identity in "Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom" (v. 30). This statement about wisdom and identity is followed in Paul, as is also the case in Jer 9:23, by a positive triad: "our righteousness and sanctification and redemption" (, , ) (v. 30). The . . . construction clearly indicates that the three terms are to be read as a triad. 33 We thus see that the positive part of the Corinthian pericope, w. 30-31, continues to be patterned after Jeremiah. The move from negative to positive, signaled especially by the development of a positive triad, is shared by both Paul and Jeremiah. In Jeremiah the shift in the triad marks a shift from anthropocentric to theocentric categories. In Paul, the shift in the triad also marks a shift from anthropocentric to theocentric categories (cf. "whom God made," v. 30). Paul, however, does not stop with the theocentric shift, but proceeds to what is for him the decisive articulation of God: Christ Jesus. This christocentric move in Paul clarifies the difference in terminology between the positive triad in Jeremiah (steadfast love, justice, righteousness) and the positive triad in Paul (righteousness, sanctification, redemption). Paul does not focus strictly on Yahweh's saving acts in the covenant, as Jeremiah does, but on God's saving acts in Jesus Christ. The positive triad 34 in Paul thus reflects Christian soteriology: God through Christ to us.
33 34

BDF, 444. Hans Conzelmann, J Corinthians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 52.

O'Day: A Study in Intertextuality

267

The christocentric move clearly distinguishes Paul's exegesis from his received Jeremiah text.35 Paul introduces a term into the text, Christ Jesus, that is clearly foreign to the Jeremiah text. Yet this christocentric move also reveals the complexity of the intertextuality here, because it is the authoritative voice of Jeremiah that makes Paul's particular christocentric presentation possible. Paul's ability to speak of Christ here is dependent on Jeremiah's earlier articulation of God. IV 1 Cor 1:26-31 concludes, as already noted, with an explicit reference to Jer 9:23, "therefore as it is written, 'Let the one who boasts, boast of the Lord.'"36 Paul's intention is clear: we are to hear his discussion as an exegesis of the Jeremiah text. Fishbane defines haggadic exegesis as that which 'characteristically draws forth latent and unsuspected meanings from the received tradition"; it "utilizes the potential fullness of received formulations and makes this potential actual."37 Two of the methodological considerations that Fishbane identifies as means of analysis of haggadic exegesis are helpful here. First, haggadic exegesis is most easily recognized when the use of a received text is "formally indicated through technical formulae." This is clearly the case in 1 Cor 1:31. Second, the received text may be incorporated and interwoven into a new text which "transforms or re-employs it." This method is more difficult to identify, but an important heuristic guideline is the "dense occurrence" in one text of terms from the other.38 This, too, is clearly the case in Paul's use of Jer 9:22-23 in 1 Cor 1:26-30. In Paul's use of Jer 9:22-23 we thus see intertexuality at its fullest. Paul both makes explicit reference to the received text and interweaves it thoroughly into the fabric of his new text. The intertextual relationship between Jer 9:22-23 and 1 Cor 1:26-31 is thus evidenced in verbal parallels, but also in structural and substantive theological parallels. Jeremiah's critique of wisdom, power, and wealth as false sources of identity that violate the covenant are re-imaged by Paul as a critique of wisdom, power, and wealth that impede God's saving acts in Jesus Christ.
35 It is this christological move that leads Fishbane to conclude that Paul and the Gospels are not examples of biblical exegesis, because "the dominant thrust of these documents is that they have fulfilled or superseded the ancient Israelite traditum" (Biblical Interpretation, 10). Paul's use of the Israelite tradition, however, seems to proceed from the same textual-exegetical imagination as that of his scribal and prophetic forebears. 38 For a discussion of the influence of this Jeremiah text on Paul's larger argument about boasting, see Josef Schreiner, "Jerema 9:22.23 als Hintergrund des paulinischen 'SichRuhmens,'" in Neues Testament und Kirche (ed. J. Gnilka; Freiburg: Herder, 1974) 530-42. 37 Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation, 283. 38 Ibid., 291.

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.