Historical criticism is a scholarly approach that investigates the origins, contexts, and meanings of ancient texts, including religious and secular writings. This method has been widely applied, particularly in the study of biblical texts, and has significantly shaped our understanding of these foundational documents.
Table of Contents
What is Historical Criticism?
Historical criticism refers to the study of literary texts with a focus on understanding their historical character and context. This approach analyzes the text to seek a greater understanding of its original meaning and significance. The primary goals of historical criticism are:
- Discovering the Text’s Primitive or Original Meaning: Historical critics aim to uncover the text’s earliest or most fundamental meaning, before later interpretations and traditions shaped its understanding.
- Reconstructing the Historical Situation: Historical critics also seek to establish a reconstruction of the historical context in which the text was written, including the author’s circumstances, the intended audience, and the events described.
Origins and Evolution
Historical criticism began in the 17th century and gained popular recognition in the 19th and 20th centuries. The perspective of early historical critics was influenced by a rejection of traditional interpretations. Historical criticism refined into various methodologies, including source criticism, form criticism, redaction criticism, and tradition history.
How Does Historical Criticism Differ from Traditional Approaches?
The historical-critical method stands in contrast to the traditional, devotional approach to texts. Devotional readers typically focus on the overall message and theological significance of a text, while historians using the historical-critical method examine the distinct messages and meanings of each individual work. For example, Christians often combine accounts from different gospels into a single narrative, while historians using the historical-critical method attempt to discern the unique characteristics and perspectives of each gospel.
The Evolution of Historical Criticism
Historical criticism has its roots in the Protestant Reformation and the European Enlightenment. The Reformation brought renewed attention to the “plain” or literal meaning of biblical texts, while the Enlightenment encouraged questioning of traditional beliefs and a focus on human reason and scientific objectivity.The term “higher criticism” became popular in Europe, originally referring to the work of German biblical scholars of the Tübingen School in the 19th century. These scholars tackled questions about the authorship and composition of the Pentateuch, developing the influential Documentary Hypothesis, which suggested the Pentateuch was composed of sources from multiple authors or traditions.This work was highly controversial, as it challenged long-held beliefs about the Bible’s divine authorship and undermined traditional understandings of biblical authority. Protestant Christians in the United States responded by recommitting themselves to the “fundamentals” of the Christian faith, while many Roman Catholics and evangelical Christians rejected historical criticism.
Methodologies of Historical Criticism
Historical criticism has evolved into various specialized methodologies, including:
- Source Criticism: Questioning whether texts came from a singular source, author, or historical context, and seeking to untangle the sources present within a given text.
- Form Criticism: Analyzing the linguistic patterns and genres of a text to understand its claims and the context in which it was produced.
- Redaction Criticism: Examining how redactors (editors) wove together various traditions into a cohesive whole.
- Tradition History: Tracing the way in which smaller textual units (pericopes) entered the larger biblical canon and transitioned from oral to written form.
These methods, along with others, allow scholars to investigate the historical origins, authorship, and development of ancient texts.
The Impact of Historical Criticism
The application of historical-critical methods has had a significant impact on the study of biblical texts and other religious writings. It has challenged traditional understandings, leading to debates and controversies, particularly within Christianity.Some evangelical scholars and writers have vigorously opposed the theories of historical-critical scholars, accusing them of presenting their interpretations as indisputable facts. Evangelical Christians have often attributed the decline of the Christian faith to the consequences of historical criticism.However, modernist Christians have embraced historical criticism, and Protestant theologians have wrestled with the implications of this approach for the authority of scripture. Today, historical criticism remains the predominant method used by biblical scholars, though it has also come under critique from postmodern thinkers.
Historical Criticism and Contemporary Issues
The historical-critical approach has been applied to address contemporary issues, such as the use of biblical texts to condemn same-sex intimacy. Scholars have questioned the historical context and original meaning of these passages, arguing that they do not reflect an understanding of homosexuality as a sexual orientation or identity. This has led to a reexamination of the church’s historical use of these texts to exclude LGBTQ individuals.
Challenges to Historical Criticism
In recent years, historical criticism has faced challenges from postmodern thinkers, who have questioned the supposed historical and scholarly objectivity of this approach. Postmodern scholars argue that we can never fully grasp the historical context or authorial intent of a text, and they emphasize the importance of acknowledging our own perspectives and their impact on the interpretation of biblical and other religious texts.Despite these critiques, historical criticism remains a dominant method in biblical and religious studies, as scholars continue to use its various methodologies to uncover the origins, contexts, and meanings of ancient texts.
Source Criticism
Source criticism questions whether texts came from a singular source, author, or historical context and seeks to untangle sources present within any given text. This method traces back to the 17th century French priest Richard Simon and was influential prior to the Protestant Reformation and Enlightenment.
Form Criticism
Form criticism analyzes and categorizes biblical sections by genres and theorizes on a pericope’s Sitz im Leben. This method continues to develop as a viable methodology, allowing scholars to understand the claims of a text and its linguistic patterns.
Redaction Criticism
Redaction criticism studies the collection, arrangement, editing, and modification of sources and frequently reconstructs the community and purposes of the authors. This method helps scholars understand how redactors wove together various traditions into one whole.
Tradition History
Tradition history aims at tracing the way in which pericopes entered the larger units of the biblical canon and made the transition from oral to written form. This method recognizes the questionable nature of the priority, stability, and detectability of oral traditions.
Historical Criticism and Biblical Studies
Historical criticism as applied to the Bible began with Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677). The historical-critical method is distinct from the traditional, devotional approach. Devotional readers concern themselves with the overall message of the Bible, while historians examine the distinct messages of each book. Christians often combine accounts from different gospels into single accounts, while historians attempt to discern what is unique about each gospel.
Historical Criticism and Modernism
The term “higher criticism” became popular in Europe and originally referred to the work of German biblical scholars of the Tübingen School. The work of Friedrich Schleiermacher was groundbreaking for the New Testament. The next generation of scholars analyzed historical records of the Middle East from biblical times, building on the tradition of Enlightenment and Rationalist thinkers. The acceptance of historical critical dogmas engendered conflicting representations of Protestant Christianity. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy affirms traditional inerrancy, while attempts to revive extreme historical criticism met with strong criticism and indifference, confined to the Minor Journal of Higher Criticism.
Historical Criticism and Postmodernism
Historical criticism remains the predominant method used by biblical scholars today, and scholars used the historical-critical method in new ways. Historical critical scholarship called into question assumptions made by contemporary readers. Such ideas influenced thought in England. George Eliot translated Strauss’s The Life of Jesus and Feuerbach’s The Essence of Christianity. Seven liberal Anglican theologians began the process of incorporating historical criticism into Christian doctrine. Ernest Renan continued the tradition of Strauss and Feuerbach. Alfred Loisy wrote L’Evangile et l’Eglise, the magnum opus against the Essence of Christianity of Adolf von Harnack and the Life of Jesus of Renan, which gave birth to the Modernist crisis. Rudolf Bultmann used higher criticism of the Bible to demythologize it. John Barton argues the term “historical-critical method” conflates two nonidentical distinctions and prefers the term “Biblical criticism”.
Conclusion
Historical criticism has been a dominant method in biblical and religious studies, significantly shaping our understanding of ancient texts. It continues to evolve and adapt to new challenges and perspectives, ensuring that our interpretations remain grounded in rigorous scholarship and historical context.