Discussion of the historical-critical method and its various methodologies and their application to Bible study and formation of doctrine.
I’ve just run through another commentary on Daniel, in this case the Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 7, section on Daniel, by Gleason Archer. (See my notes on this commentary.) You can review my more detailed view in those notes, but I would simply state that this is one of two carefully conservative, scholarly commentaries on…
In an earlier post, Dating the Book of Daniel, I mentioned that I had ordered Ernest Lucas’s volume on Daniel in the Apollos Old Testament Commentary series. I now have received, read, and returned that volume, and I thought I would post a few notes. I have to admit that I continue to be puzzled…
To conclude the content part of my series on Biblical criticism, I want to discuss literary criticism. Much of the practice of literary criticism is similar to genre and to a lesser extent canonical criticism. Essentially, literary criticism involves forgetting about the historical and theological aspects and simply reading the Bible as literature. One can…
In my previous post on this passage I stated that I was ignoring one textual issue that was really quite minor, but on thinking about it, it seems to me that it will illustrate one of the points that makes textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible different. We have relatively few Hebrew manuscripts, and most…
Previously I listed a couple of doubtful translation choices in the Hebrew Bible and gave my preferences on them. Here are a couple more that I regard as much more certain. I also gave an extremely brief introduction to textual criticism in Textual Criticism – Briefly. Praise, oh heavens, his people*, Worship him, all you…
Continuing my discussion of Biblical criticism and the tools that make up that method, let’s look at genre and canonical criticism together. I do that, because they look generally at the same point in the production of the text as we have it, but look in different ways at that point in time. We have…
Tradition criticism is an overview method that encompasses all four of the critical tools I have discussed previously, textual, form, source, and redaction criticism. Tradition criticism differs in that it is an overview process of studying the entire history of the text, looking for ways in which the expressed tradition has changed, and the circumstances…
After discussing Form Criticism and Source Criticism, Redaction Criticism is really quite easy to deal with. Redaction is simply another term for editing. It is the study of how an editor works the sources he has into a final document, the document that we would commonly refer to as the autograph. Again, it is important…
I was doing my morning reading a couple of days ago from the book of Hebrews. One of the verses that caught my eye this time was Hebrews 2:6-9, and particularly verse 7, quoted from Psalm 8:5 (all verse numbers from the English Bible, Psalm 8:5 is 8:6 in Hebrew). Now this quotation is an…
[Note, 3/25/06 — the original post was truncated due to a syntax error I made in the HTML. This is the corrected version.] (Continuing my series on Biblical criticism, from my last post From Criticism.) If Form Criticism can properly be called a “tree method” rather than a forest view, Source Criticism might be said…
