Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
Historical criticism
| Part of a series on the |
| Bible |
|---|
 |
Outline of Bible-related topics Bible portal |
Historical criticism (also known as the historical-critical method (HCM) or higher criticism,[1] in contrast to lower criticism or textual criticism[2]) is a branch of criticism that investigates the origins of ancient texts to understand "the world behind the text"[3] and emphasizes a process that "delays any assessment of scripture's truth and relevance until after the act of interpretation has been carried out".[4] While often discussed in terms of ancient Jewish, Christian,[5] and increasingly Islamic writings,[6][7] historical criticism has also been applied to other religious and secular writings from various parts of the world and periods of history.[8]
The historian applying historical criticism has several goals in mind. One is to understand what the text itself is saying in the context of its own time and place, and as it would have been intended to and received by its original audience (sometimes called the sensus literalis sive historicus, i.e. the "historical sense" or the "intended sense" of the meaning of the text). The historian also seeks to understand the credibility and reliability of the sources in question, understanding sources as akin to witnesses to the past as opposed to straightforward narrations of it. In this process, it is important to understand the intentions, motivations, biases, prejudices, internal consistency, and even the truthfulness of the sources being studied. Involuntary witnesses that did not intend to transmit a piece of information or present it to an external audience, but end up doing so nonetheless, are considered greatly valuable. All possible explanations must be considered by the historian, and data and argumentation must be used in order to rule out various options.[9] In the context of biblical studies, an appeal to canonical texts is insufficient to settle what actually happened in biblical history. A critical inspection of the canon, as well as extra-biblical literature, archaeology, and all other available sources, is also needed.[10] Likewise, a "hermeneutical autonomy" of the text must be respected, insofar as the meaning of the text should be found within it as opposed to being imported into it, whether that is from one's conclusions, presuppositions, or something else.[11]
The beginnings of historical criticism are often associated with the Age of Enlightenment, but it is more appropriately related to the Renaissance.[12] Historical criticism began in the 17th century and gained popular recognition in the 19th and 20th centuries. The perspective of the early historical critic was influenced by the rejection of traditional interpretations that came about with the Protestant Reformation. With each passing century, historical criticism became refined into various methodologies used today: philology, textual criticism, literary criticism, source criticism, form criticism, redaction criticism, tradition criticism, canonical criticism, and related methodologies.[13]
- ^ Hahn, Scott, ed. (2009). Catholic Bible dictionary (1st ed.). New York: Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-385-51229-9.
- ^ Soulen, Richard N. (2001). Handbook of Biblical Criticism. John Knox. pp. 108, 190.
- ^ Soulen, Richard N.; Soulen, R. Kendall (2001). Handbook of biblical criticism (3rd ed., rev. and expanded. ed.). Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press. p. 78. ISBN 0-664-22314-1.
- ^ Sinai 2017, p. 2–5.
- ^ Law 2012.
- ^ Sinai 2017.
- ^ Motzki 2022.
- ^ Oliver, Isaac (2023). "The Historical-Critical Study of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Scriptures". In Dye, Guillame (ed.). Early Islam: The Sectarian Milieu of Late Antiquity?. Editions de l'Universite de Bruxelles.
- ^ Krentz 1975, p. 35–47.
- ^ Krentz 1975, p. 48.
- ^ Krentz 1975, p. 53–54.
- ^ Law 2012, p. 25–26.
- ^ Law 2012, p. viii–ix.
Previous Page Next Page
