what are the four types of biblical criticism

It does not mean the same thing as a complaint or disapproval. [17], Albert Schweitzer in The Quest of the Historical Jesus, acknowledges that Reimarus's work "is a polemic, not an objective historical study", while also referring to it as "a masterpiece of world literature. students. [14]:117 117,149150,188191, George Ricker Berry says the term "higher criticism", which is sometimes used as an alternate name for historical criticism, was first used by Eichhorn in his three-volume work Einleitung ins Alte Testament (Introduction to the Old Testament) published between 1780 and 1783. 457) and the Nomina Sacra: Method and Probability", "The Long and Short of Lectio Brevior Potior", "A Statistical Study of the Synoptic Problem", "Biblical Studies: Fifty Years of a Multi-Discipline", "Biblical Scholarship 50 years After Divino Afflante Spiritu", "First Vatican Council | Description, Doctrine, & Legacy | Britannica", "Introduction: Pascendi dominici gregis The Vatican Condemnation of Modernism", "The Jerome Biblical Commentary for the Twenty-First Century". biblical criticism, discipline that studies textual, compositional, and historical questions surrounding the Old and New Testaments. [199], New historicism emerged as traditional historical biblical criticism changed. In 1943, on the fiftieth anniversary of the Providentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII issued the papal encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu ('Inspired by the Holy Spirit') sanctioning historical criticism, opening a new epoch in Catholic critical scholarship. The form critics did not derive laws of transmission from a study of folk literature as many think. https://www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-criticism, The Catholic Encyclopedia - Biblical Criticism. The Absurdity of "Higher Criticism" of the Gospels as Illustrated in a Novel. 9 It is no longer acceptable to hold exclusive beliefs. There are five highly detailed arguments in favor of Q's existence: the verbal agreement of Mark and Luke, the order of the parables, the doublets, a discrepancy in the priorities of each gospel, and each one's internal coherence. Critics focused on the historical events behind the text as well as the history of how the texts themselves developed. But times have changed [In the twenty-first century,] [c]an the notion of a sacred text be retrieved? The process of redaction seeks the historical community of the final redactors of the gospels, though there are often no textual clues. The 1980s saw the rise of formalism, which focuses on plot, structure, character and themes[143]:164 and the development of reader-response criticism which focuses on the reader rather than the author. Fundamentalism began, at least partly, as a response to the biblical criticism of nineteenth century liberalism. Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login). [25]:34, After 1970, biblical criticism began to change radically and pervasively. [55]:241,149[56] This has raised the question of whether or not there is such a thing as an "original text". Next, a scholarly effort to reclaim the Bible's theological relevance began. Historical-biblical criticism includes a wide range of approaches and questions within four major methodologies: textual, source, form . [159], Fishbane asserts that the significant question for those who continue in any community of Jewish or Christian faith is, after 200 years of biblical criticism: can the text still be seen as sacred? 1954) says that even though most scholars agree that biblical criticism evolved out of the German Enlightenment, there are some historians of biblical criticism that have found "strong direct links" with British deism. [4]:22 It begins with the understanding that biblical criticism's focus on historicity produced a distinction between the meaning of what the text says and what it is about (what it historically references). They made a lasting change in the practice of biblical criticism by making it clear it could exist independently of theology and faith. [186]:42,83, One of the earliest historical-critical Jewish scholars of Pentateuchal studies was M. M. Kalisch, who began work in the nineteenth century. E (for Elohist) was thought to be a product of the Northern Kingdom before BCE 721; D (for Deuteronomist) was said to be written shortly before it was found in BCE 621 by King Josiah of Judah (2 Chronicles 34:14-30). Most scholars agree the first quest began with Reimarus and ended with Schweitzer, that there was a "no-quest" period in the first half of the twentieth century, and that there was a second quest, known as the "New" quest that began in 1953 and lasted until 1988 when a third began. In the encyclical, Leo XIII excluded the possibility of restricting the inspiration and inerrancy of the bible to matters of faith and morals. [note 8] Bible scholar Tony Campbell says: Form criticism had a meteoric rise in the early part of the twentieth century and fell from favor toward its end. "[27]:22,16 According to Schweitzer, Reimarus was wrong in his assumption that Jesus's end-of-world eschatology was "earthly and political in character" but was right in viewing Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher, as evidenced by his repeated warnings about the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of time. "[It] is safe to conclude that in many measurable features contemporary evangelical scholarship on the scriptures enjoys a considerable good health". These new points of view created awareness that the Bible can be rationally interpreted from many different perspectives. It became both longer and shorter, both more and less detailed, and both more and less Semitic". Biblical criticism The word criticism does not mean to be negative or critical of the bible but rather refers to the application of scholarly methods and approaches to study, analyze, and interpret biblical texts. The 'ideal' of higher criticism, originally, was to study the Bible without biasand there's nothing wrong with thatin theory. [203]:120 "As Frei puts it, scripture 'simultaneously depicts and renders the reality (if any) of what it talks about'; its subject matter is 'constituted by, or identical with, its narrative". [156]:9 As a result, the Bible is no longer thought of solely as a religious artifact, and its interpretation is no longer restricted to the community of believers. [101], Later scholars added to and refined Wellhausen's theory. By the end of the nineteenth century, these principles were recognized by Ernst Troeltsch in an essay, Historical and Dogmatic Method in Theology, where he described three principles of biblical criticism: methodological doubt (a way of searching for certainty by doubting everything); analogy (the idea that we understand the past by relating it to our present); and mutual inter-dependence (every event is related to events that proceeded it). No conclusive evidence has yet been produced to settle the question of genre, and without genre, no adequate parallels can be found, and without parallels "it must be considered to what extent the principles of literary criticism are applicable". [154]:167 Stephen D. Moore has written that "as a term, narrative criticism originated within biblical studies", but its method was borrowed from narratology. Following Pius's death, Pope Benedict XV once again condemned rationalistic biblical criticism in his papal encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus ("Paraclete Spirit"). Criticism of the Bible is an interdisciplinary field of study concerning the factual accuracy of the claims and the moral tenability of the commandments made in the Bible, the holy book of Christianity. According to Spinoza: "All these details, the manner of narration, the testimony, and the context of the whole story lead to the plain conclusion that these books were written by another, and not by Moses in person". [202], Post-critical interpretation, according to Ken and Richard Soulen, "shares postmodernism's suspicion of modern claims to neutral standards of reason, but not its hostility toward theological interpretation". The labor of many centuries has expelled us from this edenic womb and its wellsprings of life and knowledge [The] Bible has lost its ancient authority". [140]:336 The evangelist's theology more likely depends on what the gospels have in common as well as their differences. For criticisms of the Bible as a source of reliable information or ethical guidance, see, The widely accepted two-source hypothesis, showing two sources for both Matthew and Luke, Source criticism of the Old Testament: Wellhausen's hypothesis, Source criticism of the New Testament: the synoptic problem. [117]:158, Form criticism began in the early twentieth century when theologian Karl Ludwig Schmidt observed that Mark's Gospel is composed of short units. [74]), These texts were all written by hand, by copying from another handwritten text, so they are not alike in the manner of printed works. [4]:161 In the late nineteenth century, they sought to understand Judaism and Christianity within the overall history of religion. JEDP are initials representing the four hypothetical sources as follows: J awist (or Yahwist, from Yahweh) - describes God as Yahweh, starting in Gen 2:4, it includes much of Genesis and parts of Exodus and Numbers. [22]:297298[2]:189 Long before Richard Simon, the historical context of the biblical texts was important to Joachim Camerarius (15001574) who wrote a philological study of figures of speech in the biblical texts using their context to understand them. [145]:4 Canonical criticism does not reject historical criticism, but it does reject its claim to "unique validity". Some of these verses are verbatim. [102]:93, Advocates of Wellhausen's hypothesis contend it accounts well for the differences and duplication found in the Pentateuchal books. He postulated a hypothetical collection of the sayings of Jesus from an additional source called Q, taken from Quelle, which is German for "source". Higher criticism is an umbrella term that encompasses the more sophisticated types of biblical criticism, such as source criticism, form criticism, and redaction criticism. another term for biblical exegesis. What is the most controversial Bible verse? Criticism by outsiders accused the phenomenon as manufactured emotionalism and sensationalism. J stands for the Yahwist source, (Jahwist in German), and was considered[by whom?] [105]:96 Yet no replacement has so far been agreed upon: "the work of Wellhausen, for all that it needs revision and development in detail, remains the securest basis for understanding the Pentateuch". [155], Ken and Richard Soulen say that "biblical criticism has permanently altered the way people understand the Bible". [169], The Church showed strong opposition to biblical criticism during that period. The roughly 900 manuscripts found at Qumran include the oldest extant manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible. Eichhorn, who applied the method to his study of the Pentateuch. While James Muilenburg (18961974) is often referred to as "the prophet of rhetorical criticism",[148] it is Herbert A. Wichelns who is credited with "creating the modern discipline of rhetorical criticism" with his 1925 essay "The Literary Criticism of Oratory". Higher criticism: the study of the sources and literary methods employed by the biblical authors. [citation needed] Devout Christians have long regarded their Bible as the perfect word of God (and devout Jews have held the Hebrew Bible similarly in high regard). [13]:49, Professors Richard Soulen and Kendall Soulen write that biblical criticism reached "full flower" in the nineteenth century, becoming the "major transforming fact of biblical studies in the modern period". [194]:12,13, Biblical criticism produced profound changes in African-American culture. This is called the synoptic problem, and explaining it is the single greatest dilemma of New Testament source criticism. [16][17]:1315 Matthew Tindal (16571733), as part of British deism, asserted that Jesus taught an undogmatic natural religion that the Church later changed into its own dogmatic form. [168]:135 Edwin M. Yamauchi is a recognized expert on Gnosticism; Gordon Fee has done exemplary work in textual criticism; Richard Longenecker is a student of Jewish-Christianity and the theology of Paul. Higher criticism, whether biblical, classical . The major types of biblical criticism are: (1) textual criticism, which is concerned with establishing the original or most authoritative text, (2) philological criticism, which is the study of the biblical languages for an accurate knowledge of vocabulary, grammar, and style of the period, (3) literary criticism. Source criticism's most influential work is Julius Wellhausen's Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (Prologue to the History of Israel, 1878) which sought to establish the sources of the first five books of the Old Testament - collectively known as the Pentateuch. On this Wikipedia the language links are at the top of the page across from the article title. [27]:15, Reimarus's controversial work garnered a response from Semler in 1779: Beantwortung der Fragmente eines Ungenannten (Answering the Fragments of an Unknown). [39] In The Essence of Christianity (1900), Adolf Von Harnack (18511930) described Jesus as a reformer. Omissions? German pietism played a role in its development, as did British deism, with its greatest influences being rationalism and Protestant scholarship. [143]:3, By 1974, the two methodologies being used in literary criticism were rhetorical analysis and structuralism. The Hebrew text they produced stabilized by the end of the second century, and has come to be known as the Masoretic text, the source of the Christian Old Testament. [7], Jean Astruc (16841766), a French physician, believed these critics were wrong about Mosaic authorship. Since Mark was believed to be the first gospel, the form critics looked for the addition of proper names for anonymous characters, indirect discourse being turned into direct quotation, and the elimination of Aramaic terms and forms, with details becoming more concrete in Matthew, and then more so in Luke.