BIBLICAL POETRY,SPINOZIST HERMENEUTICS,AND CRITICAL SCHOLARSHIP

This article considers a little known chapter in the long history of the question of the nature of biblical poetry. The debate between the Jewish scholar Raffaele Rabeni and the Christian Hebraist Biagio Garofalo (1710–1714) exemplifies shifting attitudes and concerns of eighteenth century Jewish and Christian polemists. Ostensibly, the exchange concerned an apparently innocuous topic, the “Poetry of the Hebrews”, namely, whether Biblical poetry was rhymed or metrical. At a closer look, the two scholars, equally familiar with Spinoza’s biblical critique and the latest philological and critical scholarship, clashed over the textual authority of the Hebrew Bible.

This Italian polemical exchange not only foreshadows emerging developments in the field of biblical studies, but it also differs from previous examples because of its public ramifications. The debate was publicized by the Giornale de’ Letterati, Italy’s foremost scholarly journal of the time, which sided with Garofalo. For his part, Rabeni actively opposed the publication’s “modern” approach to sacred and profane history by supporting the Jesuit Father, Giovan Antonio Bernardi, in the course of a heated controversy over the journal’s historiographical stance and objectivity.

Unlike most cases of early modern Jewish–Christian polemics examined by researchers, the Rabeni–Garofalo affair and its ramifications reflect the birth pangs that accompanied the emergence of the modern study of sacred and diplomatic history in Italy, and is best understood within the context of historical and philological‐critical studies that characterized the early stages of the Italian Enlightenment.     

FROM THE SENSES TO SENSE: THE HERMENEUTICS OF LOVE

Abstract. Drawing on philosophy, theology, comparative religion, spirituality, Holocaust studies, physics, biology, psychology, and personal experience, I argue that continued human existence depends on our willingness to reject nihilism–not as an expedient "noble lie" but because faith in a meaningful cosmos and the power of love is at least as validly grounded in human experience as insistence on cosmic indifference and ultimate futility. I maintain that hope will free us to develop nonimperialistic methods of bridging cultural differences by forming a mutually intelligible vocabulary that celebrates diversity, enters the worlds of others in respectful dialogue, and fosters a postmechanistic, organic, ecological, holistic, dynamic, interactive, open-ended model of reality. I lay the foundation for a "hermeneutics of love" to complement Paul Ricoeur's "hermeneutics of suspicion" and invite speculation on the ways science, technology, and society would be transformed if those "glasses of friendship" were widely applied.