Everything about Historical-critical Method totally explained
Historical criticism or
Higher criticism as applied in
biblical studies, is a branch of
literary analysis that investigates the origins of a text, especially the books of the
Bible. Higher criticism, in particular, focuses on the sources of a document to determine who wrote it, when it was written, and where. For example, higher criticism deals with the
synoptic problem, the question of how
Matthew,
Mark, and
Luke relate to each other. In some cases, such as with several
Pauline epistles, higher criticism confirms the traditional understanding of authorship. In other cases, higher criticism contradicts church tradition (as with the
gospels) or even the words of the Bible itself (as with
2 Peter). The
documentary hypothesis, which attempts to chart the origins of the
Torah, is another key issue in higher criticism.
The Dutch scholar
Desiderius Erasmus (1466? - 1536) is usually credited as the first to study the Bible in this light, although many of his methods are also found in the much earlier writing of
Saint Augustine (354 - 430).
Higher criticism is used in contrast with
Lower criticism (or textual criticism), the endeavour to determine what a text originally said before it was altered (through error or intent). Once lower critics have done their job and we've a good idea of what the original text looked like, higher critics can then compare this text with the writing of other authors.
Higher criticism treats the Bible as a text created by human beings at a particular historical time and for various human motives, in contrast with the treatment of the Bible as the inerrant word of God. Lower criticism is used for attempts to interpret Biblical texts based only on the internal evidence from the texts themselves.
As an example, consider the treatment of
Noah's Ark in various editions of the
Encyclopedia Britannica. In the first edition, in 1771, the story of Noah and the Ark is treated as essentially factual, and the following scientific evidence is offered, "...Buteo and
Kircher have proved geometrically, that, taking the common
cubit as a foot and a half, the ark was abundantly sufficient for all the animals supposed to be lodged in it..., the number of species of animals will be found much less than is generally imagined, not amounting to an hundred species of
quadrupeds... ." By the eighth edition, however, the encyclopedia says of the Noah story, "The insuperable difficulties connected with the belief that all other existing species of animals were provided for in the ark are obviated by adopting the suggestion of
Bishop Stillingfleet, approved by
Matthew Poole...and others, that the Deluge didn't extend beyond the region of the earth then inhabited..." By the ninth edition, in 1875, there's no attempt to reconcile the Noah story with scientific fact, and it's presented without comment. In the 1960 edition, in the article Ark, we find the following, "Before the days of "higher criticism" and the rise of the modern scientific views as to the origin of the species, there was much discussion among the learned, and many ingenious and curious theories were advanced, as to the number of animals on the ark..."
History of Higher criticism
The phrase "the higher criticism" became popular in Europe from the mid-18th century to the early 20th century, to describe the work of such scholars as
Jean Astruc (mid-18th cent.),
Johann Salomo Semler (1725-91),
Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1752-1827),
Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860), and
Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918). In academic circles today, this is the body of work properly considered "the higher criticism", though the phrase is sometimes applied to earlier or later work using similar methods.
Higher criticism originally referred to the work of
German Biblical scholars, of the
Tübingen School. After the path-breaking work on the
New Testament by
Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834), the next generation which included scholars such as
David Friedrich Strauss (1808–74) and
Ludwig Feuerbach (1804–72) in the mid-
nineteenth century analyzed the historical records of the Middle East from Christian and Old Testament times in search of independent confirmation of events related in the
Bible. These latter scholars built on the tradition of
Enlightenment and
Rationalist thinkers such as
John Locke,
David Hume,
Immanuel Kant,
Gotthold Lessing,
Gottlieb Fichte,
Georg Hegel and the French
rationalists.
These ideas were imported to
England by
Samuel Taylor Coleridge and, in particular, by
George Eliot's translations of Strauss's
Life of Jesus (1846) and Feuerbach's
The Essence of Christianity (1854). In 1860 seven
liberal Anglican theologians began the process of incorporating this historical criticism into Christian doctrine in
Essays and Reviews, causing a five year storm of controversy which completely overshadowed the arguments over
Darwin's newly published
On the Origin of Species. Two of the authors were indicted for heresy and lost their jobs by 1862, but in 1864 had the judgement overturned on appeal.
La Vie de Jésus (1863), the seminal work by a Frenchman,
Ernest Renan (1823–92), continued in the same tradition as Strauss and Feuerbach. In Catholicism,
L'Evangile et l'Eglise (1902), the magnum opus by
Alfred Loisy against the
Essence of Christianity of
Adolf von Harnack and
La Vie de Jesus of Renan, gave birth to the
modernist crisis (1902–61). Some scholars, such as
Rudolf Bultmann, have used higher criticism of the Bible to "
demythologize" it.
Theological responses
The questions of higher criticism are widely recognized by
Orthodox Jews and many traditional
Christians as legitimate questions, yet they often find the answers given by the higher critics unsatisfactory or even
heretical. In particular, religious conservatives object to the
rationalistic and
naturalistic presuppositions of a large number of practitioners of higher criticism that lead to conclusions that conservative religionists find unacceptable. Nonetheless, conservative Bible scholars practice their own form of higher criticism within their supernaturalist and confessional frameworks. In contrast, other biblical scholars believe that the evidence uncovered by higher criticism undermines such confessional frameworks. In addition, religiously
liberal Christians and religiously liberal Jews typically maintain that belief in God has nothing to do with the authorship of the
Pentateuch. Most serious Christian scholars accept many of the methods and conclusions that were so shocking when they were first introduced.
Roman Catholic view
Pope Leo XIII (1810 - 1903) condemned secular biblical scholarship in his encyclical
Providentissimus Deus;, but in 1943
Pope Pius XII gave license to the new scholarship in his encyclical
Divino Afflante Spiritu: "[T]extual criticism ... [is] quite rightly employed in the case of the Sacred Books ... Let the interpreter then, with all care and without neglecting any light derived from recent research, endeavor to determine the peculiar character and circumstances of the sacred writer, the age in which he lived, the sources written or oral to which he'd recourse and the forms of expression he employed." Today the modern
Catechism states: "#110 In order to discover the sacred authors' intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression."
Protestant Christian view
Martin Luther, leader of the
Protestant Reformation, believed strongly in the literal truth of scripture. He wrote, "All the articles of our Christian faith, which God has revealed to us in His Word, are in presence of reason sheerly impossible, absurd and false." But at other times, he accepted the authority of reason, so long as it didn't contradict scripture. "Unless I'm convicted by the testimony of Sacred Scripture or by evident reason... my conscience is captive to the Word of God." He even used some of the methods that would later be called "higher criticism" in his study of the Bible. He wrote, "The discourses of the Prophets were none of them regularly committed to writing at the time; their disciples and hearers collected them subsequently. ... Solomon's Proverbs were not the work of Solomon."
Around the end of the 18th century
Johann Gottfried Eichhorn, "the founder of modern Old Testament criticism", produced works of "investigation of the inner nature of the Old Testament with the help of the Higher Criticism".
Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher also influenced the development of Higher Criticism.
A group of German biblical scholars at
Tübingen University formed the Tübingen school of theology under the leadership of
Ferdinand Christian Baur, with important works being produced by
Ludwig Andreas Feuerbach and
David Strauss. In the early 19th century they sought independent confirmation of the events related in the Bible through
Hegelian analysis of the historical records of the Middle East from Christian and Old Testament times.
Their ideas were brought to England by
Samuel Taylor Coleridge, then in 1846
George Eliot translated David Strauss's sensational
Leben Jesu as the
Life of Jesus Critically Examined, a
quest for the historical Jesus. In 1854 she followed this with a translation of Feuerbach's even more radical
Essence of Christianity which held that the idea of God was created by man to express the divine within himself, though Strauss attracted most of the controversy.
Today, some Protestants oppose the methods of the higher criticism, and hold that the Bible is divinely inspired and incapable of error, at least in its original form.
Types of higher criticism
Higher criticism is divided up into sub-categories, including primarily source criticism, form criticism, and redaction criticism.
Source criticism
Richard Simon, and its most influential product is undoubtably Julius Wellhausen's
Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (1878), whose "insight and clarity of expression have left their mark indelibly on modern biblical studies."
Redaction criticism
Redaction criticism studies "the collection, arrangement, editing and modification of sources", and is frequently used to reconstruct the community and purposes of the author/s of the text.
Form criticism and tradition history
Form criticism breaks the Bible down into sections (
pericopes, stories) which are analyzed and categorized by genres (prose or verse, letters, laws, court archives, war hymns, poems of lament, etc). The form critic then theorizes on the pericope's
Sitz im Leben ("setting in life"), the setting in which it was composed and, especially, used.
Tradition history is a specific aspect of form criticism which aims at tracing the way in which the pericopes entered the larger units of the biblical canon, and especially the way in which they made the transition from oral to written form. The belief in the priority, stability, and even detectability, of oral traditions is now recognised to be so deeply questionable as to render tradition history largely useless, but form criticism itself continues to develop as a viable methodolgy in biblical studies.
Radical criticism
Radical Criticism, around the end of the nineteenth century, typically tried to show that none of the
Pauline epistles are authentic; that Paul is nothing but a controverted authorial token. This group of scholars often postulated the ahistoricity of Jesus and the apostles.
Findings of higher criticism
Scholars of higher criticism have sometimes upheld and sometimes challenged the traditional authorship of various books of the Bible.
Old Testament
| Book |
Author according to tradition |
Author according to scholarship |
| Torah (Pentateuch, Books of Moses) |
Moses, c 1300 BC |
Documentary hypothesis: Four independent documents (the Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist and the Priestly source), composed between 900-550 BC, redacted c 450 BC, possibly by Ezra
Supplementary models (for example John Van Seters): Torah composed as a series of authorial expansions of an original source document, usually identified as J or P, largely during the 7th and 6th centuries BC, final form achieved c. 450 BC.
Fragmentary models (for example Rolf Rendtorff, Erhard Blum): Torah the product of the slow accretion of fragmentary traditions, (no documents), over period 850-550 BC, final form c. 450 BC.
Biblical minimalism: Torah composed in Hellenistic-Hasmonean period, c. 300-140 BC.
|
| Joshua |
Joshua with a portion by Phinehas or Eleazar |
Deuteronomist using material from the Yahwist and Elohist |
| Judges |
Samuel |
Deuteronomist |
| Ruth |
Samuel |
A later author, writing after the time of David |
| 1 Samuel |
Samuel, Gad, and Nathan |
Deuteronomist as a combination of a Jerusalem source, republican source, the court history of David, the sanctuaries source, and the monarchial source |
| 2 Samuel |
| 1 Kings |
Perhaps Ezra |
Deuteronomist |
| 2 Kings |
| 1 Chronicles |
Ezra |
The Chronicler, writing between 450 and 435 BC, after the Babylonian captivity |
| 2 Chronicles |
| Ezra |
Ezra |
The Chronicler, writing between 450 and 435 BC, after the Babylonian captivity |
| Nehemiah |
Nehemiah using some material by Ezra |
The Chronicler, writing between 450 and 435 BC, after the Babylonian captivity |
| Tobit |
|
A writer in the second century BC |
| Judith |
Eliakim (Joakim), the high priest of the story |
|
| Esther |
The Great Assembly using material from Mordecai |
An unknown author writing between 460 and 331 BC |
| 1 Maccabees |
A devout Jew from the Holy Land. |
An unknown Jewish author, writing around 100 BC |
| 2 Maccabees |
Based on the writing of Jason of Cyrene |
An unknown author, writing in the second or 1st century BC |
| 3 Maccabees |
|
An Alexandrian Jew writing in Greek in the first century BC or first century AD |
| 4 Maccabees |
Josephus |
An Alexandrian Jew writing in the first century BC or first century AD |
| Job |
Moses |
A writer in the 4th century BC. |
| Psalms |
Mainly David and also Asaph, sons of Korah, Moses, Heman the Ezrahite, Ethan the Ezrahite and Solomon |
Various authors recording oral tradition. Portions from 1000BC to 200BC. |
| Proverbs |
Solomon, Agur son of Jakeh, Lemuel and other wise men |
An editor compiling from various sources well after the time of Solomon |
| Ecclesiastes |
Solomon |
A Hebrew poet of the third or second centuries BC using the life of Solomon as a vista for the Hebrews' pursuit of Wisdom. An unknown author in Hellenistic period from two older oral sources (Eccl1:1-6:9 which claims to be Solomon, Eccl6:10-12:8 with the theme of non-knowing) |
| Song of Solomon |
Solomon |
|
| Wisdom |
Solomon |
An Alexandrian Jew writing during the Jewish Hellenistic period |
| Sirach |
Jesus the son of Sirach of Jerusalem |
|
| Isaiah |
Isaiah |
Three main authors and an extensive editing process. Is1-39 "Historical Isaiah" with multiple layers of editing. Is40-55 Exilic(Deutero-Isaiah) & Is56-66 post-exilic(Trito-Isaiah). |
| Jeremiah |
Jeremiah |
Baruch ben Neriah |
| Lamentations |
Jeremiah |
Disupted and perhaps based on the older Mesopotamian genre of the "city lament", of which the Lament for Ur is among the oldest and best-known |
| Letter of Jeremiah |
Jeremiah |
A Hellenistic Jew living in Alexandria |
| Baruch |
Baruch ben Neriah |
An author writing during or shortly after the period of the Maccabees |
| Ezekiel |
Ezekiel |
Disputed, with varying degrees of attribution to Ezekiel |
| Daniel |
Daniel, sixth century BC |
An editor/author in the mid-second century BC, using older folk-tales for the first half of the book |
| Hosea |
Hosea |
|
| Joel |
Joel |
|
| Amos |
Amos |
|
| Obadiah |
Obadiah |
|
| Jonah |
Jonah |
Possibly a post-exilic (after 530 BC) editor recording oral traditions passed down from the eighth century BC |
| Micah |
Micah |
The first three chapters by Micah and the remainder by a later writer |
| Nahum |
Nahum |
|
| Habakkuk |
Habakkuk |
|
| Zephaniah |
Zephaniah |
Disputed; possibly a writer after the time period indicated by the text |
| Haggai |
Haggai |
|
| Zechariah |
Zechariah |
Zechariah (chapters 1-8); the later remaining designated Deutero-Zechariah, were possibly written by disciples of Zechariah |
| Malachi |
Malachi or Ezra |
Possibly the author of Deutero-Zechariah |
New Testament
| Book |
Author according to tradition |
Author according to scholarship |
| Gospel of Mark |
Mark, follower of Peter; mid 1st century |
anonymous, perhaps Mark, follower of Peter; mid to late 1st century; the first written gospel |
| Gospel of Matthew |
The Apostle Matthew |
An unknown author who borrowed from both Mark and a source called Q, late 1st century |
| Gospel of Luke |
Luke, companion of Paul |
Luke or an unknown author who borrowed from both Mark and a source called Q, late 1st century |
| Gospel of John |
Apostle John |
An unknown author with no direct connection to the historical Jesus; John 21 finished after death of primary author by follower(s); the last written gospel |
| Acts of the Apostles |
Luke, companion of Paul |
Luke or an unknown author who also wrote the Gospel of Luke |
| Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Epistle to Philemon |
Paul the Apostle, see Pauline epistles |
Paul |
| Ephesians |
Paul the Apostle |
Paul or edited dictations from Paul |
| Colossians |
Paul the Apostle |
Disputed; perhaps Paul coauthoring with Timothy |
| 2 Thessalonians |
Paul the Apostle |
An associate or disciple after his death, representing what they believed was his message |
| 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, see Pastoral epistles |
Paul the Apostle |
pseudepigraphal, perhaps someone associated with Paul, writing at a later date see Authorship of the Pauline epistles |
| Epistle to the Hebrews |
Paul the Apostle (disputed) |
An unknown author, but almost certainly not Paul, c 95 |
| James |
James the Just |
A writer in the late first or early second centuries, after the death of James the Just
|
| 1 Peter |
Apostle Peter, before 64 (Peter's martyrdom) |
pseudepigraphal or perhaps Silas, proficient with Greek writing, 70-90 |
| 2 Peter |
Apostle Peter, before 64 |
pseudepigraphal, certainly not Peter, perhaps as late as c 150 AD, the last-written book of the Bible |
| 1 John |
Apostle John |
An unknown author with no direct connection to the historical Jesus Same as Gospel of John, late 1st century |
| 2 John, 3 John |
Apostle John (sometimes disputed) |
An unknown author with no direct connection to the historical Jesus, final Editor of John 21, c 100-110 |
| Jude |
Jude the Apostle or Jude, brother of Jesus |
A pseudonymous work written between the end of the first century and the first quarter of the 2nd century |
| Book of Revelation |
Apostle John(sometimes disputed) |
distinct author, perhaps John of Patmos (not the same author as the Gospel of John or 2 & 3 John) see Authorship of the Johannine works |
Higher criticism of other religious texts
Both higher and lower forms of criticism are carried out today with the religious writings of many religions, including
Hinduism,
Buddhism and
Confucianism.
Qur'an
Modern higher criticism is just beginning for the
Qur'an. This scholarship questions some traditional claims about its composition and content, contending that the Qur'an incorporates material from both the
Hebrew Bible and the
New Testament; however, other scholars argue that it cites examples from previous texts, as the New Testament did to the Old Testament. For example, Islamic history records that
Uthman collected all variants of the Qur'an and destroyed those that he didn't approve of.
Further Information
Get more info on 'Historical-critical Method'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://historical_criticism_in_bible_studies.totallyexplained.com">Historical criticism in Bible studies Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |