• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Modern Biblical Criticism

pearl

Well-Known Member
Just curious as to how many, if any, have an opinion as to its credibility. Is it considered a threat to, or offering insight into our most basic held beliefs?
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Just curious as to how many, if any, have an opinion as to its credibility. Is it considered a threat to, or offering insight into our most basic held beliefs?
Can you be more specific? Can you cite an example of modern biblical criticism so we might be able to discuss it?
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Basically it the use of the 'historical critical method' in presenting probable findings of what can and can not be considered historical as it relates the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
It depends - do you want the bible to be an ancient collection of semi-historical folk tales and prose, or do you want it to be the perfect and literal truth dictated directly from god's mouth?
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Basically it the use of the 'historical critical method' in presenting probable findings of what can and can not be considered historical as it relates the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.
It's good at that.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
It depends - do you want the bible to be an ancient collection of semi-historical folk tales and prose, or do you want it to be the perfect and literal truth dictated directly from god's mouth?

I think the point is that that literal truth can be identified within the poetry etc. There is so much vehemence directed toward this, especially among conservative Catholics and fundamentalists, to the point where these scholars are labeled as heretics.
One probable hypothesis is that Moses did not write the entire Law as found in the Pentateuch and identifies at least four different traditions. Distinguishing what is folklore, legend, myth from what may be considered history.

Another is the stages through which the Gospels were formed, etc.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Basically it the use of the 'historical critical method' in presenting probable findings of what can and can not be considered historical as it relates the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.
I think that there is nothing at all wrong with the historical critical method when placing the Bible under scrutiny. It should be encouraged when used in good faith. And, confirmation bias should be avoided at all cost. Every claim in the Bible should be scrutinized and tested, as the Bible is really just a book of claims written 3rd hand by people who didn't actually witness the events written about.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Just curious as to how many, if any, have an opinion as to its credibility. Is it considered a threat to, or offering insight into our most basic held beliefs?
Credulity, pretty low. Insights, could be, if you want to really research that content. Read away, but your skepticism radar on high.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
I very much am in agreement with textual criticism even though I also respect the fact that religions and their denominations/branches really can't operate that way.

The reality is that religious beliefs are pretty much unfalsifiable, thus it is typically impossible to narrow down the alternatives to only one "truth". Therefore, the ultimate conclusion of textual criticism is that we really can't be much sure of anything in this area.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
"It's" credibility? (singular?)

The historical critical method is one discipline, together these disciplines are interdependent.

It is a 'good read', informative and accurate. As I scanned it I recognized one of my favorite authors, including official Church documents.

The textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible could very well be a help for Christians to understanding Hebrew Scripture before reading it with Christian interpretation.
 
Last edited:

pearl

Well-Known Member
Would you consider say the Jesus Seminar

From what I remember it was considered liberal and the method seemed 'loose'? The only name I was familiar with is John Dominic Crossman. I thought the method was wanting. They examined each pericope and voted on the authenticity by using colored stones. Today there is a better method, developed by American scholars, 'canonical exegesis', to read each individual text within the unity of Scripture as a whole.
 
Top