Q&A Home > B > Biblical Criticisms

What are views of Higher Biblical criticism such as Redaction criticism, Historical criticism, Source criticism and such. Higher criticism basically questions the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and instead claims that they were composed by communities bearing the name under those names. An example is how they view the Gospel of St. John, for which they say that John invented the sayings of the 'I Am' statements of Christ which are not present in the other Gospels for a Theological agenda to battle a gnostic heresy at his time. They also claim that revelation and the gospel of John are written by separate Johns; John the elder wrote revelation, the 2nd and the 3rd epistles and John son of Zebedee wrote the gospel and the 1st epistle. They doubt the authorship of the epistle of 2 Peter and state it's pseudonymous or bearing the name of Peter falsely because the lack of linguistic similarity between the 1st epistle. their conclusions are based off comparing the linguistic similarities between one book under one author with another book of the supposed same author, and see if they are of the same origin. Since these hypothesis are based off evidenced research, how would the Church respond to such claims and how does the Church respond to the evidence laid out.

he Church believes that God is the author of the Holy Bible and had endowed specific individuals with the preservation of the Scripture. There is no reason for scrutiny regarding the authenticity of the Holy Scripture that is canonized by the Church. St. Peter the Apostle confirms that, "no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20-21). Redaction criticism and higher criticism are investigative procedures intended to critique and judge the authorship, background, and dates of the Holy Scripture. While higher criticism deals with the genuineness of the text, lower criticism searches for the original wording. These critics do not believe in the inspiration of Scripture. This is contradictory to the doctrine of the Church. The inquiries of these critics are used to dispel the work and inspiration of the Holy Spirit to produce a reliable and accurate testament of God's Word, and the Church's stance is steadfast regarding this matter: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you" (John 14:26). Redaction criticism claims that writers of the accounts of the Holy Gospel were compilers of oral traditions but did not actually write them. They seek to discover the theological motivation behind the author's choice and the anthology of rituals or other written Christian documents. These biblical criticisms attempt to invalidate the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The writers of the Holy Scripture testify: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17). God is the one who gave these appointed authors the words He wanted to be recorded. Thus, the Holy Spirit directed and guided all the writers of the canonized Scripture exactly what He wanted them to write.

Historical criticism refers to a method of biblical studies or to a specific perspective of Scripture used to select interpretations. Historical criticism can provide a deeper meaning to particular events and highlight evidence beyond the biblical passages. It is important to avoid becoming ensnared by historical criticism. This trap can set the stage for putting limits on God's message or overgeneralizing it. Historical criticism sometimes concludes that the Holy Scripture is a mere collection of ancient writings to an uninformed society. The methodology of historical criticism assumes that the Scripture is a collection of man-made writings. This approach dismisses miraculous, spiritual, and divine intervention. It is dangerous to first presume the meaning of the text, then read the content based on that assumption. The Lord Jesus Christ commissioned His disciples to deliver His doctrine by teaching, explaining, and discipleship: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:19-20). The Book of Acts (Acts 8:26-39) illustrates the importance of interpretation in the dialogue between Phillip the deacon and the Ethiopian eunuch, as Phillip questioned the eunuch if he understood what he was reading, which were prophecies by the prophet Isaiah regarding Christ, but the eunuch responded: "'How can I, unless someone guides me?' And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him" (Acts 8:31).

Source criticism is a concentrated field of biblical studies that seeks to determine the sources used to develop the biblical text. The source critic assesses from where biblical content was retrieved and evaluates written documents and oral traditions that contributed to the mentioned accounts. This method was popular for critiquing secular literature, but began being used with particular books of Scripture in the eighteenth century. The Holy Scripture is not merely a history book or novel. Inerrancy of Scripture and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit are of theological concerns to the Church. Some researchers have distorted fundamental theories regarding portions of Scripture. A major focal point of these critics has been the Synoptic Gospels. They perpetuate skepticism because of the various events mentioned or unmentioned as they compared them to each other in attempt postulate explanations for their differences and appraise the sources used. However, the positives of using this method is that it can provide some valuable information. An example is according to St. Luke, in Chapter 1, as he clearly states that he used different sources in his narrative of the Holy Gospel and provided intricate details that he must have retrieved directly from interviews with St. Mary, the Mother of Christ. She was the most knowledgeable regarding the annunciations, her discourse with St. Elizabeth during the visitation, the birth of St. John the Baptist, the birth of Christ, His circumcision and presentation to the temple, the witness of Anna the prophetess, and when the Lord Jesus Christ was twelve years old and was briefly lost from her and St. Joseph when they went to Jerusalem. Thus, St. Luke acknowledges: "Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart" (Luke 2:19;51). The Church believes that the Holy Spirit is the source of all canonized biblical text and led the appointed authors to include true accounts and reject any untruths as the Lord Jesus Christ plainly revealed to His disciples: "when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth" (John 16:13).