Acts of Interpretation: Ancient Religious Semiotic Ideologies and Their Modern Echoes : Ancient Religious Semiotic Ideologies and Their Modern Echoes

Ancient authors debated proper verbal and non-verbal signs as representations of divinity.

These understanding of signs were based on ideas drawn from language and thus limited due to a their partial understanding of the multi-functionality of signs.

Charles S. Peirce's semiotics, as adapted by anthropological linguists including Michael Silverstein, better explains the contextual linkages ("e;performativity"e;) of ancient religious signs such as divine names.

Sign meaning is always dependent on processes of interpretation and is always open to reinterpretation.

Focusing on these processes permits a more detailed analysis of the ancient evidence.

Examples are drawn from ancient Israelite verbal and non-verbal divine representation, the apostle Paul's linguistic letter/spirit model, Christian debates about the limits of language to best represent the deity, Josephus' aniconic advertisement of Jewish rites, the multi-layered divine representations in the Dura-Europos synagogue, the diverse "e;performativity"e; of Jewish ascent liturgies, and-the single modern example-the role of art at Burning Man.

Divine representation is the basis for ritual efficacy even as sign meaning is a constant source of contention.