Abstract
Each of the three major Abrahamic religions has its own scriptural passage enjoining its followers to differentiate themselves from the “other.” Commentators have historically interpreted them according to the qualities and practices of the “others,” and geographical proximity seems to be the single greatest factor in determining who is referenced, directly or by allusion. This pattern has manifested across space and time, from the menstrual practices of Arab Muslims in the Middle Ages to the naming conventions of enlightenment-era Albanian Christians to the liturgical tendencies of modern American Jews. Through a comparative analysis of religious texts, historical accounts, and contemporary observations, I identify the proximity pattern and argue that competition for resources, status, and influence is what leads to the exacting scriptural interpretations based on practices of nearby groups. The interpreters may not consider these groups to be the most sinful, nor even the most culturally similar and in need of differentiation—it is the proximity that presents the issue. In the second section, I discuss the geographical implications; the practices that began with physical proximity foster stronger inter-group boundaries over time, leading to the formation of enclaves, ghettos, or religiously distinct neighborhoods. By highlighting the reciprocal relationship between physical geography and religious interpretation, this paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the complexities of religious differentiation within Abrahamic traditions. It underscores the significance of considering spatial dynamics in the study of historic scriptural interpretation by illuminating ways in which physical proximity shapes religious practice and vice versa.
Presenters
Elizabeth LathamStudent, Theology (Christian Ethics), Oxford University, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
Religious Commonalities and Differences
KEYWORDS
Differentiation, Scripture, Abrahamic Religions, Historical Geography, Comparative Religion
