Hidden Perspectives

Bringing the Bible Out of the Closet

Johanna Stiebert Interview

1 Comment

Johanna, you’re well known for your work on the Bible, gender and sexuality. Can you tell us about your research so far?
It’s been a bit all over the place – because I’ve been all over the place (Britain, Botswana, India, US, back to Britain…) but I’ve worked on self-conscious emotions (particularly shame – including its associations with sexuality), on whether the Hebrew Bible has anything to say about homosexuality, on HIV/AIDS and African-centred readings of biblical texts, on how (based on the Hebrew Bible) conception appears to have been understood in antiquity, on father-daughtejohanna stiebert copyr dynamics – and, next, on close-kin sex in the Hebrew Bible and if or when it constitutes incest.

How did you get involved in the Hidden Perspectives project?
The organiser, Katie Edwards, is pretty persuasive! When I heard about it I was immediately eager to get involved. I have a strong commitment to social justice and human rights. When I was living in southern Africa I gave a presentation, together with another colleague, on masculinity and sexuality (including homosexuality) at the University in Lesotho. It was a tremendous experience, because such topics were so rarely discussed publicly then and there. Later at the University of Botswana I organised panel discussions on the topics of homosexuality, HIV/AIDS and the Bible, and child sexual abuse. I am a big believer in giving difficult topics an airing and exploring what positive change can grow from that.

How will you ‘bring the Bible out of the closet’ at the festival on 1 June
I want to give an accessible talk about those passages of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) that are constantly dragged into discussions on how the Bible allegedly condemns homosexuality. What we call homosexuality is not really represented in the Hebrew Bible, nor is there any demonstrable preoccupation with condeming same-sex sex-acts. Two verses in Leviticus appear to be very clear – but actually they’re not. I think it’s important to know about how ambiguous these verses really are – even for biblical scholars who have studied the Hebrew language and the possible historical contexts of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. So, I’ll be looking at what scholars are saying to translate, explain and make sense of these odd verses.

Why do you think Hidden Perspectives is important?
Where homophobia and discrimination of all kinds against LGBT members of our community are concerned the straight community needs to get much more engaged to gain a fuller understanding and insight and to counteract such abuses. I remember quipping, shortly after getting married on the spur of the moment in Tennessee, how easy it was – all you needed was a valid driver’s licence, there was no background check and no one asked whether I was in the country legally, whether I was of sound mind, already married, or whether the guy I was marrying was related to me – and then a friend of mine pointed out that if you wanted to marry someone you loved who was of the same sex as you it was impossible. That’s just not right. And much, much more needs to happen to move things in the right direction. There may be some encouraging signs here but there’s still plenty of room for improvements and things are looking pretty bleak in most other parts of the world. I’m attending and supporting Hidden Perspectives to learn and heighten my awareness and to find likeminded people to generate human-rights-focused activism.

I’m currently working on what are sometimes called the ‘incest laws’ of Leviticus 18 and 20. I’m also co-organising (with Musa Dube, University of Botswana) a project on trends and challenges of Bible interpretation in southern Africa and the UK.

Read more about Johanna here.

Advertisements

Author: Hidden Perspectives

A research project within the Sheffield Institute for Interdisciplinary Biblical Studies (SIIBS) at The University of Sheffield.

One thought on “Johanna Stiebert Interview

  1. Dear Dr Stiebert (if I may),

    I was very interested in your opinion that the so-called “incest laws” of Leviticus 18 and 20 are much more ambiguous than what some more wooden literalists maintain. I agree, and isn’t if funny that among the traditionalistic and conservative historical critics there is a reluctance to recognise the polysemy. multivalence, and slipperiness of texts, and a refusal to deal with the recent insights of the likes of Bakhtin, Derrida, and Barthes.

    As I recently discussed on an erotic clop-fic writers’ forum – and I would greatly value your opinion on this – is it really so clear that the shekaveteka in Leviticus 20:23 refers to a “bed of sexual intercourse” shared by a human and a behemah (“animal”)? Or could it simply be referring to the practice of the burial of a master or his wife with their favorite animal? And of course once you consider such alternatives, the text is no longer as “stable” (please forgive the pun!) as it might first have seemed. It seems to me that there is a multivalency in the text, and one that resists attempts to pin it down to a blanket prohibition which would disallow M/Pony or F/Pony sexual activities.

    What are your thoughts?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s