"Symbolic Interpretation Is Most Useful": Clement of Alexandria's Scriptural Imagination
In the fifth book of his Stromateis, Clement of Alexandria reflects on the symbolic nature of religious language among both barbarians and Greeks before providing his own figural reading of the tabernacle from the Jewish scriptures. He claims that the symbolic mode is useful for speaking divine trut...
| Published in: | Journal of early Christian studies |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
[2017]
|
| In: |
Journal of early Christian studies
|
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Clemens, Alexandrinus, Stromata
/ Paganism
/ Judaism
/ Religious language
/ Exegesis
/ Stylistics
/ Symbolism
/ Allegory
|
| RelBib Classification: | AG Religious life; material religion BE Greco-Roman religions BH Judaism HA Bible KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | In the fifth book of his Stromateis, Clement of Alexandria reflects on the symbolic nature of religious language among both barbarians and Greeks before providing his own figural reading of the tabernacle from the Jewish scriptures. He claims that the symbolic mode is useful for speaking divine truths, and at first glance, it appears that Christians must also utilize symbolic interpretation to understand their sacred texts. This essay explores a few of the reading practices that Clement utilizes within the argument of Str. 5. In particular, it analyzes the technical terminology of ancient symbolic interpretation in the pagan tradition and how Clement adapts these terms to his own distinct scriptural lexicon. This essay argues that, if one moves beyond Clement's theoretical statements on symbolic interpretation in Str. 5 to investigate his exegetical practices, two things become clear. First, although both genres utilize symbolic interpretation, Clement sees a distinction between Christian scripture and pagan literature. Second, Clement places a surprising restriction on Christian figural reading. This essay, then, marks a preliminary phase toward a reassessment of Clement's scriptural exegesis. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1086-3184 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of early Christian studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1353/earl.2017.0052 |