ANCIENT JEW REVIEW

After Echoes of Scripture, very few studies that stemmed from a NT context ever mention rabbinic literature anymore. My book works to revive and reframe this conversation, make room for early rabbinic texts in the study of Paul and make room for Paul in the study of ancient Midrash, without collapsing these texts into constricting and antiquated models of dependency and borrowing.

“All this to say that Paul’s emphasis in Romans 10 on speaking and subsequently hearing—orality—is not because it is relevant only to his gentile communities, but because it serves as an explanation for why part of Israel still not has yet believed; they cannot believe because they cannot “hear” the oral nomos speaking about Christ and righteousness by trust. “

Studies that seek to build on her path-breaking work in the history of midrash will have to pay closer attention to this fundamental X-factor in Pauline hermeneutics.

"We tend to think about rabbinic interpretations, like midrash, arising from a difficulty in the text itself: smoothing out a piece of grit until, in the famous analogy, it becomes a pearl. What if, however, difficulties that arise from the juxtaposition of two texts are fertile ground for interpretation as well—and that interpretation is not meant to make them easier, but rather, harder?"

"After reading Fisch’s book I am convinced that Paul’s general hermeneutic should not be identified as a radicalization of Alexandrian allegory, or as allegory at all. And I can accept, based on Paul’s blend of the intertextual method featured in later rabbinic midrash with the terminology and content of allegory in Gal 4, that allegory and midrash are not always diametrically opposed, at least for Paul. Nevertheless, as Fisch herself recognizes and details, allegory and midrash differ in numerous ways. Moreover, they are not blended in the vast majority of works of ancient Jewish interpretation or in rabbinic literature, which suggests that their distinction as hermeneutical systems has heuristic value."