Some theories from various social scientific disciplines make a singular appearance in our field, while others have a bit of staying power. Social Identity Theory (SIT)–or, as it has been called, the “social identity perspective” or the “social identity approach”–appears to fall in that latter category. The concepts are not entirely new (e.g., boundary markers between insiders and outsiders), nor even is the term “social identity” itself (see E.A. Judge, “The Social Identity of the First Christians” in 1980), but SIT relates data that otherwise wouldn’t often be considered together (e.g., the demarcation of group boundaries and “ethics”).

The approach is borrowed from social psychologists Henri Tajfel, John Turner, and those who have followed them. The literature within social psychology itself is vast and, at least to this biblicist, intimidating. The literature using the theory in biblical studies is much shorter . . . for now. Ben Byerly has a bibliography that he calls “Social Identity in the Bible,” but it is more expansive in its understanding of “social identity” (which isn’t a bad thing). In many of those works, you will not find any engagement with this particular social psychological approach. Since I’m currently trying to get a handle on this approach, I thought I would offer a more restrictive bibliography covering only those works explicitly applying SIT to biblical studies, some to a greater extent than others. This is not because I think SIT is the only good approach to discussing group identity in biblical studies or ancient history, but because I need to take it just one theory at a time for my own sanity.

As it stands now, I count a little over 40 books or articles in this category. As you can see, though, it’s heating up. I have found only one author in the 20th century: Esler, who claims to have inaugurated the theory in New Testament interpretation (See Galatians, p. 41 – I have found no evidence to the contrary). Around two-thirds of these sources have been published since 2007 alone!

It also appears that the members of the biblical studies researchers at the University of Helsinki (including Petri Luomanen, Raimo Hakola, Jutta Jokiranta, and Risto Uro) are in a competition for the most publications discussing identity in biblical studies (Uro is not on this list, but has related publications). Jutta Jokiranta seems to be the first person applying SIT to the DSS, while I believe the South African Jan Bosman is the first (and only?) scholar to apply the approach to the Hebrew Bible (Louis Jonker picks up on Bosman’s dissertation work as helpful, but doesn’t fully engage the theory himself).

Three of the entries are fellow bibliobloggers (Philip Harland, Brian Tucker, and Coleman Baker) two of whom are in the process of tidying things up on their dissertations for publication with Pickwick (an imprint of Wipf and Stock). Wipf and Stock seems to be picking up on the trend, as they also published Matthew Marohl’s dissertation listed below.

I am posting this list in hopes that it might be helpful to someone else, but also in hopes that others may help me fill in any gaps that I may have. If you notice any missing items, or know of forthcoming items that should be included, please let me know!

By the way, in addition to producing his own work, Brian Tucker is like a book review factory on identity issues–and a good one at that! See his blog for his coverage of a great many books dealing with identity and go looking for his various review essays as well.

And without further adieu, the bibliography (avec links):

Asano, Atsuhiro. Community—Identity Construction in Galatians: Exegetical, Social-Anthropological, and Socio-Historical Studies. JSNT 285. London: T & T Clark International, 2005.

Baker, Coleman A. Identity, Memory, and Narrative in Early Christianity: Peter, Paul, and Recategorization in the Acts of the Apostles. Eugene, Ore.: Pickwick, 2011. [See the dissertation version of this on ProQuest.] [Updated]

Bosman, Jan. Social Identity in Nahum: A Theological-Ethical Inquiry. Biblical Intersections 1. Piscataway, N.J: Georgias, 2009. [Link to the D.Th. thesis version of the work.]

Brawley, Robert L. “Social Identity and the Aim of Accomplished Life in Acts 2.” Pages 16-33 in Acts and Ethics. Edited by Thomas E. Phillips. New Testament Monographs 9. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2005.

_____. “From Reflex to Reaction? Identity in Philippians 2.6-11 and Its Context.” Pages 128-46 in Reading Paul in Context: Explorations in Identity Formation: Essays in Honour of William S. Campbell. Edited by Kathy Ehrensperger and J. Brian Tucker. LNTS, 428. London : T&T Clark, (forthcoming) 2010.

Byrskog, Samuel. “Ephesians 4:1-16 – Paraenesis and Identity Formation.” Pages 109-138 in Ethik als angewandte Ekklesiologie: Der Brief an die Epheser. Edited by Michael Wolter. MRB 17; Roma: Benedictina, 2005.

Cobb, L. Stephanie. Dying to Be Men: Gender and Language in Early Christian Martyr Texts. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.

Esler, Philip Francis. “Group Boundaries and Intergroup Conflict in Galatians : A New Reading of Galatians 5:13-6:10.” Pages 215-240 in Ethnicity and the Bible. Edited by Mark G. Brett. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

_____. Galatians. London: Routledge, 1998.

_____.“Jesus and the Reduction of Intergroup Conflict: The Parable of the Good Samaritan in the Light of Social Identity Theory.” 8.4 (2000): 325-357.

_____. “‘Keeping it in the Family’: Culture, Kinship and Identity in 1 Thessalonians and Galatians.” Pages 145–184 in Families and Family Relations as Represented in Early Judaisms and Early Christianities. Edited by Jan Willem van Henten and Athalya Brenner. Leiden: Deo, 2000. [See Jan Willem van Henten's response in the same book: "The Family is Not All That Matters: A Response to Philip Esler."]

_____. “Social identity, the virtues, and the good life: a new approach to Romans 12:1-15:13.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 33.2 (2003): 51-63.

_____. Conflict and Identity in Romans: The Social Setting of Paul’s Letter. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003.

_____. New Testament Theology: Communion and Community. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005.

_____. “‘Remember my Fetters’: Memorialisation of Paul’s Imprisonment.” Pages 231-258 in Explaining Christian Origins and Early Judaism. Edited by Petri Luomanen, Ilkka Pyysiäinen, and Risto Uro. Biblical Interpretation Series 89. Leiden: Brill, 2007. [Google Books link starts on the second page of the article because the first page is missing in the preview.]

Esler, Philip Francis, and Ronald A. Piper. Lazarus, Mary and Martha: Social-Scientific Approaches to the Gospel of John. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 2006.

Faulkner, Anne. “Jewish Identity and the Jerusalem Conference: Social Identity and Self–categorization in the Early Church Communities.” eSharp 1 (2005): 1-19.

_____. “The Emergence of Gentile Leadership and the Jerusalem Conference: A Socio-Psychological Approach to the Group Dynamics of the Participation of Gentile Believers in the Early Church.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of Durham, 2009.

Finitsis, Antonio. “The Other in Haggai and Zechariah 1-8.” Pages 116-131 in The “Other” in Second Temple Judaism : Essays in Honor of John J. Collins. Edited by Daniel C. Harlow, Karina Martin Hogan, Matthew Goff,  and Joel S. Kaminsky. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2011. [New Entry]

Guijarro, Santiago. “Cultural Memory and Group Identity in Q.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 37.3 (2007): 90-100.

Harland, Philip. Dynamics of Identity in the World of the Early Christians. London: T&T Clark, 2009.

Hakola, Raimo. “Social Identities and Group Phenomena in Second Temple Judaism.” Pages 259-276 in Explaining Christian Origins and Early Judaism: Contributions from Cognitive and Social Science. Edited by Petri Luomanen, Ilkka Pyysiäinen, and Risto Uro. Biblical Interpretation Series 89. Leiden: Brill, 2007. [The first several pages are missing from the Google Books preview.]

_____. “Social Identity and a Stereotype in the Making: The Pharisees as Hypocrites in Matt 23.” Pages 123–39 in Identity Formation in the New Testament edited by Bengt Holmberg and Mikael Winninge. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2008.

_____. “The Burden of Ambiguity: Nicodemus and the Social Identity of the Johannine Christians.” New Testament Studies 55 (2009): 438-55.

Horrell, David. “‘Becoming Christian’: Solidifying Christian Identity and Content.” Pages 309-335 in Handbook of Early Christianity: Social Science Approaches. Edited by Anthony J. Blasi, Jean Duhaime, and Paul-Andre Turcotte. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira, 2002. [See also this version online.]

_____. “The Label Christianos: 1 Pet 4.16 and the Formation of Christian Identity.” Journal of Biblical Literature 126 (2007): 361–81. [New Entry]

Jokiranta, Jutta. “Identity on a Continuum: Constructing and Expressing Sectarian Social Identity in Qumran Serakhim and Pesharim.” Ph.D. diss., University of Helsinki, 2005. Forthcoming in STDJ; Leiden: Brill.

_____. “Pesharim: A Mirror of Self-Understanding.” Pages 23–34 in Reading the Present in the Qumran Library: The Perception of the Contemporary by Means of Scriptural Interpretations. Edited by Kristin De Troyer and Armin Lange. Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005. [Only mentions SIT somewhat generally.]

_____.“The Prototypical Teacher in the Qumran Pesharim: A Social-Identity Approach.” Pages 254-66 in Ancient Israel: The Old Testament in its Social Context. Edited by Philip Francis Esler. Minneapolis, Minn.: Augsburg Fortress, 2006. [Essay is included in her dissertation]

_____. “Social Identity in the Qumran Movement: The Case of the Penal Code.” Pages 277-298 in Explaining Christian Origins and Early Judaism. Edited by Petri Luomanen, Ilkka Pyysiäinen, and Risto Uro. Biblical Interpretation Series 89. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

_____. “Social Identity Approach: Identity-Constructing Elements in the Psalms Pesher.” Pages 85-109 in Defining Identities: We, You, and the Other in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Proceedings of the Fifth Meeting of the IOQS in Groningen. Edited by Florentino Garcia Martinez and Mladen Popović. STDJ 70. Leiden: Brill, 2008. [Essay is included in her dissertation - first page unavailable on Google Books preview.]

Kazen, Thomas. “Son of Man and Early Christian Identity Formation.” Pages 97-122 in Identity Formation in the New Testament edited by Bengt Holmberg and Mikael Winninge. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 2008.

Keay, Robert D. “Paul the Spiritual Guide: A Social Identity Perspective on Paul’s Apostolic Self-Identity.” Ph.D. Thesis, University of St. Andrews, 2004. [See his summary of the thesis in Tyndale Bulletin.]

Kuecker, Aaron J. “The Spirit and the ‘Other’: Social Identity, Ethnicity and Intergroup Reconciliation in Luke-Acts.” Ph.D. thesis, University of St. Andrews, 2008.

_____. “The Spirit and the ‘Other’, Satan and the ‘Self’: Economic Ethics as a Consequence of Identity Transformation in Luke-Acts.” Pages 81-103 in Engaging Economics: New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception. Edited by Bruce W. Longenecker and Kelly D. Liebengood. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009.

Lamoreaux, Jason T. “Social Identity, Boundary Breaking, and Ritual: Saul’s Recruitment on the Road to Damascus.” BTB 38.3 (2008): 122-34.

Lieu, Judith. Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Luomanen, Petri. “The Sociology of Knowledge, the Social Identity Approach and the Cognitive Science of Religion.” Pages 199-229 in Explaining Christian Origins and Early Judaism: Contributions from Cognitive and Social Science. Edited by Petri Luomanen, Ilkka Pyysiäinen, and Risto Uro. Biblical Interpretation Series 89. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

May, Alistair Scott. The Body for the Lord: Sex and Identity in 1 Corinthians 5-7. JSNT 278. London ; New York: T & T Clark International, 2004.

Marohl, Matthew J. Faithfulness and the Purpose of Hebrews: A Social Identity Approach. Princeton Theological Monograph Series. Eugene: Pickwick Publications, 2008. [He is explicitly following Esler as an example “of the appropriate and effective use of social identity theory in biblical interpretations” (35). Esler was also his doctoral advisor.]

Roitto, Rikard. “Behaving Like a Christ-Believer, as a Household Member or as Both?: A Cognitive Perspective on Identity and Behavior Norms in the Early Christ-Movement.” Pages 93-114 in Exploring Early Christian Identity. Edited by Bengt Holmberg. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.

Shkul, Minna. Reading Ephesians: Exploring Social Entrepreneurship in the Text. LNTS 408. London: T&T Clark, 2009.

Tellbe, Mikael. “The Prototypical Christ-Believer: Early Christian Identity Formation in Ephesus.” Pages 115-38 in Exploring Early Christian Identity. Edited by Bengt Holmberg. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008. [If you have a better link for Tellbe, please let me know. I'm not adept at maneuvering Swedish websites!]

_____. Christ-Believers in Ephesus: A Textual Analysis of Early Christian Identity Formation in a Local Perspective. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009.

Tucker, J. Brian. ‘You Belong to Christ’ Paul and the Formation of Social Identity in 1 Cor 1–4. Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publications, (Forthcoming) 2010.

_____. “Baths, Baptism, and Patronage: The Continuing Role of Roman Social Identity in Corinth.” Pages 173-88 in Reading Paul in Context: Explorations in Identity Formation: Essays in Honour of William S. Campbell. Edited by Kathy Ehrensperger and J. Brian Tucker. LNTS, 428. London : T&T Clark, (forthcoming) 2010.

Ukwuegbu, Bernard O. “Paraenesis, Identity-Defining Norms, or Both? Galatians 5:13-6:10 in the Light of Social Identity Theory.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 70.3 (2008): 538-559.

Vaccarella, Kevin M. “Shaping Christian Identity: The False Scripture Argument in Early Christian Literature.” Ph.D. diss., Florida State University, 2007.

As I mentioned earlier, I am working through Philip Harland‘s Dynamics of Identity (courtesy of T & T Clark), which looks into early Judean and Christian gatherings as related to other unofficial associations in the Greco-Roman world. One of the themes in the back cover endorsements, and rightly so, is Harland’s challenge to many scholarly assumptions about the uniqueness of early Christian identity. He doesn’t state that early Christian groups are not unique, but argues against the grain of those who emphasize distinction and separation.

This is from his conclusion:

This study has focused on what was common among many groups while also paying attention to certain distinctive features of ethnic groups and cultural minorities. The attention to shared modes of identity construction, negotiation, and communication is not meant to suggest that Christians were not unique. However, Christians were unique or distinctive insofar as every association, minority group, or ethnic group was unique or distinctive, each in its own way. Among the distinctive characteristics of Christians and Judeans that stood out to many insiders and outsiders was their attention to one, Judean God to the exclusion of other deities. This also entailed refraining from involvement in certain social settings where those other gods were honoured. This distinction was a potential source of tensions with many other groups and individuals within their contexts, and it could lead to social harassment and persecution on particular occasions.

When I read this, it hit me as extremely level-headed. This is the kind of balanced and nuanced scholarship that I aspire to in my own research. It also seems to be an excellent concise description of the identity formation of early Christian groups. I just had to pass it along!

I’m reading through Philip Harland‘s Dynamics of Identity in the World of the Early Christians: Associations, Judeans, and Cultural Minorities, kindly sent along to me by T & T Clark for review, and I’d like to first highlight his excellent introduction, which provides a very helpful review of scholarship on social-scientific issues, identity theory, and associations in the ancient world.

I thought this paragraph, in particular, was a well-stated and well-balanced approach to the use of social-scientific methods in biblical studies:

Building on contributions from both of these scholarly areas [social history as (1) "from below" scholarship or (2) social scientific research], I approach the social sciences as heuristic devices, as things that help the social historian develop questions and find or notice things that might otherwise remain obscure. I tend to draw on social-scientific insights to develop a research framework for analysis, and I am less focused than some other scholars on testing models specifically. In this respect, I consider myself more a social historian than a social scientist. Throughout this interdisciplinary study, I explain and adapt social-scientific concepts and theories in order to further our understanding of specific historical cases in the ancient context. [5]

Though I am nowhere near as accomplished as Harland in the field social-scientific research, of course, I feel like he took the words right out of my mouth.

Tim gives voice to a version of this question that I’ve seen a few others say and probably several others have thought without actually saying it. This point gets to one of the big pieces in the dearth-of-female-bibliobloggers puzzle. This is about identity formation and setting boundary markers (can you help us out, Brian?). When it comes to biblioblogging, who is in and who is out? What is our “ruler” for considering a blog to be appropriately focused upon academic biblical studies?

Tim points to my previous post where I am reaching out to the Emerging Women community (see the great comments coming in over there). He highlights something I have said, italicizing it in this way: “I’m not certain that any would qualify as focused upon “academic biblical studies” (I haven’t searched through all of them), but they are definitely a collection of blogs of interest to our field.” Thank you , Tim, for giving me the opportunity to clarify the statement. In response, I would emphasize the words “I’m not certain” and “I haven’t searched through all of them.” Please read on . . .

I had been thinking about the very question that Tim so eloquently states in his post (one of the best posts on this topic thus far). Given the freedom of blogging, I cannot imagine setting a solid boundary line. I think for any blog to be considered a biblioblog, though, a few questions should be pondered:

• How many posts are on biblical studies in a given time period? Say, a month.
• What is the ratio of biblical studies posts to other sorts of posts?
• How tangentially related are those “other sorts of posts” to biblical studies?
• What qualifies as a post about “biblical studies”? We are not including every person on the internet that sometimes says interesting things about the Bible. No, we need some academic interaction.
• What, then, do we consider “academic interaction”?

It’s a bit of a balancing act. The thing with Jim’s blog is that, yes, it’s eclectic. But buried in those posts about the evils of one news bit or another are some posts that do indeed “interact” with academic issues of biblical studies. Maybe Jim’s “interaction” is more ranting than measured dialogue, but apparently that’s acceptable for biblioblogging (since Jim’s blog is accepted as a biblioblog). The key, I think, is that Jim refers to scholars and scholarship and people doing stupid things with archaeology. He addresses issues that are of interest to the academic world.

What I was uncertain about in the quote highlighted by Tim was whether we could all be on the same page about what defines an appropriate focus on academic biblical studies.

I think that if we can find women who are interacting (or ranting or whatever) with academic issues of biblical studies at least a few times a month and those posts are not totally overshadowed by the rest of their other interests (any more than Jim’s academically-related posts are), then we have found new bibliobloggers! So, I am suggesting we place Jim’s blog on the “margins,” in a sense, defining him as a good boundary marker. We are saying, “Okay, we’ll let Jim be Jim, but that’s probably as academically diluted as we want to go.” I mean no offense to Jim when I say these things. He is certainly confident and comfortable with his own approach to blogging and academics!

So, let the hunt go on for new female bibliobloggers! I will suggest two places to begin looking. I have already mentioned the Emerging Women community. I will also highlight the RevGalBlogPals ring of blogs (see the “Our Blogs” section on the right sidebar).