The Bible Gets Its Freak On: Book Recommendation
Thursday, September 1, 2011 at 1:05PM | by Otter 
Let's Talk About Sex, Baby, Let's Talk About The O.T., Let's Talk About Sex
For years I've been meaning to edit a version of the Bible in which the naughty bits are in red: they're as common as the words of Jesus, I think. So imagine my delight when I found this
In the Mailbag:
More book recommendations, please?
I've been reading Michael Coogan's God & Sex: What the Bible Really Says.
Coogan is one of my favorite biblical scholars, having edited the outstanding notes to The New Oxford Annotated Bible (which I used in my Bible as Literature classes). He provides terrific insights into difficult passages, taking the historical fields of meaning open to the writer and original audiences as his point d'appui.
As the title announces, Coogan's book emphasizes the presence of sexuality in the Bible. He examines the texts and contexts of sexual laws, attitudes, and innuendoes. Often those innuendoes are unfortunately closed to the modern student: if, for instance, "uncovering someone's feet" is a biblical idiom suggesting sex, how should our interpretation of the Book of Ruth change, based on Ruth 3:6-7?
But Coogan is not so puerile as your current bloggist: he has a larger (and I think very laudable) project in mind.
Coogan points out in his introduction that for far too long biblical scholars have stayed on the sidelines in public discussions about, for instance, gay marriage. And it's time that stopped: if Pat Robertson or Rick Perry, who know scripture without seeming to know much about it, are entitled to declare God's will based on scripture, then the scholarship becomes an important part of the public discussion. And Christians anxious to use the text to defend their preferences and policies must rightly be held to account for their use of the text: if they misunderstand it entirely (and Coogan maintains they often do on important questions), the rest of us should know it.
So for example he investigates the nature of homosexuality and porneia (often translated as "fornication" or "sexual immorality") in the ancient world, seeking to understand the biblical commands and demands not as reinforcements of modern sexual ethics but rather as they must have been understood at the time of their writing.
(Note for long-time readers and interlocutors: Coogan's scholarship challenges one or two of my own basic assumptions about sex and the Bible, and enriches them wonderfully.)
For too many conservative, evangelical, or fundamentalist Christians, the damning appelation "liberal scholarship" justifies ignoring such books. It shouldn't. The clarity and precision of Coogan's insights into scripture are not rarified ivory-tower evasions of the text, but an unsentimental look at what's really there, in most cases.
As is the case in the best "liberal" scholarship, it should not unsettle anybody except out of unfounded prejudices. It doesn't ask, "Hath God said?" as the serpent in Genesis did. Rather it points out where what we think has been said is not in fact quite there.
Otter
The Kindle edition is obnoxiously full of copy-errors. Not Coogan's style. Alas.
Reader Comments (1)
Ruth's story is interesting to me. The whole concept of passing the widows around to the next available male is somewhat demeening, but then again, I didn't live back then, so I may be looking at those elements of the story a bit too harshly. If, when Ruth "came softly and uncovered his feet", she was giving Boaz (who, as I read it, was joyfully drunk, and surprised to see her when he wakes) everything she had to give, then there are two ways people can look at it: either she's a spineless slut who let her Mother-in-law have far too much control over her decisions, or, Ruth was willing to offer herself, biblically, as a "living sacrifice", giving her all in hope of being redeemed. People will say she's either a slut, or one of the most courageous examples of devotion in the Bible. I sort of think she may be a bit of both.