Historical criticism is an approach to biblical interpretation that seeks to understand the text in its historical context. It asks questions such as when the text was written, by whom, for whom, and why. The goal is to place the biblical text in its proper historical setting in order to better understand its meaning and significance.
Some key aspects of historical criticism include:
- Literary analysis – Looking at the literary style, structure, themes, etc. to understand the text as a piece of literature.
- Source criticism – Examining the sources behind the text, such as looking at the different sources that were combined to form the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible).
- Form criticism – Identifying the form or genre of a text (gospel, parable, letter, etc.) and how that affects the message.
- Redaction criticism – Studying how editors or redactors shaped and assembled the text for theological purposes.
- Historical background – Researching the history, culture, politics, economics, etc. of the time period in which the text was written.
Some key figures in the development of historical criticism include:
- Baruch Spinoza – Questioned the traditional attribution of authorship of biblical books.
- Jean Astruc – Hypothesized different sources behind Genesis based on the use of different names for God.
- Julius Wellhausen – Proposed the influential documentary hypothesis of the Pentateuch.
- Hermann Gunkel – Developed form criticism and identified biblical genres.
- Rudolf Bultmann – Pioneered redaction criticism and demythologizing the New Testament.
Historical criticism emerged in the 17th-18th centuries as scholars began applying Enlightenment principles of rational inquiry to the study of the Bible. They focused on using history, archaeology, and literary analysis to understand the human origins of the biblical text.
Advocates believe historical criticism provides a deeper understanding of the biblical text by shedding light on its historical situatedness. It also helps separate theological truth from incidental historical trappings. Critics claim it undermines the faith by portraying the Bible as a purely human book.
Some key insights from historical criticism include:
- Recognizing the influence of Near Eastern cultures on the biblical writers.
- Appreciating the development of monotheism in ancient Israel.
- Discerning the compositional history of biblical books.
- Understanding the social, political, and religious contexts that shaped the texts.
- Grasping the culture and mindset of ancient audiences.
Historical criticism has had a profound impact on biblical studies. Virtually all scholars today incorporate historical criticism in their approach. However, many also recognize its limitations. Historical critics may miss the theological message while focusing solely on historical matters. Many also practice other interpretive approaches alongside historical criticism.
In summary, historical criticism seeks to read the biblical text in its historical context in order to discover its original meaning. It utilizes scholarly tools like source criticism, form criticism, redaction criticism, and study of historical backgrounds. While immensely influential, historical criticism has its critics. Many scholars today seek a balanced approach that combines historical analysis with theological exegesis and sensitivity to the contemporary relevance of the text.
Some key Bible passages related to historical criticism include:
“But there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries, and he has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will be in the latter days.” (Daniel 2:28) – Indicates God is the ultimate author behind the prophecies, not just human speculation.
“For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (2 Peter 1:21) – Affirms that biblical authors were divinely inspired, not just writing on their own initiative.
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness…” (2 Timothy 3:16) – Claims inspiration for the whole OT, not just portions that seem clearly divine.
“For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.” (Romans 15:4) – Shows the contemporary relevance and spiritual profitability of OT Scripture.
“But there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” (John 21:25) – Indicates the Gospels are selective and incomplete historical narratives.
“Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book…” (John 20:30) – Suggests more could be written about Jesus, just selectively recording.
In conclusion, while historical criticism highlights the human dimension in Scripture, the Bible makes clear that God inspired the authors and that the text serves divine purposes.
Other biblical passages emphasize the spiritual power and authority of God’s word throughout changing historical circumstances (Isaiah 40:8; Matthew 24:35; 1 Peter 1:25). Ultimately, Scripture transcends its historical situatedness through the ongoing quickening of the Holy Spirit who inspired it.
Historical criticism has value in understanding the Bible’s historical setting. But reading Scripture prayerfully, in community, with an openness to spiritual transformation balances historical analysis with sensitivity to the text’s enduring theological relevance and dynamic power.
The biblical authors wrote within particular historical contexts. But as 2 Timothy 3:16 affirms, all Scripture is “God-breathed.” The Holy Spirit can speak through the text afresh to each generation when it is read in faith. The Word of God is “living and active” (Hebrews 4:12). While respecting its historical grounding, Christians believe that under the Spirit’s illumination, Scripture still functions authoritatively as a means of encountering the risen Christ.