Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Biblical criticism written essay
The history of the bible essay
Biblical perspective of history essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Biblical criticism written essay
INTRODUCTION
“Biblical criticism” refers to various methods of studying and investigating the textual content of the Bible. In general, it just describes examining the Bible in a scholarly and critical manner. Therefore when the term “critic” or “criticism” is used in this way it does not essentially denote something negative, but rather a close consideration of the authenticity and historicity of the Biblical text. These literary critics also look into the origins and purposes of the books of the Bible. It is highly important for one to realize that not all literary criticism of the Bible is wrong or harmful.#
“Higher Criticism” and “Lower Criticism” are two main branches of Biblical criticism. “Lower Criticism” is the branch that studies the various textual troubles and weighs out the evidence to determine the most accurate textual reading. On the other hand, “Higher Criticism” is the specific study of dates, authorship, origins and overall genuineness of the books. A great amount of Higher criticism concerns the Old Testament, especially the first five books. Let us consider the nature Higher criticism and the fallacy of liberal Higher criticism.
BIBLICAL LITERARY CRITICISM: HIGHER CRITICISM
Sadly, most Biblical critics approach the Bible with assumptions. First, many assume that there is no such thing as predictive prophecy. Second, a majority assumes the falsehood of miraculous activity of any kind or time period. In the third place, many of them come to the study denying the concept of inspiration or direct revelation from God.# Due to critics of this sort with their presumptions and rationalist mindset, i...
... middle of paper ...
...
McDowell, Josh The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1999.
Mosher, Keith A. The Book God “Breathed” Pulaski: Sain Publications, 2008.
Jensen, Irving L. Jensen’s Survey of the Old Testament. Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1978.
Perrin, Norman. What is Redaction Criticism? Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969.
Pfeiffer, R. H. Introduction to the Old Testament. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1948.
The Holy Bible, New King James Version. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2004.
Notes and Articles:
Hague, Canon E. (2002) The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth, “The History of Higher Criticism.” Vol. 1, Article 1. Chicago Baker Book House.
Templeton/Williams Session 1 Lecture Notes
Websites:
http://heartoftn.net/users/gary27/wilson.htm
http://www.theopedia.com/Biblical_criticism#ref-0
LaHaye, Tim, and Ed Hindson. The Popular Encyclopedia of Bible Prophecy. Eugene, OR.: Harvest House Publishers, 2004.
It is the reader and his or her interpretive community who attempts to impose a unified reading on a given text. Such readers may, and probably will, claim that the unity they find is in the text, but this claim is only a mask for the creative process actually going on. Even the most carefully designed text can not be unified; only the reader's attempted taming of it. Therefore, an attempt to use seams and shifts in the biblical text to discover its textual precursors is based on a fundamentally faulty assumption that one might recover a stage of the text that lacked such fractures (Carr 23-4).
René de Chateaubriand, François. The Beauties of Christianity. The Hebrew Bible In Literary Criticism. Ed. and Comp. Alex Preminger and Edward L. Greenstein. New York: Ungar, 1986. 445.
Hindson, E. E., & Yates, G. E. (2012). The Essence of the Old Testament: A survey. Nashville, Tenn: B & H Academic.
King James I was crowned and went on a journey to create a new English translation” (“Roots Of The King James Bible”). “The ground rules for the Bible were set by 1604: such as no contentious notes in the margins; no language inaccessible to common people; a true and accurate text, driven by an unforgivingly exacting level of scholarship” (“The Bible of King James.(cover story)”). “When creating the King James Bible, the translators had fifteen rules which they had to follow” (“The Making of the King James Bible--New Testament”). “The first rule the scholars’ were to follow was that they had to follow along with the Bishops’ Bible” (“The Making of the King James Bible--New Testament”). The only thing about the scholars’ following along with the Bishops’ Bible was that there were so many different versions that no one knows which was used. “The first publication of the King James Bible was riddled with mistakes and received some negative criticism” (“The King James Bible: A Short History From Tyndale/ Shaping The Bible In The Reformation”). “The phrases were not always called majestic, but they were indeed frowned upon by many of an 18th century writer” (“The King James Bible At 401”). Even though the bible received many negative comments from people after the Bible was first made it has turned out to have a great impact on many writers and
The most striking of these is the notion that the Bible needs correction. This is huge in that it suggests that God failed somehow in inspiring the original scribes to write what He wanted in the manner the He wanted it written. Contemporizing the language is therefore seen as justified, and in the process interpretation and exposition are included. Some modern translations remove the reader as far from the original as the old Latin did. The Bible does not need to be changed to make it relevant; because it is the ETERNAL Word of God it will always be relevant. Metaphors, gender, patriarchalism, short sentences, repetition – God designed it all that way.
Metzger, B. (1997). The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. New York.
...e to the study of the bible instead of all the doubts that was created by the other criticism. To them all the odd parts and repeated phrases or parts all add to a strikingly beautiful tale. They see the bible as a literary masterpiece in which the authors used gorgeous imagery to strike at the heart of the reader to show them God’s greatness. In essence rhetorical critics want you to see the big picture instead of all the little side pictures. The J story of Genesis as well at times the P story is filled with imagery that is meant to show God’s power.
Metzger, B.M. & Coogan, M.D. “The Oxford Companion to the Bible”. Oxford University Press. New York, NY. (1993). P. 806-818.
Scholars have shifted from the notion that the Bible differs from other ancient Near Eastern literature, cultures, and religions. If this were so, the Bible would be considered a myth. In this chapter Oswalt gives descriptions to what a myth is and gives insight into whether it is acceptable to label the Bible as a myth. Since the 1960s, scholars have been stating that the attributes of the Bible and its contemporary belief system have more in common to a myth even though the data used to make these claims have remained the same.
People for years have been debating against each other to prove the Bible to be inherent or to be errant. Errancy is a deviation from the truth or what is right. There are many different types of errors expressed throughout the Bible such as transational errors, doctrinal errors and contradictions. How could any book be without error? That would be practically impossible, so in this paper I will prove the Bible to be very errant because of many facts shown.
For centuries now Christians have claimed to possess the special revelation of an omnipotent, loving Deity who is sovereign over all of His creation. This special revelation is in written form and is what has come to be known as The Bible which consists of two books. The first book is the Hebrew Scriptures, written by prophets in a time that was before Christ, and the second book is the New Testament, which was written by Apostles and disciples of the risen Lord after His ascension. It is well documented that Christians in the context of the early first century were used to viewing a set of writings as being not only authoritative, but divinely inspired. The fact that there were certain books out in the public that were written by followers of Jesus and recognized as being just as authoritative as the Hebrew Scriptures was never under debate. The disagreement between some groups of Christians and Gnostics centered on which exact group of books were divinely inspired and which were not. The debate also took place over the way we can know for sure what God would have us include in a book of divinely inspired writings. This ultimately led to the formation of the Biblical canon in the next centuries. Some may ask, “Isn’t Jesus really the only thing that we can and should call God’s Word?” and “Isn’t the Bible just a man made collection of writings all centered on the same thing, Jesus Christ?” This paper summarizes some of the evidences for the Old and New Testament canon’s accuracy in choosing God breathed, authoritative writings and then reflects on the wide ranging
Carson, D, & Moo, D. (2005) An introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Hirshman, M. G. (2006). A rivalry of genius: Jewish and Christian biblical interpretation in late antiquity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
New Testament. Vol. 2. Edited by Gerhard Kittel. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.