Historical Criticism
(If you haven't read the introduction, please scroll down and do so).
Historical Criticism has been the big thing when studying the bible for the past hundred and fifty years, particularly among secular scholars. I am going to touch on it at least a couple more times, but I would first like to define it and go over a little about its origins.
Historical Criticism is "is the art of distinguishing the true from the false concerning facts of the past" (The Catholic Encyclopedia). Thus it is used to decide what part of a writing is true, and what part is false. When it was applied to the Bible (its only major study) it starts with the assumption that all things miraculous and divine are false, and then attempts to work its way from there. The Book of J is an example of Historical Criticsm, as is the Markian Priority hypothosis (I'll explain it later).
I will discuss many of the flaws and misconceptions associated with Historical Criticism in later posts, but first I will explain why it is such a big thing when studying the Bible. For the last hundred and fifty years or so much of the intellectual world has taken on the goal of dismantleing the current authority. It is their view (which is somewhat accurate) that the Authority has always oppressed the weak. Therefore, white's have oppressed minorities, men have oppressed woman, the Church has oppressed 'free thinkers', heterosexuals have oppressed homosexuals, the rich have oppressed the poor, etc. Intellectuals (critics, etc.) take it upon themsevles to free the oppressed from their oppressers through whatever means (Marxism, Civil Rights Movement, Historical Criticism, etc.).
The problem, however, is that there is no particular reason to believe that the current 'oppressers' are the worst. The only reason those in charge seem so bad (or are so bad) is because they have the power to do it. If Hitler had never gained the power to murder millions of Jews, Anti-Semitism would likely not be considered the great evil that it is. Likewise, if African-American's actually held the power in this country they would probably, in some way, oppress the whites. Human nature desires its own elevation, and will, in many cases, attempt this at the expense of others.
As Harold Bloom said on one of the first pages, we cannot say if any Historical Criticism is true. It is, however, very popular because it attempts to descredity and/or destroy one of the reigning institutions of the world, the Christian Church, seen as one of the oppressers that must be stopped.
Historical Criticism has been the big thing when studying the bible for the past hundred and fifty years, particularly among secular scholars. I am going to touch on it at least a couple more times, but I would first like to define it and go over a little about its origins.
Historical Criticism is "is the art of distinguishing the true from the false concerning facts of the past" (The Catholic Encyclopedia). Thus it is used to decide what part of a writing is true, and what part is false. When it was applied to the Bible (its only major study) it starts with the assumption that all things miraculous and divine are false, and then attempts to work its way from there. The Book of J is an example of Historical Criticsm, as is the Markian Priority hypothosis (I'll explain it later).
I will discuss many of the flaws and misconceptions associated with Historical Criticism in later posts, but first I will explain why it is such a big thing when studying the Bible. For the last hundred and fifty years or so much of the intellectual world has taken on the goal of dismantleing the current authority. It is their view (which is somewhat accurate) that the Authority has always oppressed the weak. Therefore, white's have oppressed minorities, men have oppressed woman, the Church has oppressed 'free thinkers', heterosexuals have oppressed homosexuals, the rich have oppressed the poor, etc. Intellectuals (critics, etc.) take it upon themsevles to free the oppressed from their oppressers through whatever means (Marxism, Civil Rights Movement, Historical Criticism, etc.).
The problem, however, is that there is no particular reason to believe that the current 'oppressers' are the worst. The only reason those in charge seem so bad (or are so bad) is because they have the power to do it. If Hitler had never gained the power to murder millions of Jews, Anti-Semitism would likely not be considered the great evil that it is. Likewise, if African-American's actually held the power in this country they would probably, in some way, oppress the whites. Human nature desires its own elevation, and will, in many cases, attempt this at the expense of others.
As Harold Bloom said on one of the first pages, we cannot say if any Historical Criticism is true. It is, however, very popular because it attempts to descredity and/or destroy one of the reigning institutions of the world, the Christian Church, seen as one of the oppressers that must be stopped.
posted by J.M.R. Burgard @ 8:58 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home