This chapter considers more popular and experiential receptions of the Bible, in its various canonical and material manifestations, in faith communities. It examines communal engagement with biblical texts in liturgy and prayer, actualizations of the Bible in the praxis of believers and faith communities, and how the Bible functions in ecumenical dialogue and in wider interfaith conversations.

In the predecessor to this volume, John Barton observed that the interpretation of the Bible is never finished because new readers in a new time will inevitably ask new questions. Now almost a quarter century later, this is as true today as it was in 1998. Yet, it is not only that the results of the interpretive task change but that the concept and nature of interpretation itself undergoes transformation. Barton’s volume already noted the significant paradigm shifts in the field that were unfolding in the 1990s, in which the dominance of historical-critical methods as nearly synonymous with the idea of “biblical scholarship” was giving way to a range of competing approaches, several of which claimed affinity with older, pre-Enlightenment approaches. However, in his own essay in that volume, he also cautioned against a tendency to dismiss historical criticism (or, as he prefers, biblical criticism) too readily, making a strong case for the ongoing importance of the specific kinds of questions it poses to the text.

This chapter examines the role of apocalyptic thought during the Renaissance, which was marked by both continuity with medieval apocalypticism and innovation. It includes consideration of its impact on sober humanist scholarship, fierce Reformation debates regarding the papacy, apocalyptic optimism associated with exploration and missionary expansion in the New World, and esoteric speculation about the figure of Enoch.

The one called ‘Jezebel’, prophet of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to John our brother: Grace to you and peace.

It is with great trepidation, with fear and trembling, that I find myself putting ink to paper. Indeed, you may say, with what audacity does that woman dare to respond to such uncompromising words of prophecy? Surely the authoritative word of the heavenly Son of Man is final? Surely there is no come-back in the face of visions and revelations of the Lord?

But respond I must, for your prophetic oracle, and the vivid description of your visions received on Patmos, have thrown our little community into turmoil. No doubt that was your hope. No doubt you wished that I be discredited amongst the saints here in Thyatira (though I thank God that this has not yet happened, such are our bonds of familial loyalty). That much seems evident from the ‘word of the Lord’ you wish to mediate to us. But – I speak as one prophet to another, though this is bound to make your hackles rise! – are you sure that you have not confused your own animosity with the spirit of prophecy? Must one interpret your heavenly visions only in the way you present them to us? I wonder. For in those damning words of the Son of Man, I can hear the familiar tones of my brother and old sparring partner John.