Autism and Biblical Studies: Establishing and Extending the Field beyond Preliminary Reflection

Abstract

This article considers core issues of practice, method and hermeneutics, as they bear upon the development of a scholarly field concerned with “Autism and Biblical Studies.” A small body of scholarship has begun to bring biblical studies into dialogue with research into autism, and to reflect on the pertinent methodological issues; this article acknowledges the preliminary character of this and reflects upon what might be necessary for this emergent area of interest to be established as a mature field of research. The extending of the discussion to incorporate a range of sub-disciplines, each operating with different core “identifications” of the biblical material, is crucial to this, as is the careful use of insights from postcolonial and ideological critical approaches. Pivotally, however, research must also be shaped and led by those who are themselves autistic, so that autism is properly the subject and not merely the object of research.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 This designation reflects a trope in autism advocacy, visible in social media and its use of the tag #actuallyautistic.

2 Other languages are used in publication, of course, but function less commonly as international languages of exchange.

3 See, for example Horrell (2020).

4 I am grateful to the editor, Professor Brian Brock, for directing me to Carlson (2009), which examines the underlying philosophical values with such care.

5 The various interview perspectives shared in this article, for example, exemplify this preference in a Nordic language context: https://psykologtidsskriftet.no/2018/11/autisten-i-oss, retrieved February 27, 2021. As one contributor (Ragnhild Iveranna Hogstad Jordahl) writes, “Formuleringen «… med autisme» får det til å virke som at det autistiske er noe som er separat fra mennesket – et slags tillegg som man kanskje kan tenke seg å fjerne. Det gir ikke et korrekt bilde.”

6 A central theme in Croasmun, 2017 is that there is, in fact, a “downward causality” involved in emergence. Person-level experience exercises a shaping influence on the elements in lower levels. In Croasmun’s thesis, this becomes an element in his exploration of Sin as a person-identification, a real identity who is generated by (or emerges from) the agency of individual people and in turn affects (by downward causation) their moral state.

7 Notably: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/23/americans-are-in-the-middle-of-the-pack-globally-when-it-comes-to-importance-of-religion/

8 While not strictly an example of this, I feel compelled to note Barclay (2010), as an exploration of the category of “event” and its philosophical significance for philosopher Alain Badiou, as he reads the gospel story.

9 See, again, Reinders (2000).

10 On this, cf. Reinders analysis (2000) of the liberal values that have underlaid inclusivity discourse and their intrinsic deficiencies; they are not adequate to the task of generating a true culture of belonging. The surge in anti-inclusive values and the often-vicious dismissal of “wokeness”—both played out in recent populist politics—reflect the kind of cratering that such superficial discourse can face.

11 This may be true even when a text rails against the values of a current empire; even the protest can be shaped by the values of empire. This is an important theme in the relevant scholarship.

12 By this, I mean that “Judaism as religion” is often contrasted with “Christianity as faith” (or as “relationship”) and Jewish commitment to law is often identified as the opposite of pursuing righteousness by faith. Few scholars would today agree that this is a fair reading of the New Testament material.