moment of reading, simply precedes interpretation and leads necessarily to particular meanings. Rather, I wish to suggest that the subject of biblical interpretation does not only precede but is also formed, in part, through practices of reading. In order to speak about the gay male subject of biblical interpretation in this manner, I turn to Foucault’s late work on the technology or practices of the self. I will not, however, comment on Foucault’s corpus as a whole or discuss the many controversies