Reviewed by: Belonging in Genesis: Biblical Israel and the Politics of Identity Formation by Amanda Beckenstein Mbuvi Danny Mathews amanda beckenstein mbuvi, Belonging in Genesis: Biblical Israel and the Politics of Identity Formation (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2016). Pp. xii + 167. Paper $49.95. This is a theological study of the received text of Genesis that explores the implications of the joining of the patriarchal accounts in Genesis 12–50 with the Primeval History in chaps. 1–11. The main purpose of Genesis when read this way—as a canonical text from a reader-oriented approach—is to facilitate a transformation of identity by providing the means by which readers can envision themselves in relationship with one another in the world. To make this case, this short but succinct and substantial book is organized into two parts. Chapters 1–3 function as prolegomena, explicating the theoretical and theological foundations of the book. By means of a trenchant critique of Erich Auerbach's interpretative approach to Adam and Eve in Mimesis, Mbuvi rejects a "Eurocentric" perspective of biblical interpretation that reflects and reinforces preexisting Western culture that is loosed from its Hebrew and Jewish moorings, especially the bifurcation of society into a hierarchal structure of "us" over and against "them." In contrast, M. points to a very different view earlier in Mimesis where the Bible intends to present its own reality, a perspective she terms "YHWH-centric," which seeks rather to transform the readers' own conceptualization of reality. Finally, the introductory section concludes by arguing that Genesis intentionally employs family storytelling, or family narrative, as the precise means for communal identity formation. The rest of the book applies this approach to selected segments of Genesis, namely, 5:1–12:7; 16:1-16; 21:1-21; and 26:1-33. Based on a study of the theological function of genealogy in Genesis, M. argues that the genealogical notices in 5:1-3 and 9:28-29 (among other features such as the Lamech speech in 5:29, which exhibits lexical and thematic links with chaps. 6–9) serve to organize Genesis 5–9 as a discrete literary unit. The recurring genealogical notices via the tôlĕdôt formula play a crucial theological role in placing kinship identity beginning in Genesis 5 in a cosmological framework exhibited in the first use of this formula in Gen 2:4. This underscores that the varieties of kinship and national identities in Genesis are all actually part of one human community. "Unlike plants and animals, humans only have one species" (p. 49). This approach yields a rich harvest of theological insights from Genesis 5–9, which narrates both the positive and negative aspects of family identity, from an ongoing process of life through childbearing as well as death and struggle, and ultimately to the complete obliteration of the network of God, land, and humanity. This concludes with both redemption via reconstituting the community through covenant and the perpetuation of curse and conflict in the renewed sibling rivalry among Noah's sons. Next, in a detailed study of Noah's cursing of Canaan for the actions of Ham, M. presents a helpful image of a "family tree" in contrast to a "social ladder" to portray the differences between a modern and a Yhwh-centric reading of Genesis. She argues that readers who reject a racial interpretation of this curse nevertheless maintain a social-ladder view of a rigid and orderly differentiation of communal identities based on cultural and ethnic differences. Rather, a close study of Genesis 10 and 12:1-7 reveals fluidity among various [End Page 512] groups that show "multiple levels of belongings" (p. 81), such as the classification of humanity in Genesis 10 into overlapping levels of kinship, language, land, and nationality. This view is reflected in the image of a family tree that embodies dynamic and fluid circumstances by developing and growing in reaction to environmental changes, as well as exhibiting clear variety and differentiation within the community that emerges from a common source. The image of the tree provides another metaphor of fruitfulness that is made possible only when the branches diverge and grow while remaining connected to the...
Read full abstract