How popular is LessWrong with Stanford students


Citation preview

Scientific studies on the New Testament Editor / Editor Jörg Frey (Zurich) Co-editor / Associate Editors Markus Bockmuehl (Oxford) James A. Kelhoffer (Uppsala) Hans-Josef Klauck (Chicago, IL) Tobias Nicklas (Regensburg)


Doing Gender - Doing Religion Case Studies on Intersectionality in Early Judaism, Christianity and Islam edited by

Ute E. Eisen, Christine Gerber and Angela Standhartinger

Mohr Siebeck

Ute E. Eisen: born 1961; Study of the Ev. Theology; PhD at the University of Hamburg; Habilitation at the Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg; since 2004 professor of the Old Testament and New Testament at the Justus Liebig University in Giessen. Christine Gerber: born 1963; Study of the Ev. Theology; 1996 PhD at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich; 2005 habilitation at the Humboldt University in Berlin; since 2007 professor for New Testament at the Department of Protestant Theology at the University of Hamburg. Angela Standhartinger: born 1964; Study of the Ev. Theology; PhD and habilitation at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt; since 2000 professor for the New Testament at the Philipps University of Marburg.

e-ISBN PDF 978-3-16-152368-7 ISBN 978-3-16-152226-0 ISSN 0512-1604 (Scientific studies on the New Testament) The German National Library lists this publication in the German National Bibliography; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http: //dnb.dnb. de available. © 2013 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen. The work, including all of its parts, is protected by copyright. Any use outside the narrow limits of copyright law without the consent of the publisher is inadmissible and punishable by law. This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was set by Michael Schlierbach in Neubünsch (, printed by Gulde-Druck in Tübingen on age-resistant printing paper and bound by the Spinner bookbinder in Ottersweier.

Foreword This anthology publishes the revised articles from a conference that took place under the same title from June 30th to July 2nd, 2011 in Rauischholzhausen (Hesse). The conference was prepared in an interdisciplinary committee, to which, in addition to the editors, Prof. Dr. Bärbel Beinhauer-Koehler, Dr. Christiane Krause and Prof. Dr. Silke Petersen belonged. For the editors, the publication is an occasion for a variety of thanks. First of all we would like to thank the three named for the great cooperation. We would like to thank all scientists for having set themselves the task of addressing the question of intersectionality for their subject area and for enriching the conference with lectures and discussions. Another reason to be grateful is that you invested time and effort in the publication. The publishing house Mohr Siebeck and colleagues Prof. Dr. We would like to thank Jörg Frey for including the publication in the first row of the “Scientific Studies on the New Testament”. We are grateful to our academic staff for their great support in editing, Dr. Ursula Kaiser, Dr. des. Friederike Oertelt (both Hamburg), Ms. Aliyah El Mansy (Marburg), Ms. Verena Grunewald and Ms. Gunna Lampe-Thielmann (both Gießen). Finally, I would like to thank Mr. Michael Schlierbach (Rosenheim) for the competent preparation of the artwork and the register. May the volume with its question about the interplay between 'gender' and 'religion' as well as other social aspects and the differentiated detailed studies promote the perspective of early Jewish, early Christian and early Islamic texts and the interpretations of the world that are reflected in them. Gießen, Hamburg and Marburg, September 2012

The editors

Table of contents Foreword ................................................ .................................................. .............. V Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger Doing Gender - Doing Religion. On the question of intersectionality in biblical studies. An introduction ................................................ .................................................. .. 1

(De) construction and application Ulrike Auga Gender and religion as interdependent categories of knowledge. Intersectionality debate, deconstruction, discourse analysis and the criticism of ancient texts ........................................ ..................................... 37 Karen L. King Gender Contestation as Political Critique. Four Cases from Ancient Christianity ............................................. ................ 75 Silke Petersen "Every heresy is a worthless woman" (Epiphanius von Salamis). On the construction of the gender difference in religious controversy ................. 99

Intercultural marriages and gender morality in early Judaism, Christianity and Islam Christl M. Maier The discourse on intercultural marriages in Jehud as an ancient example of intersectionality ...................... .............................. 129


Table of Contents

Aliyah El Mansy Interreligious Marriages in the Literary Discourse of the 1st / 2nd Century. Plutarch and the first letter of Peter in comparison ......................................... 155 Bärbel Beinhauer-Koehler "Infidelity" in the emerging Islam. A Koranic norm of the couple relationship in interplay with the new religion ....................................... ................. 179 Doris Decker Women between self-determination and external determination. Change in female gender constructions in religious change processes using the example of early Islamic traditions ... 193

'Gender' in religious politics and morals Friederike Oertelt Gender, religion and politics with Philo von Alexandria ................................ ................................................ 227 Christiane Krause Patria Potestas - Honor Shame? Dead daughters in the chapter “De pudicitia” by Valerius Maximus ................. 251 Brigitte Kahl War, masculinity and the imperial God the Father. The August forum and the messianic re-imagination of "Hagar" in Galatians .................................... ..................................... 273

Slaves in times of religious law education Catherine Hezser Part Whore, Part Wife. Slave Women in the Palestinian Rabbinic Tradition .................................... 303 Bernadette J. Brooten Enslaved Women in Basil of Caesarea's Canonical Letters. An Intersectional Analysis ............................................... .............................. 325

Table of Contents


Men's questions about the New Testament Moisés Mayordomo Jesus' masculinity in the Gospel of Mark. A search for clues ................................................ ............................................ 359 Shelly Matthews The Weeping Jesus and the Daughters of Jerusalem. Gender and Conquest in Lukan Lament ............................................ .......... 381 Martin Leutzsch Eunuch and intersectionality. A multi-perspective attempt on Acts 8.26-40 .................................... 405 Register of places .. .................................................. .............................................. 431 Register of persons .. .................................................. .......................................... 451 Item register ...... .................................................. .............................................. 459 authors .................................................. .............................. 467

Doing Gender - Doing Religion On the question of intersectionality in biblical studies. An introduction by Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

The contributions to this anthology relate in different ways to the analysis of “intersectionalities” as can be seen in texts from antiquity and late antiquity. The focus is on the interaction between 'gender' and 'religion' in times of religious upheaval. Texts from the Old Testament, early Judaism, the New Testament, the oldest Christian communities and early Islam represent the reference horizon in which interdependencies between gender roles and religious concepts are considered. The basic question, which is applied to various case studies in the essays in the anthology, takes up a discourse that has been intensifying since the 1990s, especially under the metaphor of "intersectionality" (crossover) in the social, political and, subsequently, historical sciences 20th century. The title formulation “Doing Gender - Doing Religion” alludes to the critical starting point of essentialist approaches: Gender “is” not, but is “made” in the field. And analogously, religion is also analyzed here as a dynamic social process. In order to depict this central aspect of the non-essentialist understanding of the categories “gender” and “religion”, we put these - as well as all other categories of the intersectionality debate - apart from other terms in single quotation marks. The task of this introduction is to introduce the question of intersectionality research and its inclusion in this volume (I.). An overview of the history of research shows previous applications of the question and its theoretical reflection in feminist theology and New Testament science (II.). From these two sections the question arises to what extent 'religion' can be considered a category of intersectional analysis in antiquity (III.). After an overview of the contributions in the anthology (IV.), A brief conclusion concludes the introduction (V.).


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

I. The debate about intersectionalities and their inclusion in the study of ancient texts1 While the dating of concepts and texts from ancient times, which are the focus of this anthology, is always questionable, the hour of birth of the metaphor "intersectionality" must be precisely determined. The American legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw coined it in 1989 to draw attention to the fact that the theories and policies that criticize social unequal treatment are too one-sided in considering only one form of discrimination. Specifically, she pointed out that the situation of “women of color” is not really perceived in either sexism or racism criticism.2 With the metaphor “intersectionality”, which was initially related to the image of a street crossing, Crenshaw found a term that has been widely received since then Problem that was raised more than ten years earlier in the black women's movement.3 The “place of origin” of the intersectionality discourse is therefore the feminist criticism of the marginalization and disadvantage of groups of people as well as their experiences of multiple discrimination on the basis of 'race', 'class 'and' gender '. The metaphor “intersectionality” and the problem it named were taken up in various ways in the years that followed. Because the need for discussion was and is obvious, and that multiple discriminations1 The literature on the question is immense. Since the aim here is not to depict the discussion, the references are limited to a few titles. Gabriele Winker / Nina Degele (eds.), Intersectionality, gives a good insight. See also the anthologies by Helma Lutz et al. (Ed.), Focus on Intersectionality; Cornelia Klinger et al. (Ed.), Axes of Inequality: On the relationship between class, gender and ethnicity; Sabine Hess et al. (Ed.), Intersectionality revisited. Instructive introductions to the history of the discussion are given by Katharina Walgenbach, Gender as an interdependent category, 23–64; Gudrun-Axeli Knapp, “Intersectionality”, 68–81 and Leslie MacCall, Complexity of Intersectionality, 1771–1800. 2 Her initiative paper was published in 1989 under the title Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics. Crenshaw was referring specifically to the legally under-complex treatment of social injustices in the remuneration of women of color; cf. also this., Mapping the Margins, 1241–1299, as an analysis of experiences of violence by “women of color” from an intersectional perspective. 3 In the Combahee River Collective Statement, the authors' collective consisting of black feminist lesbian women formulated as early as 1977: “The major source of difficulty in our political work is that we are not just trying to fight oppression on one front or even two, but instead to address a whole range of oppressions. We do not have racial, sexual, heterosexual, or class privilege to rely upon, nor do we have even the minimal access to resources and power that groups who possess anyone of these types of privilege have. "Http: // defcon1 / combrivercoll.html (August 17, 2012).



Theoretically neglecting the role of women has already been criticized many times, especially in Black Feminism. In the Second Women's Movement, in particular, it was revealed that a large proportion of women would be marginalized again if the question of self-determination and access to power and resources fails to recognize the differences among people who are subsumed as female.4 This discourse networked now deal with others such as racism or social criticism in order to analyze interactions theoretically. “Instead of simply adding the effects of two, three or more suppressions (which is difficult enough), the protagonists of the concept (sc. The intersectionality analysis) emphasize that the categories appear in an interwoven way and mutually reinforce, weaken or change can […]. The aim is a comprehensive theoretical and above all empirical analysis of the meanings of different categories of difference in phenomena and processes of different kinds. ”5 So the term was succinctly brought to the fore, which urgently needed analysis, and now in the USA, soon in others too Continents, was discussed. Today's discussion about “diversity management”, which is now also being carried out in the personnel policy of large corporations, can be understood as a late, toothless mutation.6 Of course, beyond the generally shared conviction, there is the fact that different forms of oppression work together in societies and therefore there is It is not appropriate to concentrate theoretically only on one aspect or to consider forms of oppression only additively, there is no consensus on what to ask for and how. The discussion shows that the step from the analysis of the “micro level” to the “macro level” is not easy.7 While on the “micro level”, in the processes of individual identity formation, social differences are situationally brought about and at the same time also changed, the social construction is based from identity to affiliation or deviation from the respective categorizations. It may be obvious that the life of a “black” woman of the “lower class” from the Bronx is determined differently than that of a “white” academic from Marburg or Cambridge, then 4

On “Stimulators and genealogies of the interdependent debate” see Walgenbach, Gender als interdependent category, 25ff, here 25; See also Kathy Davis, Intersectionality as a “Buzzword”, in: Lutz et al. (ed.), Focus Intersectionality, 55–68, on the epistemological explanations of the success story of the “intersectionality” paradigm. It was precisely because of the openness and diffusion of the theory that the question was received so vigorously. 5 Winker / Degele, intersectionality, 10f. 6 Cf. Knapp, “Intersectionality”. 7 Cf. on this differentiation as an approach to structure the confusing discussion, Klinger, Crossing Identities, in: Dies. et al. (ed.), Über-Kreuzungen, 38-67.


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

the question of which theoretical premises and instruments should be used to analyze “intersectionality”. As already explained, the intersectionality debate grew out of political and social science discourses and is therefore geared towards contemporary societies. The focus of the present anthology, on the other hand, is on “case studies” on religious texts from antiquity and late antiquity, processed primarily from a theological and religious studies perspective. The first question to be asked is whether and how the question of intersectionality is suitable as a method of historical clarification and analysis.This anthology aims to make a contribution to this question, and in particular to the question of the heuristic added value of the intersectionality discourse in historical, religious and theological research. The complexity of the discussion and the variety of proposed solutions for how an analysis of what has been brought to the concept of "intersectionality" only superficially cannot be shown here. However, four questions of increasing degree of abstraction indicate what needs to be considered. 1. The question about the individual categories Due to their origin in the central anti-discrimination discourses, the categories “gender, class and race” have become the “classic triple”. But the question arises as to whether this triad is actually sufficient to analyze the intersectionally interwoven structures of oppression in a specific society. Doesn't this mean that other suppression mechanisms are hidden? The question is also of ethical relevance, because ignorance of a form of oppression can be understood as discriminatory on its part. It is repeatedly asked to include 'body', 'age', 'sexual orientation' etc. However, this also raises the question of whether the “categories” should actually be recorded in an analog manner. Does the 'gender', which is considered to be fixed according to our culture, really shape identity in the same way as the 'status', which according to the ideals of social permeability can be changed? who distinguish ours? Of course, “gender, class and race” are also not “natural” categories, and they already change their face on their “transatlantic journey”, as the historical avoidance of the term “race” in German indicates Rendtorff, Why gender is something “special”, in: Klinger et al. (Ed.), Über-kreuzungen, 68–86. 9 Cf. more precisely Knapp, “Intersectionality”, 68. On the problem of the talk of “race” see also Winker / Degele, Intersectionality, 15–18 as well as II.1 below.



gories initially reflect historically the consequences of modern nationalism and industrialization, 10 the analysis of ancient texts only uses these terms equivokally anyway. 2. The question of the status of the categories Categories such as “class”, “race” and “gender” come from a historical location, a specific social structure. This is evident in the term 'class', which in the form used today comes from industrialized society. How this term can be transferred to other epochs remains to be asked. It would of course be a gross simplification to contextualize the “categories” only in their historical development. Post-structuralism and deconstruction have perpetuated self-reflection by showing that structural categories such as 'race' / 'ethnicity', 'class' / 'status' or 'gender' / 'body' / 'sexuality' are by no means essential. They are (re) produced in performative and discursive interactions. The title “Doing Gender - Doing Religion” refers to this constructivist approach: The “gender” is not understood as essence, but the classification of people into female and male as a product of “performative actions” 11. In other words, "gender identity and role are [...] acquired and exercised through behavior and action that are appropriate to the situation - and not once and for all, but are updated anew in every situation in which people are forced to act." 12 As Mother theories of intersectionality analysis have brought this perspective into the gender discourse and made it fruitful for the questions of racial discrimination or social stratification. However, the “Doing Gender” approach asks how specific individuals gender in social interactions and processes. At the level of interviews, the methods of intersectionality analysis can be used to (re) construct how processes of social identity formation take place. The particular difficulty of historical research in older epochs is that it cannot be observed how individuals act situationally as a specific gender. Rather, it can (only) be investigated how 'genders' are constructed in texts and possibly also archaeological evidence. The phrase “Doing Religion”, which is based on the well-rehearsed speech of “Doing Gender”, is intended to indicate that the 10 Cf. Klinger, Über-kreuzende

Identities, 50-55. Claudia Opitz-Belekahal, Gender History, 27, with reference to the ethnologists Candace West and Don Zimmerman. 12 Ibid. 11


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

Differentiation and essential determinations in the field of the religious should be understood nonessentialistically, even if the performative creation of identities proceeds differently here too (see III. Below). 3. The question of the appropriate question If consequently the question is asked how differences were generated and expressed in concrete ancient societies, then the critical impetus of deconstructivism also affects the questioners themselves: not only the object, but also them Categories with which the object is viewed are not objective givens, but are created discursively. Should discourse theory not only be taken up as an ethical impulse for perpetuated self-relativization, then its consideration for the intersectionality analysis of ancient texts and artifacts represents a special challenge. How is this insight-critical insight adequately taken into account in the intersectional analyzes? Crenshaw's metaphor of "intersections" was suitable to finally give the "elephant in the room" 13 the necessary attention. But is it capable of opening one's eyes to the complex interconnection of object and knowing subject? The image of “intersections” suggests that different categories such as streets or straight lines intersect at one point in space, but otherwise exist separately.14 It only records the interaction of “gender” and ethnic affiliation or social status selectively. This can release the political impulse, as in the case of the lower wages of black women, but does not do justice to the interaction of different identity politics. At the “macro level” of social analysis, it cannot be communicated that the categories under consideration always influence each other. Other metaphors are brought into play to sharpen the view. Images such as the likewise geometric “axes of inequality” 15 or the cartographic concept of “mapping the margins” 16 used by Crenshaw make aspects visible, but obscure others. The talk of “interactions” or “interdependencies” may be more appropriate to make it clear that none of the “categories” used should be viewed as immobile. But even in this formulation, the participation of the questioning subject in the generation of the differences is not visible. Walgenbach, for example, beats the 13 Cf. Mayordomo

below in the anthology on this metaphor. as an interdependent category, 49. 15 Cf. the essay of the same name by Klinger and Knapp, in: Dies. et al. (ed.), Axes of Inequality, 19–41. 16 See Crenshaw, Mapping the Margins. 14 See Walgenbach, Gender



Formula of the “interdependent categories” 17 in order to undermine the latent notion of genuine kernels. The phrase “doing difference” coined after the talk of “doing gender”, however, focuses on the creation of the categories themselves, 18 but has to face the reproach that inequalities are only seen as a problem of production and thus their roots in social structures 19 Winker and Degele therefore propose the method of "intersectional multilevel analysis" 20: It is not just about interactions in the area of ​​social practice, but rather the "levels" of social practices, symbolic representation and the construction of identity themselves interact with the Making inequalities. The problem of the appropriate designation ultimately only reflects the limits of the possibility of grasping lived life, social structures and the collective production of structures of difference in their complexity, and moreover, to be aware that the respective concept determines the perception of the object. In this anthology, Ulrike Auga refers to the problematic consequences of the operationalization of categories with the talk of “epistemic violence”. She therefore advocates taking up the question of intersectionality as a critique of knowledge systems using the means of “disidentification” in order to overcome essentializations, including the queer discourse. Can "epistemic violence" be avoided without being speechless? While “Doing Intersectionality” as a program is plausible and - as this anthology would like to show - heuristically productive, the practice of analysis remains dependent on self-critical reflection. 4. The question of the question of religion The specialist sciences gathered in this volume set themselves the task of looking at 'religion' as a category of intersectional analysis. The term religion is used here pragmatically as a working term; Its importance in antiquity and, in particular, the determination of its relationship to the category of 'ethnos' should be discussed separately (see III below). Religion is rarely an issue in the social science analyzes of intersectionality. This can be explained first of all by the research interest in (post-) modern societies that are considered to be secularized. 17 See Walgenbach, Gender

as an interdependent category. Sarah Fenstermaker / Candace West (ed.), Doing Gender, and overall West / Fenstermaker, Doing Difference, 357–384. 19 Cf. Walgenbach, Gender as an interdependent category, 49–52. 20 Winker / Degele, intersectionality. 18 cf.


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

After the devastating religious wars of early modern Europe and the Enlightenment, religion is no longer understood as a function of a society, but as a private matter that expresses itself as a personal (religious) conviction or not. Thus religion does not seem to have any social significance. If religious affiliation is included in intersectionality analyzes as an aspect of differentiation and discrimination, then it is also positioned differently. Winker and Degele assign 'religion' to the structural category 'race', since it symbolizes differences that are considered natural and which are used to identify groups.21 Lutz and Wenning initially do not consider 'religion' in their 13 hierarchical lines of difference, but then classify them However, in addition to language skills, the concept of culture is used in the oppositions believing - not believing, belonging - not belonging.22 This signals another reason for the fact that religion has hardly been discussed in the intersectionality debate up to now: the parameter of religious identity stands at right angles to the categorizations, which start from asymmetrical duals, 23 because in religious contexts it is hardly a question of only binary differentiations. And the evaluation of the alternatives - who is on top? - In this case, it is not globally negotiated, but rather a point of contention: which religious interpretation of the world is the “true” one is judged differently by each subsystem, 24 and within the subsystems this dispute about “truth” continues. In the religious upheaval processes of so-called monotheistic religions, which consider the contributions collected here, the dispute over truth is fierce. In these often apologetic discourses of religion, demarcation and setting of differences are common, one's own practice and one's own beliefs are symbolically essentialized as truth. In this respect, the analogization of, for example, 'gender' or 'race' discourses and religious discourses can sharpen the view for the creation of difference and hierarchies in the latter. In line with the thesis of permanent interrelationships between discourses, the aspects of “gender” and “religion” are also discussed in this anthology, always taking into account other categories. The interweaving of the dimensions becomes particularly clear in the question of how slaves are perceived: Primarily according to “status”, “gender” or

21 See Winker

/ Degele, Intersectionality, 47–49, 55. Helma Lutz / Norbert Wenning, Differenzen über difference, 11–24, here 20. 23 Cf. the list of 13 “bipolar difference lines”, ibid. 24 Cf. Leutzsch at the bottom of this anthology . 22nd



as “man before God” according to the respective theological anthropology? 25 Here, as in other cases, a look at the interactions reveals that constructs of femininity are not consistent. Incidentally, discourses of masculinity are also included in an analogous manner.26 The analysis of valuations, their internal coherence, legitimation and functionalization is illuminating for the logics of religious articulation as well as for the gender discourses. On the other hand, notions of gender roles can be strategically introduced - also at the same time - for religious self-assurance or for the defense of one's own faith and for criticizing other religious systems.27 What is of particular interest here is what kind of gender differentiation serves the apology, and again how it is, as far as recognizable , these strategies of legitimation relate to lived life and other symbolic politics. Mutual influences of these discourses are particularly evident in the phases examined in this anthology in the transition from antiquity to late antiquity, and these are therefore particularly suitable for “field research”.

II. On the question of intersectionality in the feminist-theological discussion Also in the feminist-theological discussion, the triple “gender, race, and class” was taken up for analysis, further differentiated and methodologically reflected. The following overview aims to reconstruct milestones in the research of such interdependent categorizations. First, the beginnings of the discussion in feminist theology in German-speaking countries are presented. Then it is outlined what was worked out methodologically and in terms of content in the exegetical debate on the New Testament, taking into account the intersectionality analysis. The research-historical overview shows that interdependencies of oppressive structures have been perceived and discussed since the late 1970s, mainly because this was demanded by those who saw themselves particularly affected by the marginalization of feminist discourses.

25 See Hezser

and Brooten at the bottom of this volume. and Matthews at the bottom of this volume. 27 See Petersen at the bottom of this volume. 26 Cf. Mayordomo, Leutzsch


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

1. The beginnings of research into interdependent structures of oppression in German-speaking feminist theology and exegesis. The impulses to perceive the amalgamation of various oppressive structures came mainly from the USA. The impetus in German-speaking countries was the debate about anti-Judaism in feminist theology. She began analyzing the American Jewish theologian Judith Plaskow in the late 1970s. In her contribution Blaming the Jews for the Birth of Patriarchy28 she criticized the fact that the scientifically dishonest use of sources in feminist theology could give rise to the idea that the supposedly “angry God” of the Old Testament was to blame for the “murder of goddesses”. This God is opposed to Jesus Christ as love that surpasses everything, taking up a Christian-anti-Jewish stereotype. At the same time, Jesus is declared a "feminist" and ahistorically constructed as a shining counter-image to a darkly drawn Jewish-rabbinical patriarchate.29 In the mid-1980s, Plaskov's criticism provided the impetus for Christian-Jewish dialogue within German-speaking feminist theology, which continues to the present day At first only sporadically, but for about ten years now, there has been a dialogue between Christian and Islamic feminists.31 At the end of the 1970s, so-called materialistic exegesis developed in Europe, which is based on the specific living conditions of the people of the 1.Century asked in order to relieve the Bible from an idealistic misunderstanding by placing the poor and the oppressed at the center.32 In the anthology, which was the first for the Federal Republican debate, Der 28 Cf. Judith

Plaskow, Blaming the Jews, 250-254.

29 Cf. Plaskow, Feministischer Antijudaismus, 9–25. 30th

A workshop on feminist theology in Arnoldshain in November 1986 and the discussion in the magazine Schlangenbrut 5 (1987) 16. An overview of the discussion is provided by Leonore Siegele-Wenschkewitz (ed.), Repressed Past, That Believes Us. See also Eveline Valtink, Feminist-Christian Identity and Anti-Judaism, 1–28. 31 In the Schlangenbrut 12 (1986) a literature report appeared: “We are strangers. Turkish women in the FRG ”, feminist impulses from Islam were initially only received sporadically. See, however, Rosie Abul-Fadl, The Woman in Religion and Society according to the Koran and the Islamic Tradition, 155–172. With the issue of the journal Schlangenbrut 77 (2002) and various articles at the ESWTR conferences, the topic has now established itself. See e.g. Saʿdiyya Shaikh, Islam, Feminisms and the Politics of Representation, 93–110; Haifaa Jawad, An Islamic Response to the Conference "Holy Texts: Authority and Language," 129-132. See also Annette Esser et al. (Ed.), Feminist Approaches to Interreligious Dialogue. 32 On the history of materialist exegesis, including feminist criticism, see Brigitte Kahl, Toward a Materialist-Feminist Reading. Cf. also Kuno Füssel, Materialist Reading of the Bible.



As early as 1979, Dorothee Sölle raised the question of discourses on rulership. “To live in a mortal body, to be a real body, means to be dependent. [...] We are not only dependent on biology, but also dependent on those in power, on their culture, their ideas and laws. My inability to accept myself as a woman [...] shows me how controlled, how bound, how unfree I am. ”33

For her, asking “materialistically” does not only mean taking into account the socio-economic conditions and power relations, but in this context also one's own physicality and gender. In doing so, it provides, at least implicitly, the impetus for research into the intersections and networks of various oppressive structures. Luise Schottroff has taken up this thread since 1980 in many studies on women in the Jesus movement, in the Pauline congregations and in patriarchal analyzes.34 In the feminist liberation hermeneutic approach she developed, the experiences of oppression of the marginalized of the Roman Empire are transformed into the experiences of the present made fertile. At the same time, the obfuscation of the option for the poor in the history of interpretation and the history of Christian anti-Judaism are criticized.35 With the systematic analysis of gender hierarchies, economic exploitation relationships and religious prejudice structures, Schottroff developed approaches of an intersectional analysis model as early as this phase. Unlike Schottroff, Brigitte Kahl ties in more closely with Fernando Belo's structuralist impulse. It interprets Luke 1 as a gospel for the poor that proclaims the comprehensive, egalitarian reorganization of gender, economic and power relations. Although this is suppressed by the Gospel of Luke with a view to the Roman fathers in the course of the story, it is at least documented. It is therefore important to read the Gospel of Luke against the Gospel of Luke.36 The works of the Roman Catholic theologian Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, who emigrated from Germany to the USA in 1970, were influential for German biblical studies. In her feminist liberation33 Dorothee Sölle, The Man between Spirit and Matter, 16–36, here 32 (italics in the original). A year later, two more volumes, edited by Willy Schottroff and Wolfgang Stegemann, on materialistic and socio-historical interpretation appeared under the title: Traditions der Befreiung, Vol. 1: Methodical Approaches and Vol. 2: Women in the Bible. 34 Cf. Luise Schottroff, Women in the Followers of Jesus, in: Schottroff / Stegemann, Traditions der Befreiung, Vol. II, 91-133; this., Mary Magdalene and the women at the tomb of Jesus, 3–25. These and other contributions are compiled in the anthology Schottroff, Liberation Experiences. 35 Cf. Schottroff, Lydia's impatient sisters. 36 Brigitte Kahl, Gospel of the Poor and Gospel of the Gentiles.


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

Hermeneutics characterizes the neologism “Kyriarchat”, which grasps structures of rulership in a more complex way than the well-rehearsed talk of patriarchy, namely as a term that expresses “the rule of the emperor / lord / master / father / man over his subordinates.” 37 With this, Schüssler wants Fiorenza to pay attention to it make that exploitation and oppression do not have to proceed solely along gender lines and that the concept of "patriarchy" runs the risk of overlooking oppressed men and women. As a heuristic concept, the Kyriarchat analysis can serve to uncover the power relations and social stratifications that are discursively inscribed in ancient texts and their ideological reproductions in the history of interpretation. In her latest work, Schüssler Fiorenza explicitly refers to the connection between kyriarchal analysis and intersectionality: “A kyriarchal status model of social analysis is able to examine the institutionalized structures and value patterns of domination for their effects on the relative status of social actors in a given society , even if these are inscribed in literary texts. If such status inscriptions constitute persons as peers, capable of participating on a par with each other, then we can speak of status equality or grassroots democracy; if they do not do so, then we speak of domination. "38

The crossing of racism and sexism has been a theme in womanist theology since the 80s. The adjective womanist was coined by Alice Walker to describe the perspective and experiences of black women.39 The examination of the Bible played a central role as an instrument of oppression and as a source of liberating experience.40 In Germany, the critical appraisal of racism began comparatively late Which was probably also due to the fact that after the Shoah and the racially motivated murder of allegedly “non-Aryan”, disabled, homosexual and black people under National Socialism after 1945, understandably, the term 'race' was initially only used with the greatest caution. The German history of the 20th century documents at the same time that and how the category37 Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza, Jesus - Miriam's child, Sophias Prophet, 34; see also this., But She Said, 7–9. 38 Schüssler Fiorenza, Introduction: Exploring the Intersections of Race, Gender, Status, and Ethnicity in Early Christian Studies, in: Nasrallah / dies. (ed.), Prejudice and Christian Beginnings, 1–23, here 16f. as well as their detailed justification and further differentiation of the metaphor Kyriarchat, ibid., 9–15. 39 See Alice Walker, In Search of Our Mothers ’Gardens. 40 See Delores S. Williams, Sisters in the Wilderness. The influential anthology by Cain H. Felder (ed.), Stony the Road We Trod, contains further reflections on the interdependence of gender and racism; See also Renita J. Weems, Reading Her Way through the Struggle, in: ibid., 57-77, and Clarice J. Martin, The Haustafeln (Household Codes) in African American Biblical Interpretation, in: ibid., 206-231 .



'Race', 'Health' and 'Sexuality' could and can even be used as political instruments to justify the murder of millions of people. An expansion of the reappraisal of racism in the German-speaking discussion only took place in 1998 through the voices of black women41. In response to Dolores Williams's womanist theology, Eske Wollrad designs her feminist theology as a critical reflection of “whiteness” .42 In doing so, she draws attention to the interweaving of the categories “race, class, gender” and maintains the postulate of an understanding of gender, the “race 'and' class', for a privilege of white middle-class feminists: 43 “[T] he adoption of the paradigm 'race' / gender / class causes white feminist theologians to move out of fixed positions of the self and the foreign. If they consistently apply the paradigm to themselves, 'race' and 'class' are no longer regarded as the other thing that black women also have, but as components of their own identity and theology. ”44

In the feminist intersectionality debate, the category “body” was introduced as the fourth structural category, alongside “race”, “class” and “gender”. It was introduced into German-speaking feminist theology by Dorothee Wilhelm: 45 From the perspective of disabled women, she objects to the de-gendering of people and protests against the fact that disabled people only appear as objects of good works (cf. e.g. in Lk 14,12– 14). In the classic interpretation matrix of New Testament miracle narratives, it reveals a pressure to normalize and adapt. Heterosexism norms were made visible in the German-speaking discussion as early as 1987 by the anthology, which was highly contested in church politics, Had you thought that there are so many of us. In addition to previously unknown open experience reports from church committed women, Frau41

Schlangenbrut 16 (1998) 63. Eske Wollrad, Wildniserfahrungen; Dies., Beyond the Pale, 169-183; This., Whiteness in contradiction. 43 Cf. Wollrad, Wildniserfahrungen, 203–213. 44 Ibid., 210. 45 Dorothee Wilhelm, Fremdkörper - Productive Irritations in Encounters with the Disabled, 51–59; This., Who is healing whom and especially from what ?, 10–12. In 1995 the seminar "Religion and Disability Studies" was founded at the annual conference of the American Academy of Religion and the Society of Biblical Literature in the USA. Since 2004 there has been a special seminar “Biblical Scholarship and Disabilities” at the SBL. See Hector Avalos / Sarah J. Melcher / Jeremy Schipper (ed.), This Abled Body. 46 Monika Barz / Herta Leistner / Ute Wild (eds.), Would you have thought that there are so many of us? 42


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

In love, the volume also contains a contribution by Bernadette J. Brooten on the evaluation of homoeroticism in Paul and in the Greco-Roman world.47 In the meantime, a questioning of categorizations has also established itself in theology, as it is programmatically through the so-called Queer theory is called for.48 As already shown above, the intersectionality debate stands in the difficult-to-resolve tension of naming categories in order to show crossovers of oppression without thereby tying people or groups of people to them. Queer theory questions the categorizations more fundamentally, since with every category formation, however differentiated, there are also fixings. These are often accompanied by essentializations that must be avoided, as Ulrike Auga pointedly elaborates in this volume.49 2. Intersectionality analysis in the international exegetical debate The interventions of Jewish, Islamic, racism-critical, materialistic, homosexual, disabled feminist theologians showed that 'gender' cannot be isolated from other categories either on the level of ancient texts and testimonies or on the level of the process of interpretation and interpretation. The systematic research into the interdependencies and crossovers of the various subordinate and superordinate features and categories began. with particular emphasis from a racism-critical and post-colonial perspective. In the 2005 anthology Postcolonial Bible Criticism. Interdisciplinary Intersections, for example, draws Laura E. Donaldson's attention to the fact that even in feminist interpretations of Mt 15: 21-28 the character of the silent and thus presumably disabled daughter of the Canaanite woman is overlooked. At the same time she asks whether their muteness could not also indicate “shamanic” and mantic abilities shared by women of many indigenous peoples, including the so-called witch of Endor (1 Sam 28: 3–25) teaching African exegete Musa Dube basic questions of a postcol47 Bernadette J. Brooten, Therefore God delivered them up to dishonorable passions, in: ibid., 113-138. See also Brooten, Love between Women; Matti Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World. 48 The magazine “Werkstatt Schule Theologie” has been published since 1994, which regularly deals with biblical subjects and in which the subjects of queer and intersectionalities are increasingly gaining space. A stimulating anthology on the interdependencies between gender and body constructions is Heike Walz / David Plüss (eds.), Theology and Gender. 49 See Auga at the bottom of this anthology. 50 See Laura E. Donaldson, Gospel Hauntings, in: Moore / Segovia (ed.), Postcolonial Biblical Criticism, 97-113; Tat-siong Benny Liew, Margins and (Cutting-) Edges, in: ibid., 114–165.



nial feminist interpretation of the Bible: 51 Does the text oppose the political imperialism of its time or does it justify occupying the inhabited land of others? Are differences in a text constructed in a dialogical and liberating manner or as a condemnation of everything foreign? And does the text use 'gender' to construct relationships of submission and submission? Also from a postcolonial perspective and the Minority Biblical Criticism, a biblical exegesis from the self-reflective minority perspective, some contributions have since appeared. They illuminate the intersectionalities of various identitarian ascriptions and systems of oppression in biblical texts and their processes of interpretation. For example, Dora Rudo Mbuwayesango compares the (missing) subject positions of Israelites and Canaanites in the marriage and sexual laws of Deuteronomy. Kah-Jin Jeffrey Kuan and Mai-Anh Le Tran point out that the status of “in-betweenness” of the whore Rahab in Israel is comparable to that of Asian Americans.52 Randall C. Bailey works a heterosexual matrix in the Book of Esther out and Demetrius Williams urges that class, status and gender analyzes be included in the African-American biblical interpretations of the Pentecostal base text Acts 2.16-21.53 However, the story of the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8.26-40 is particularly frequent whose characterization in terms of 'ethnicity', 'skin color', 'body', 'status' and 'religion' make it a paragon of intersectional existence.54 The analysis is not just about description. Interpretations from minority perspectives also aim at creating powerful alliances of marginalized people in the perception of the intersections of oppressive structures. The editors of Toward Minority Biblical Criticism, published in 2009, write: “Intersections between race-ethnicity and other identity factors such as class, gender, and sexuality mean that there may be many unexpected twists and turns when it comes to relations among racial-ethnic minority groups across color lines. If the dominant society uses 51 Cf. Musa

Dube, Postcolonial Feminist Interpretation of the Bible, 57. Dora Rudo Mbuwayesango, Canaanite Women and Israelite Women in Deuteronomy, in: Liew (ed.), Postcolonial Interventions, 44-57; Kah-Jin Jeffry Kuan / Mai-Anah Le Tran, Reading Race, Reading Rahab: A ‘Broad’ Asian American Reading of a ‘Broad’ Other, in: ibid., 27–43. 53 Randall C. Bailey, “That’s Why They Didn’t Call the Book Hadassah!”, In: Dies. / Liew / Segovia (ed.), They Were All Together in One Place, 227–250; Demetrius K. Williams, “Upon All Flesh”, in: ibid., 289-310. 54 Cf. also Leutzsch at the bottom of this anthology and in addition to the literature cited there: Gay L. Byron, Ancient Ethiopia and the New Testament, in: ibid., 161–190; Manuel Villalobos, Bodies Del Orto Lado, 191-221. 52 cf.


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

the intersections to generate conflicts (such as Blacks as sexual predators against Asians as asexual), these same intersections may also turn out to be basis of alliance (since both Asians and Blacks are radicalized as sexually 'deviant', though in opposing terms or directions ).[...] In other words, the relations of these intersections across racial-ethnic minority lines are precarious, unstable, and can be used as fertile ground for building allying as well as agnostic relations. "55

These studies make it clear how much the intersectionality debate with the examined interdependencies focuses on the relevance of perception and reflection.56 And the reception standing between the texts and today's interpreters also plays a major role. When working on religious documents from antiquity, the question is not only how the text inscribes structures, but also how these are created or consolidated in the history of interpretation. Intersectionality appears to be a heuristically suitable question for critically analyzing the power structures that have arisen in the interaction between the text and hegemonic discourses of interpretation.57 This becomes clear not least in two recently published compilations that apply intersectionality analysis to the emerging Christianity: that of Laura Nasrallah and Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza edited band Prejudice and Christian Beginnings. Investigating Race, Gender, and Ethnicity in Early Christian Studies asks above all about the intersections of 'race', 'gender', 'ethnicity' and 'empire' in ancient texts and modern interpretative history.58 The thematic booklet Cultural Complexity and Intersectionality in the Study of the Jesus Movement of the journal Biblical Interpretation aims on the one hand to develop a methodology for intersectional analyzes and on the other hand to determine how images of the historical Jesus contributed or can contribute to the construction of identities in culturally complex societies.59 Two examples may illustrate this: For Marianne Bjelland Kartzow let the entanglements and crossovers

55 Randall C. Bailey / Tat-siong Benny Liew / Fernando F. Segovia, Toward Minority Biblical Criticism, in: Dies. (ed.), They Were All Together in One Place, 3–43, here 18. 56 This is particularly evident in the archaeological case studies in the volume Douglas R. Edwards / Thomas McCollough (ed.), The Archeology of Difference, are gathered. 57 Cf. Caroline Vander Stichele / Todd Penner (ed.), Contextualizing Gender in Early Christian Discourse. The book is intended to introduce students to theories of cultural studies and their application to early Christianity. 58 Laura Nasrallah / Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza (ed.), Prejudice and Christian Beginnings. 59 Denise Kimber Buell et al., Introduction. Cultural Complexity and Intersectionality in the Study of Jesus Movement, 309-310, here 309.



The best way to analyze different categories is to use the heuristic questions formulated by the Asian-American law professor Mari Matsuda: 60 “The way I try to understand the interconnection of all forms of subordination is through a method I call 'ask the other question.' When I see something that looks racist, I ask, 'Where is the patriarchy in this?' When I see something that looks sexist, I ask, 'Where is the heterosexism in this?' When I see something that looks homophobic, I ask, ' Where are the class interests in this? '"61

With the intersectional analysis one has to ask, for example, what significance the baptismal confession from Gal. 3.28 had for Jewish slaves in contrast to Greek slaves or what effects the house table from Col.3.18-4.1 had on slaves with children exercised. Halvor Moxnes drafts an intersectionality analysis based on local conditions, which asks central questions about 'economy', 'gender' and 'health' in Galilee.62 In the Gospels it is not the question of the religious identity and the degree of Hellenization of the political elite, but the question of economic exploitation, uprooting caused by illness and a new conception of gender roles are discussed. The majority of the articles discussed here analyze texts from the Jewish and Christian tradition, i.e. those that continue to act as religious texts to the present day.63 Therefore, the question of whether and to what extent religion itself must become the subject of intersectional analysis will be examined below. 64

III. Religion in Antiquity and the Question of Intersectionality As the debates on religious studies, religious philosophical and theological issues of recent decades have shown, a uniform understanding of religion has not been able to establish itself. Definitions also often remain “a Eurocentric, implicitly theological interior” 60 Cf. Marianne Bjelland Kartzow, “Asking the Other Question”, 364–389, here 370: “Instead of examining gender, race, class, age, and sexuality as separate categories of oppression , intersectionality explores how these categories mutually construct one another. ”61 Mari J. Matusda, Beside My Sister, Facing the Enemy, 1183–1192, here 1189; See Kartzow, "Asking the Other Question", 371. 62 Halvor Moxnes, Identity in Jesus ’Galilee, 390-416. 63 For example, the articles in Todd Penner / Caroline Vander Stichele (ed.), Mapping Gender in Ancient Religious Discourses, examine how “constructions of gender can be understood to intersect with religious discourses in antiquity” (ibid. IX). 64 Cf. Moxnes, Identity in Jesus ’Galilee, 400:" [T] he new studies represent a broadening of perspectives that does not privilege religion as a separate factor, but sees it in interaction with other factors ".


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

perspective on foreign cultures arrested ”.65 In addition, definitions are often in danger of postulating a transcultural or timeless essence of religion, mostly one's own. Most likely at the moment, following Clifford Geertz’s formal definition of religion as a “system of symbols” 66 or as a “system of cultural signs” 67 appears to be more extensive. The complex forms of expression of religion in antiquity can be condensed into three essential aspects with Gerd Theißen, "rite" as the repetitive patterns of action, "ethos" as the norms and values, and "myth" as the narrative element.68 "religion" becomes thus to a heuristic category with which cultural “practices, ideas, norms and theological constructs are historically examined” .69 Especially against the background of the intersectionality debate outlined above, it is important to work with 'religion' as a heuristic category. By adding 'religion' in the following to the bundle of heuristic categories on intersectionality, it should be emphasized once again that all 'categories' of this debate are understood here as previous constructions and thus non-essentialist. 'Religion' in antiquity shows itself to today's analysis primarily as an action. People acted religiously in a variety of ways through prayers, vows, solemn parades, festivals, sacrificial acts, telling myths and other things, and these acts were culturally embedded. It was much less individually oriented than in the modern age, rather it was deeply anchored socially in the family, community and society.70 In this respect, 'religion' in antiquity is from interdependent categories like 'gender', 'status', 'body', Sexuality 'etc. prominently shaped, which results in the valence of this category for the intersectionality debate. Conversely, this has the consequence of contextualizing 'religion' intersectionally, i.e. analyzing the interdependence of fluid heuristic concepts and categories within such sign systems. With the establishment of the cultural embedding of 'religion', the question of the attribution of 'ethnos' is also raised for antiquity. This deserves more attention with regard to the construction of cultural-religious and socio-religious discourses. Because 65

Gregor Ahn, Art. Religion I, 513-522, here 518; see also Falk Wagner, Art. Religion II, 522-546; Ernst Feil, Art. Religion I, 263–267. 66 Clifford Geertz, density description, 48. 67 Cf. Gerd Theißen, The Religion of the First Christians, 28, following Geertz, defines “religion as a cultural system of signs that promises gain in life through correspondence to an ultimate reality” (italics in the original). 68 Ibid., 20-28. 69 Andreas Bendlin, Art. Religion, 888f. 70 Jörg Rüpke, Religion of the Romans, 13 passim, emphasizes the presence and embedding, in particular, of the religion of the Romans in politics and society.



Belonging to an ethnos (λαός, ἔθνος, γένος, natio, genus) determines diverse religious practice, just as, conversely, religious action can realize belonging to an ethnic group. In the complex cultural discourse environment of the Roman Empire, the various followers of early Judaism and emerging Christianity had to understand themselves, find, negotiate and defend their identity (s ).71 Early Christians also subscribed to this self-image, although the baptismal formula from Gal. 3:28 transcended ethnic boundaries, among other things.72 Since the 2nd century, self-designations such as “new gender” (καινὸν γένος), 73 “third gender” (τρίτον γένος) 74, “holy people” (λαὸς ἅγιος) have been encountered in Christian texts / ἔθνος ἅγιον) 75 or “the one generation of the saved” (τὸ ἓν γένος τοῦ σῳζομένου), 76 into which one can “get into” through baptism, election or knowledge.77 While in the concept according to Gal 3:28 from the 1st century a certain expansion of the given boundaries becomes recognizable, more distinct groups have become more established in the 2nd century. New borders are marked and one uses the interpretation pattern 'ethnicity'. This example shows how different, and sometimes contradicting, the arguments within symbolic systems can be. And it shows that 'ethnos' appears in the texts themselves as a questionable quantity. This also becomes clear in a controversy regarding the question of when 'Judaism' transformed from a 'people' of Judeans to a 'religion'. Shaye D. Cohen locates the transformation of 'Judaism' from a people to a 'religion' in the Hasmonean period (1st century BC). It is conditioned by the possibility of conversion, which is becoming established.78 At the same time, he describes the existing fluidity

71 Cf. exemplary

John M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 405-410. Rom 1: 13-17; Mk 13.10 par; Mt 28:19; Lk 24.47; Apk 14.6 and so on For a discussion of the formation of ethnic identity in Paul see also Denise Kimber Buell / Caroline Johnson Hodge, The Politics of Interpretation, 235–251; Sze-kar Wan, "To the Jew First and Also to the Greek": Reading Romans as Ethnic Construction, in: Nasrallah / Schüssler Fiorenza (ed.), Prejudice and Christian Beginnings, 129–155; Bald at the bottom of this anthology. 73 E.g. Diog. 1.1; see 5.1-9. 74 E.g. Clemens of Alexandria, Strom.; Aristides, apol. 2; Tertullian, scorp. 10 considers the thesis to be an external attribution. 75 E.g. 1 Petr 2.9; Justin Martyr, Dial. 119.3; Clement of Alexandria, Paid. 76 Clement of Alexandria, current. See also MartPol 3.2. 77 Denise Kimber Buell, Why this New Race, 116-165. See also J.M. Lieu, The Race of the God-Fearer, 483-501; David G. Horrell, Race, Nation, People, 123-143. 78 Shaye D. Cohen, The Beginnings of Jewishness, 109-139. 72 cf.


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

of the boundaries asserted between Jews and non-Jews.79 Steve Mason, on the other hand, advocates the thesis that by the 3rd century AD one had to speak of the 'ethnos' of the Judeans, both in terms of self and in terms of others 'Religion', 'Judaism' only transformed itself through the attributions of Christian authors of the 3rd century that aimed at delimitation. It should be noted, however, that 'Jewish' or 'Judean characteristics' were discussed controversially both inter- and intra-ethnically.81 In this process since the middle of the 2nd century, the term “heresy” was finally re-coined by the Christian side. Now it not only served as a designation for a school or choice (αἵρεσις), as it was in New Testament times, whereby it was thus an expression of an awareness of plurality, but it was simply formed to denote "heretics" and "heretics" by them “true Christianity” should be delimited.82 Islam emerged in the 7th century, and similarly to the carrier groups of early Judaism and early Christianity, their carrier groups make use of already existing systems of signs. Later self-images of Islam, as in Judaism and Christianity, mostly conceal this process-based development. In the growing community, reference variables that varied with their own momentum played a role: monotheism in the Judeo-Christian tradition as well as the local old Arab culture and religion, as well as concrete urban centers such as Mecca and Medina.83 In Islam, later with the conquests, constructions of “ethnicity “Added. Accordingly, the previously known monotheism was proclaimed as a novelty of a certain ethnic group, namely the inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula.84 Religious practice, ethos and symbolic orders of antiquity and late antiquity are consequently complex with, in the broadest sense, interdependent cultural constructions of themselves and others should be presented as plural and fluid. In relation to the questions in this volume, gender constructions also position themselves analogously in 79 On the Critique of Cohen, cf. Naomi Janowitz, Rethinking Jewish Identity in Late Antiquity, in: Stephen Mitchell / Geoffrey Greatrex (eds.), Ethnicity and Culture in Late Antiquity, 205 -210; Buell, Why this Race?, 44-45, 162-163. 80 Steve Mason, Jews, Judaeans, Judaizing, Judaism, 457-512. 81 See the criticism by Lee I. Levine, Jewish Identities in Antiquity: An Introductory Essay, 30–32. 82 Cf. Justin the Martyr, 1. Apol. 26.8; dial. 80, 4, etc. See A. Le Boulluec, La notion d’héresie dans la littérature grecque IIe – IIIe siècles; Daniel Boyarin, Delimitations, 42-107. 83 Cf. Angelika Neuwirth, Der Koran als Text der Spätantike, 44. 104. 542-548. 84 We would like to thank Bärbel Beinhauer-Köhler for this passage for valuable information about Islam.



Discourse on cultural hierarchies in general and religiously based hierarchies in particular.85 The outlined observations on 'religion' in antiquity and late antiquity can be aptly bundled with the words of Karen L. King: “For the purposes here, I suggest what are frequently referred to as 'religions' in antiquity can be thought of as multiform, plurivocal, unstable bundles of diverse and shifting practices, variously formed and formulated, that shape and are shaped by individuals and groups, with varying intersections of social, political, and economic life forms (such that at times a 'religion' may appear as distinct, while in other times and places it is indistinguishable as a separate / able field), changing and varied over time and place (eg, historically and locally specific), always contested and fluctuating both internally and with regard to outside groups and ideological borders. "86

IV. Analysis of intersectionality in theory and in case studies. About the articles in the volume At the beginning of the volume, under the heading (De) construction and application, there are essays that fundamentally pose and at the same time problematize the question of “intersectionality”. They continue the questions and inquiries that are condensed in the introduction to secondary literature: The question of intersectionality is complex due to the discursive character of the categories and should be transferred with care to the texts of antiquity. Nevertheless, their heuristic value is shown in the analyzes. This becomes particularly clear in the first three contributions. In her contribution, Ulrike Auga uses gender and religion as interdependent categories of knowledge with a critical revision of the intersectionality debate itself, from a post-colonial, post-secular and queer theoretical perspective. The criticism here is that intersectional analyzes tend to naturalize the categories they criticize, such as 'bisexuality', 'race' or 'ethnicity', 'body relations' and 'sexualities', by thematizing them. The resistance to contextual criticism remains trapped in the structures of epistemic violence, because these perpetuate the marginalization of the groups they actually advocate by fixing the categories.An intersectionality analysis expanded with queer theoretical considerations can, according to Auga, show the simultaneous effect of complex discrimination with a critical attitude towards identitary fixations. Even the so far little considered category of 'religion' should not be uncritically based on an essentialist concept of religion, 85 Cf. Oertelt, Matthews 86

and Krause at the bottom of this anthology. Quoted from King at the bottom of this anthology, pp. 79-80.


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

who universalizes the hegemonic discourse of conservative theology. Using the concrete example of the third vision in the Shepherd of Hermas, Auga shows how the performance character of religion and multidimensional assemblages of facets of identity in metaphorically charged images of the church fluid, i.e. H. are not symbolized identitarian and pre-essentialist. In the article Gender Contestation as Political Critique, Karen L. King compares the gender, body and religious identity constructions in four early Christian texts of the 2nd century, the Gospel according to Mary, the Martyrdom of Perpetua, the Apocryphon of John and the Testimonium Veritatis. The definition of sexuality and role models for women as part of the religious ethos is very different in the texts. The analysis of the interlinking of gender, body and religious identity constructions makes it clear, on the one hand, that the criticism of political and social injustice is not necessarily linked to concepts of gender equality. On the other hand, King draws attention to breaks and gaps that can be the starting point of a critical analysis of society directed against the texts themselves. If the texts are analyzed under the question of what options women offered themselves in early Christianity, for example, it becomes clear how inscribed gender stereotypes were discussed, broken through and reconceptualized. Above all, however, it shows that, despite all gender-political rhetoric, religious texts never provide a closed set of gender norms, but rather that this remains to be negotiated constantly. Silke Petersen examines the functionalization of gender ideals in ancient and modern heresy discourses under the motto “Every heresy is a worthless woman”. She observes astonishing similarities in the argumentation structures of ancient heresy discourses and in current debates on theological questions. The widespread assumption that women in the first Christian centuries had a special affinity for groups opposed as heresy cannot be statistically proven. The thesis of the seducibility of women thus proves to be a stereotypical prejudice for the devaluation of so-called heresies among the church fathers as in modern church historiography. The "question of women" is being instrumentalized in a "religious culture war" that is by no means about women. Rather, the gender argument is used because it can be used in the argumentation “to praise one's own religion and to devalue another religion” (p. 123). The discourse on marriages between religiously, ethnically or culturally different people has proven to be a particularly productive test case of intersectional analyzes. This becomes clear in the next four contributions, which reveal discourses about intercultural marriages and gender morality in early Judaism, Christianity and Islam and contrast them socially and historically.



In the article The discourse on intercultural marriages in Jehud as an ancient example of intersectionality, Christl M. Maier compares the image of the books Esra and Nehemia of post-exilic Judah with socio-historical and archaeological data of the population structure. The ban on marrying a 'strange woman' thus becomes recognizable as a concept that was originally socio-economically motivated, but later mainly based on symbolic stereotyping. 'Strangeness' and 'cultic purity' serve as constructs to create a (fictional) male genealogy and in this way to secure land and heritage. In comparison, however, other texts emerge as counter-discourses that present an ethnically inclusive conception (1 Chron 1–9; Ruth; Isa 56). The interdependent interplay of the categories 'ethnos', 'gender', 'status' and 'religion' in these texts leads to their own constructions of socio-religious self-definition. Aliyah El Mansy compares the topic of interreligious marriages in the literary discourse of the 1st and 2nd centuries. Century Plutarch and the First Epistle of Peter. Plutarch advises the newly wed wife Eurydice to worship the man's gods alone and to avoid "excessive worship" and "foreign superstitions". Because what follows from this becomes visible on the basis of Marc Anton's marriage to the Egyptian Queen Cleopatra. Plutarch wants to prove that marriage to a woman who is alien to the culture can lead to the feminization of the man and thus to neglect of duty towards Roman cultural values. While the First Epistle of Peter signs most of Plutarch's preferred virtues for women and men, he discovers an effective opportunity to promote the Christian faith in interreligious marriages. Two other contributions refer to early Islam. Bärbel Beinhauer-Köhler's contribution on "infidelity" in emerging Islam examines the concept of infidelity among women. It focuses on the observation that with the introduction of Islam, a patrilocal monogamous form of marriage that privileges the male lineage is gaining ground. This replaces the diverse, partly also matrilocal and polyandric forms of marriage of the pre-Islamic tribes. The ideas of a permitted form of marriage and correct religiosity are networked, the determination of forbidden fornication [zināʾ] becomes a means of delimiting people of different faiths. For example, in the relevant Koranic Surah 24.3, fornication and polytheism are equated and in the narrative traditions that were later collected in hadiths, fornication is associated with pre-Islamic matrilocal forms of marriage. By giving the marriage a formalized and public character, according to Beinhauer-Köhler, a specifically feminine Islamic habit is designed through the contrast with the opposite habitus of ancient Arab opponents of Islam. Doris Decker continues the diachronic analysis of the hadith traditions under the title Women between Self-Determination and External Determination. Ana


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

The analysis criterion is on the one hand the question of the ability to act, on the other hand the question of self-determination and external determination by women. Among other things, the twelve different stories about the Jew Ray½Ána bint Zayd, who as a prisoner of war became a lover and, according to some representations, also wife of Mu½ammad, are analyzed. Tradition diverges on the question of whether Ray½Ána joined Islam and became Mu½ammad's wife, or whether she remained Jewish and renounced marriage. Although the figure of Ray½Ána is portrayed more passively in the more recent sources, if it is said that she joined Islam, then this is considered to be her self-determined decision. Further examples from the older and more recent narrative tradition show, according to Decker, that - measured by the self-determination and external determination of women in the history of the tradition - it is not the gender structure that changes, but rather the system of norms and values ​​related to them with regard to Islam. Even the more recent traditions of tradition in no way dispense with narratives of women who act in a self-determined manner. The next contributions shed light on the connection between gender, religious politics and morality and show how alleged or actual transgressions of gender role attributions serve to position one's own group identity in political discourses. Friederike Oertelt's contribution examines Philo of Alexandria's historical writings under the question of gender, religion and politics. In line with conservative Greek ethics, Philo claims that Jewish women are kept away from public action. In the religious field, however, they would have taken part in a procession to the Roman governor in the defense of the Jerusalem temple by publicly participating. Even the Roman Empress Livia could be described as "man of understanding" insofar as she supported the Jerusalem temple. This striking tension corresponds to the gender symbolism in the allegorical writings, in which the transformation of the feminine into the masculine through devotion to philosophy is extolled. According to Oertelt's analysis, Philo thus constructs different images of women, depending on how they best serve his apologetic argument, the representation of Judaism as a representative of the highest Greek-Hellenistic standards. Christiane Krause examines the Roman horizon of values, as reflected in the work of the early imperial author Valerius Maximus, in her contribution Patria Potestas - Honor-Shame? Dead daughters in the chapter "De pudicitia" by Valerius Maximus. The example narratives of women and young men who were killed by their father, for example after being raped, do not follow a concept of 'honor and shame' that was claimed to have shaped antiquity universally, but that ethnographic research has long been called into question



Has. In most ancient stories and comedies, raped daughters and women do not have to die, but marry the rapist. Thus, the chastity (pudicitia) invoked by Valerius Maximus as goddess proves to be the central space and “status” structuring concept. An intersectional analysis shows that the narrative evaluation of a rape not only takes into account “gender” but also “status” and, linked to this, the respective narrative role as victim or perpetrator. Brigitte Kahl presents under the heading War, Masculinity and the Imperial God the Father, the imperial ideology as the key to an intersectional reading of the letter to Galatians. The messianic genealogy developed here establishes a no longer biological descent for Kahl and thus creates a counter-model to the Roman-imperial genealogy, as it is symbolized in the program of the Augustus Forum in Rome. There victorious masculinity is represented by the submission pose of female figures, which symbolize the conquered peoples, including the people of Judah. With the letter, the community addressed in Galatians is asked to reflect critically on self-submission to this Roman ideology in the figure of Hagar, who also symbolizes a place of the excluded (Gal 4: 21-31). The community of all peoples, including Judaism, lived experimentally in the Pauline congregations was conceived “as a learning field of self-transformation”, in which identity or difference is not abolished, but “the hierarchical-binary configuration of the one or the other at all levels of the peoples. , Gender, class and religious opposition (Gal 3:28) ”(pp. 296–297). Two contributions make special reference to the situation of female slaves in times of religious law education and thus to the interaction of “gender” and “status” in religious texts from the first centuries of our era. In her contribution, Enslaved Women in Basil of Caesarea’s Canonical Letters, Bernadette J. Brooten examines three letters from Basilius of Caesarea (330–379), one of the few Christian sources of the time that thematize the situation of female slaves. On the one hand, Christian slaves are subjected to the same duties and moral codes as other Christians and are considered equally divinely gifted. As women, however, they are subordinate to men and, as slaves under Roman law, are the property and property of their masters. In this existence, shaped by intersecting structures, expectations of chastity and marital fidelity compete with the social and legal conventions that do not prohibit sexual violence against wives and slaves. Basilius' letters show how structures of oppression can be strengthened, but also thwarted by strategies of resistance.


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

Catherine Hezser examines the positioning of female slaves in the Palestinian rabbinical tradition under the motto Part Whore, Part Wife: Slave Women in the Palestinian Rabbinic Tradition. The rabbis discuss which duties of wives slaves are allowed to relieve their mistresses, such as suckling and raising children as well as sexuality with the slave owner. If the image of the role of 'status' and 'gender' initially corresponds to legal practice in the rest of late antiquity, differentiations emerge under the aspect of 'religion': if religious rituals and purity are concerned, gender differences seem to be more important than Jewish origin. Within the slave status, however, 'gender' becomes irrelevant. The most noticeable overlap, however, is found in the list of household chores that wives as well as slaves had to do. In this way the slave becomes a kind of substitute wife who fulfills the wife's duties in the household, child care and sexual satisfaction of the husband. The contributions in the last column, Men's Questions on the New Testament, take up the impulses of intersectionality research for the masculinity discourse. The analytical view of discrimination against women runs the risk of using the masculine as a measure and norm in accordance with the typical discourse. The reconstruction of the concept in ancient writings shows that and how 'masculinity' is created discursively. Moisés Mayordomo takes up these results in order to analyze Jesus' masculinity in the Gospel of Mark: To what extent does the Jesus of the Gospel of Mark follow the discourse on masculinity? Jesus' authority, autonomy and strength against demons correspond to the ideal of masculinity. His surrender to the Roman occupying power, the humiliation and execution run counter to the ideal. Speaking in the criteriology of intersectionality, the ideal of gender and “status” intersect here, as Jesus lacks the sovereign status from the perspective of Roman power, which is an aspect of “masculinity”. Insofar as lowliness and willingness to serve are developed by Jesus as a religious ideal, the discourse of masculinity itself is called into question. Tears can also construct gender-specific characters and ethnic groups in a story. Shelly Matthews shows this in her contribution The Weeping Jesus and the Daughters of Jerusalem with two Lucanian stories that frame the Passion story. When Jesus weeps in front of the city after his entry into Jerusalem, then he assumes the role of the victorious general who sheds 'male' tears at the sight of the defeated city at the dawn of a new historical epoch he has initiated. The demand on the women of Jerusalem not to weep for the fate of Jesus but for the future collapse of their own city is a sign of male heroism. According to Matthews, the Gospel of Luke thus constructs Judaism as one of



the own group differentes ethnos, which is dedicated to submission. At the same time it excludes lamenting traditions of women, which are positively taken up in other gospel traditions. The question of the interdependencies of 'gender' and 'ethnos' thus offers an analysis tool to uncover structures of identity and oppression. The eunuch, who after the narrative of Acts 8 decided to be baptized by Philip, is the subject of a differentiated case study by Martin Leutzsch on eunuch and intersectionality. A multi-perspective experiment on to Acts 8: 26–40. He is the treasurer of a foreign queen, Black, possibly enslaved and, as a eunuch, a person with an unclear gender status, as well as a Jew or a sympathizer of Judaism when he meets Philip. In the context of today's intersectionality analyzes, multiple discriminations could be established with him. However, the eunuch demonstrates 'prosperity' and 'status' as well as 'education' in the traveling car. Leutzsch also criticizes simple assignments by working out that this assessment only takes into account the 'ethical' external perspective. Different conceivable 'emic' perspectives result in different evaluations of individual aspects, for example in the horizon of the Lukan double work or a Meroitic-Ethiopian or Roman perspective and one from the Jesus movement in the 2nd half of the 1st century. Perceptions and evaluations of skin color, gender status, religious ability, religious affiliation and social prestige can turn out differently here.This also makes it clear that intersectionality is a context-specific concept in which, depending on the value system, individual features of this figure can be read as features of exclusion or limitation.

V. Doing and Undoing. For the performance of intersectional analyzes The concept of "intersectionality" has also proven to be an "eye opener" for the analysis of ancient texts. This is shown by the contributions to the anthology as “case studies”. If these cannot be summed up in terms of content, then at the end of the introduction it should be underlined in which the individual contributions converge and what - in the sense of the deconstructing approach - is always to be drawn as a provisional conclusion from the project "Doing Gender - Doing Religion" . First of all, it should be stated in principle that the question of divergent and interdependent "categories of knowledge", in addition to "gender", also "class", "race", "body", "sexuality", "ethnos" and many more, has a high heuristic value, to record social inequality and the resulting structures of rule. The formula “doing gender” could be supplemented with programs such as “doing class”, “doing race” or “doing nation”. These formulas


Ute E. Eisen / Christine Gerber / Angela Standhartinger

grasp that 'gender', 'class' or 'nation' are understood here as categories that do not exist per se, but are created or manufactured. Because this is a central insight: when we speak of categories of intersectionality, we are not talking about naturalistic or essentialistic parameters, but about discursively generated. The concept of “intersectionality” above all implies the perception of the crossover and interdependence of analysis categories that are interwoven, work together and, depending on the context, can condense into multiple discrimination if they accumulate. The differentiation of the categories from initially 'Gender' to 'Race', 'Class' and finally to 'Body', 'Sexuality' and others is thus constitutive in order to make the fabric of discrimination practices visible. This volume on texts from antiquity, which are received as “religious” texts up to the present day, works out that “religion” can also be defined as a heuristic category and must be included. However, this can only be done appropriately if such modern concepts of religion are not applied to texts of antiquity that proceed in a markedly abstract manner and in many cases imply the separation of religion and politics. Because in antiquity religion meant a concrete ritual-social practice with more or less open borders. If, on the other hand, 'religion' is brought into play as a heuristic category that interacts with other categories, such as 'ethnos', 'status' or 'body', it becomes clearer how divergent and fluid religious practice, ethos and symbolic are Conceptualized orders in ancient texts. This insight confirms, among other things, that the often unbroken talk of "Judaism" and "Christianity", but also labels such as "Gnosis" can obscure the view. The preference for specific internal and domination discourses, which were only condensed using the example of Christianity in the centuries when it was developed as the “state religion”, obscures how diverse and permeable religious self-understanding was articulated, especially in the first two centuries, but also later. This insight proves to be particularly evident when the entire breadth of early Jewish and Christian literature is included, including those texts that “fall out of the ordinary” in the context of later dogmatic teaching. For us it follows from this that the talk of “the religions” of antiquity is subject to a disidentification for the purpose of more precise perception. 'Religion' is made and is constantly changing under changing socio-economic, political and cultural influences up to the present day. Only under this prerequisite can it be possible to grasp the polyphony and pluriformity of the texts of antiquity, which elude modern concepts of identity and religion. An important result that is also useful for the discussion of contemporary