Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T03:12:49.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Historical Criticism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Clare K. Rothschild
Edited by
Joel B. Green
Joel B. Green
Affiliation:
Fuller Theological Seminary, California
Get access

Summary

The historical–critical method encompasses a variety of strategies for eliciting meaning from a premodern literary text. The most prominent of these subspecies are text, source, form, redaction, rhetorical, and social-scientific criticism. Although distinctive, each approach prioritizes comparative analysis of a text in its literary and historical contexts – involving cultural, social, political, religious, and other aspects. An investigation of early Christian texts from a historical–critical perspective implies close examination of a passage using any or all of the pertinent critical techniques listed previously.

In this chapter I sketch the emergence of the historical–critical method in the field of biblical studies and describe its suitability for understanding the Gospel of Luke. Following this background, I analyze Luke 20:45–21:4 by means of this method, showing how manipulation of traditional source material, in this case the author's version of Mark, best explains the author's narrative strategy, which in turn helps to reveal the author's first goal: to write the first credible history of early Christianity.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE HISTORICAL–CRITICAL METHOD

“Higher criticism” was the name given to study of the Bible as any other fancient text, that is, as composed by human beings during particular phases in history. In contrast, “lower criticism” was the attempt to understand biblical texts on the basis of internal evidence alone. The Dutch scholar Erasmus (1466–1536) might be credited as the first to study the Bible critically, although many of his methods are identifiable in the work of earlier scholars and theologians.

Type
Chapter
Information
Methods for Luke , pp. 9 - 41
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Krentz, Edgar, The Historical-Critical Method (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf and Stock, 2002 [1975])Google Scholar
Harvey, A., The Historian and the Believer (New York: Macmillan, 1966)Google Scholar
Duling, Dennis C. and Perrin, Norman, Proclamation and Parenesis, Myth and History (3rd ed.; New York: Harcourt Brace, 1974)Google Scholar
Ehrman, Bart D., The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (4th ed.; New York: Oxford University Press, 2007)Google Scholar
Krentz, , Historical-Critical Method; Kümmel, Werner Georg, The New Testament: The History of the Investigation of Its Problems (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1972)Google Scholar
Powell, Mark Allan, Fortress Introduction to the Gospels (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 1998)Google Scholar
Schnelle, Udo, The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 1998)Google Scholar
Metzger, Bruce M., The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (3rd ed.; New York: Oxford University Press, 1992)Google Scholar
Epp, Eldon J., Junia: The First Woman Apostle (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2005), 12–13Google Scholar
Pestman, P. W., The New Papyrological Primer (2nd ed.; Leiden: Brill, 1997)Google Scholar
Tischendorf, Constantin, When Were Our Gospels Written? An Argument by Constantine Tischendorf: With a Narrative of the Discovery of the Sinaitic Manuscript (New York: American Tract Society, 1866)Google Scholar
Aland, K. et al., rev. and ed., Novum Testamentum Graece (27th ed.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung, 1993), 80–1
Hayes, John H. and Miller, J. Maxwell, eds., Israelite and Judaean History (3rd ed.; London: SCM, 1990) 61–4
Wellhausen, Julius, Prolegomena to the History of Ancient Israel (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994 [1885])Google Scholar
Aland, Kurt, ed., Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1996)
Robinson, James M. et al., The Critical Edition of Q (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2000)Google Scholar
Griesbach, Johann J., Commentatio qua Marci evangelium totum e Matthaei et Lucae commentariis decerptum esse monstratur (Jena, 1789/90)Google Scholar
Orchard, J. B., ed., A Synopsis of the Four Gospels: In Greek: Arranged according to the Two-Gospel-Hypothesis (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983)
Dungan, David L., ed., The Interrelations of the Gospels (BETL 95; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1990), 125–230
Farrar, Austin, “On Dispensing with Q,” in Studies in the Gospels: Essays in Memory of R. H. Lightfoot (ed. Nineham, D. E.; Oxford: Blackwell, 1955)Google Scholar
Goodacre, Mark, “Beyond the Q Impasse or Down a Blind Alley,” JSNT 76 (1999): 33–52Google Scholar
Reicke, Bo, “Die Entstehungsverhältnisse der synoptischen Evangelien,” in ANRW 252 (1984): 1758–91Google Scholar
Gunkel, H., The Legends of Genesis (Chicago: Open Court, 1901Google Scholar
Baird, William, History of New Testament Research, vol. 1: From Deism to Tübingen (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 1992)Google Scholar
Berger, Klaus, Formen und Gattungen im Neuen Testament (Stuttgart: Uni-Taschenbücher, 2005)Google Scholar
Marxsen, Willi, Mark the Evangelist: Studies on the Redaction History of the Gospel (3rd ed.; Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1969)Google Scholar
Watson, Duane F. and Hauser, Alan J., Rhetorical Criticism of the Bible: A Comprehensive Bibliography with Notes on History and Method (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 114Google Scholar
Mitchell, Margaret M., Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation: An Exegetical Investigation of the Language and Composition of 1 Corinthians (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1991), 7Google Scholar
Betz, Hans Dieter, Galatians: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979)Google Scholar
Mitchell, Margaret M. to Grant, Robert M., Augustus to Constantine: The Rise and Triumph of Christianity in the Roman World (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 2004), xxii–xxvGoogle Scholar
Stark, Rodney, The Rise of Christianity: A Sociologist Reconsiders History (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996)Google Scholar
Kelhoffer, James A., The Diet of John the Baptist: “Locusts and Wild Honey” in Synoptic and Patristic Tradition (WUNT 176; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005)Google Scholar
Collins, John J., Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls (New York: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar
Robinson, James M., ed., The Nag Hammadi Library in English (rev. ed.; San Francisco: Harper, 1990)
Williams, Michael Allen, Rethinking Gnosticism: An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996)Google Scholar
Collins, John J., The Bible after Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2005)Google Scholar
Omanson, Roger L., A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006), 145–6Google Scholar
Collins, Adela Yarbro, Mark: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 2007)Google Scholar
Bultmann, Rudolf, History of the Synoptic Tradition (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), 113–14Google Scholar
Dibelius, Martin, From Tradition to Gospel (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1935), 236–37Google Scholar
Fitzmyer, Joseph A., The Gospel According to Luke (2 vols; AB 28–28A; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1981–5), 2:1316–17Google Scholar
Anderson, R. Dean., Glossary of Greek Rhetorical Terms (Leuven: Peeters, 2000), 21–2Google Scholar
Wright, A. G., “The Widow's Mites: Praise or Lament? A Matter of Context,” CBQ 44 (1982): 262Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×