Various Types of "Criticism"

• Form Criticism – "study of biblical tradition which may be presumed to have existed originally in oral form." (in Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 1, pp. 812-815).

Form Criticism focuses on the literary form or genre of the literature. This can be applied both to books of the Bible as a whole or to individual sections of a book. Form Criticism can be valuable to us as evangelical theologians. When we do hermeneutics, we consider the literary genre of the book we are studying. On the negative side, the Bible can become just another piece of literature that gets studied. As we have already talked about earlier in the course, the Bible is more than a piece of literature to be reviewed for various literary styles. It was written to convey important theological concepts. It was written in an appropriate style for the day it was written, but it was not simply another piece of literature. When we come to the point of seeing the Bible merely for the forms of literature it presents, we have taken form criticism too far.

• Source Criticism – "attempt to explain the extensive duplications and disagreements among the Gospels through an examination of their literary and historical sources." (Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 2, pp. 1988-1990). 

Source Criticism looks at what sources did the writers use to produce their book. Most commonly, this is used in discussion to recognize that Mark was the first gospel written, and that Matthew and Luke, may have used Mark in writing their gospel. On the negative side, source criticism has lead some scholars (R. Bultmann, M. Dibelius) to see the Bible as essentially a compiled work; a collection of otherwise unrelated accounts.

• Redaction Criticism – "an attempt to discover the distinctive contribution of a biblical writer to the final form of the information he records." (Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 2, pp. 1825-1827). 

Redaction criticism seeks to look at not just the words of the writer, but the overall message or theme; the theology of the book. On the positive side, this helps us to realize that each author wrote for different purposes and for different audiences. On the negative side, however, redaction criticism has been taken to the point where the author's are essentially accused of telling half-truths or "stretched" the story in order to fit their theological purpose.

• Textual Criticism – "the task of reconstructing the original text of the Bible with as great a degree of accuracy as the available materials permit." (Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 1, pp. 314-322)

The science of textual criticism is similar to the exercise a few classes ago where I gave you six copies an article and then you compared the other copies with the one you had and arrived at an understanding of what the original text said. Before we look in depth at textual criticism, it is helpful to know how the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments were recorded.

The first topic we need to consider when discussing how the Bible came to be is the place of oral tradition in the Scriptures. In our 21st century mindset, we think that something isn't official until its on paper. However, in ancient times, oral communication was not just part of communication; it was, in fact, the main means of communication, especially in the time before 2000 BC when writing was not prominent.

The oral tradition of many parts of the Old Testament and the Gospels of the New Testament is important. "Oral tradition...is the deposit of 'memories' of a community, tribe, or clan which carries the storyteller's tale." (Beebe 33). Oral tradition is important for us to consider first because it was part of the Old and New Testament's transmission, and secondly because contrary to what we may think, oral tradition was very accurate in ancient times. In keeping with the biblical injunction for parents to teach their children about the commandments of God (Deuteronomy 6:1-3), young boys were expected to memorize the whole of the Torah (Pentateuch). Indeed, this is quite a feat!

IN-CLASS EXERCISE - ORAL TRADITION

Jewish culture was passed on from generation to generation to the telling of stories, as were the cultures of their neighbors (Canaanites, etc.). Just because they were given verbally does not mean they were inaccurate or poorly recalled, but rather they were very well memorized. So, as we come to the beginning of the writing of Scripture, we must first recognize that much of the Old Testament was well known before it was ever written down. The oral tradition was largely composed of stories, but also included poetry and songs. As we know, it is sometimes easier to remember words set to music! An example of this is in Deuteronomy 31:30-32:47.

(See Craig L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1997): 84-86 for seven evidences that the words of Jesus were accurately passed on through oral tradition.)

As you are probably aware, the Scriptures were written in two primary languages: Hebrew and Greek. Hebrew was the language of the nation of Israel, and thus the natural choice as the language for their historical records and stories as recorded in the Old Testament. In the NIV, "Hebrew" is identified as the language in 2 Kings 18:26 & 28 and Isaiah 36:11 and "the language of Canaan" (Isaiah 19:18). The early Hebrew Alphabet began to develop on its own in approximately 1000 BC.

The New Testament was written in Greek, specifically Koine (common) Greek. In the 3^rd century BC Alexander the Great conquered Asia and made Greek the one language for business. Thus, when Christ came on the scene, this was the language used throughout the empire for written communication.

A third language, Aramaic is used a tiny bit in the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, the following passages were written in Aramaic:

• Ezra 4:7-6:18; 7:12-26
• Daniel 2:4-7:28
• Genesis 10:22; 31:47
• 2 Kings 18:26
• Isaiah 36:11
• Jeremiah 10:11

Jesus and the disciples would have spoken Aramaic throughout Palestine. Words like "Abba" (Mark 14:36) and "maranatha" (1 Corinthians 16:22) are Aramaic, as is Christ's cry on the cross (Matthew 27:46).

The Bible gives significant internal evidence of their "writing" or "accounts." For example, throughout Genesis, we have the words "This is the account of ..." (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1, 31; 11:10, 27; 25:12-13, 19; 36:1, 9; 37:2). In the rest of the Pentateuch, there are many occasions in which God simply tells Moses "Write this out..." and he does so (Exodus 17:14; 24:4; 34:27-28; Deuteronomy 31:9, 19, 22, 24). Other places in the Old Testament where God's servants are to write down things are:

• Joshua 8:30-34; 18:4-9; 24:26
• Judges 8:14
• 1 Samuel 10:25
• 2 Chronicles 35:4
• Proverbs 22:20

Okay, so the people of Israel not only had the oral tradition, they also had some written records. But how did these written records come to be? What were they written on? What were they written with? I'm glad you asked...

In the times of the Old and New Testaments, writing could take place on various types of material:

• Clay - Jeremiah 17:3; Ezekiel 4:1
  The words would be written while the clay was still damp, and then it would be baked in a kiln or sun dried.
• Stone - Exodus 24:12; 31:18; 32:15-16; 34:1, 28; Deuteronomy 5:22; 27:2-3; Joshua 8:31-32
  This would be done with a chisel on the stone - like the Flintstones! Eg. The Ten Commandments!
• Metal - Exodus 28:36; Job 19:24; Matthew 22:19-20
• Wooden board to hold wax - Isaiah 8:1; 30:8; Habakkuk 2:2; Luke 1:63
• Precious stones - Exodus 28:9, 11, 21; 39:6-14
• Potsherds (ostraca) - Job 2:8

The first words of Scripture were written on papyrus, a reeded plant (see Exodus 2:3; Job 8:11; Isaiah 18:2; 35:7). A sheet of papyrus was made by pressing and glueing two layers or strips of papyrus together to form a sheet. When the papyrus sheets were all rolled together it would be approximately 30 feet long and form a scroll or biblion, thus giving us the word "book."

Scriptures: Isaiah 34:16; 2 John 12; Revelation 5:1

"Until the third century A.D., writing was commonly on papyrus. This was made from the pith of the papyrus plant which could be as thick as a man's arm. It was cut in strips about a foot long, placed on a flat surface and glued together crosswise like plyboard. When dried the whitish surface was polished smooth with a stone or other implement." (Ewert 20)

Scripture was also written on parchment. Often made of goat or sheep skins which would then be rubbed down with a stone until the wax-like surface was able to be written on; equivalent to a soft leather. These too could be rolled into scrolls.

Scriptures: 2 Timothy 4:13; Psalm 40:7; Ezekiel 2:9-10ff; Jeremiah 36:2

However, as you can imagine, the scrolls/rolls had some inconveniences. Think of trying to find a passage about halfway through a 30 foot scroll. To try to solve this problem, work was written on a codex. The codex, like a wooden tablet, could easily be made into something similar to our modern day books. Four double-size sheets placed on top of each other and then folded over forming a book. By the time of the New Testament writing, the codex was much more prevalently used than the papyrus scrolls (Ewert 21).

From the New Testament, it appears that the Scriptures from a scroll were always to be read out loud (Luke 2:46ff; Luke 4:17-20; Acts 8:28-30). But, in order for a scroll to be copied, it had to be from the original scroll. You couldn't use a dictophone or just record what you heard.

Throughout the Old Testament and continuing into the New Testament, there is considerable evidence that parents taught their children the trade of a scribe so that business could be conducted and records kept of their dealings. In fact, there were "clans of scribes" (1 Chronicles 2:55; 2 Samuel 8:16/1 Kings 4:3; Jeremiah 36:10).

The various writing instruments used included:

• Chisel - Joshua 8:31-32; Job 19:24; Jeremiah 17:1 (a 3-sided instrument with beveled head)
  An "iron tool" for use on stone, clay or wax.
• Pen - 2 John 2:12; 3 John 13
  Much like a calligraphy pen; would include ink and inkhorn, and a pen knife (Ezekiel 9:2-3; Jeremiah 36:23).

Old Testament Textual Criticism

The best manuscript of the whole of the Old Testament is the Leningrad Codex, also known as B19^A. This codex is dated around 1005-10 AD. The Hebrew Scriptures (as was mentioned earlier in the course) were only the consonants of the Hebrew letters in their original writings. In the 6^th century, the Masoretes added the vowel pointing so that it was possible for it to be adequately read. Thus, there are a few places where your English version may indicate some textual note that appears to be referring to two quite different ideas. This is because a different vowel pointing could make a word meaning quite different.

"Dead Sea Scrolls" Video #2, first 40-45 minutes.
[Available in the T. S. Rendall Library VC 296.155 DEAD V.2]

We discussed a few weeks ago that most of the original NT manuscripts were written on papyrus. Currently there are 97 papyri of portions (none of them are the entire NT) of the NT available for study. As these are the oldest Greek manuscripts available, they are obviously some of the most important. They range in date from about the early 2^nd to 8^th century.

The majority of the copies of the NT that we have are written on parchment, a type of animal skin superior to leather.

If you begin to get into the study of textual criticism, you will find four types of documents referred to.

The first of these two types of documents are named because of the type of handwriting used. There are two main types of handwriting in which the NT manuscripts were done: 

• Uncial (majiscule) – this is equivalent to our modern CAPITAL LETTERS. The Greek manuscripts from the 3^rd century BC to 10^th century AD were written in uncials. Uncial letters were written in a continuous script; no spaces between the words. Some of Paul’s epistles would have been written in a cursive uncial as this was commonly used for shorter, more personal letters (ie. Philemon, Titus, Timothy).
  Since uncials are what the original autographs and the earliest copies of the Scriptures most certainly would have been written, these are certainly are most valuable form of NT evidence for textual criticism. 299 uncials are available. Some of the most important are:
  • Codex Sinaiticus - is the earliest surviving copy of the complete NT (4^th century)
  • A – Codex Alexandrinus (4^th century)
  • B – Codex Vaticanus (4^th century)
  • C – Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (4^th century)

These papyri contain all or portions of the OT and some of the Apocrypha books.

• Miniscule - There are about 10 times as many miniscules as uncials. Miniscules are similar to our small English letters written in a cursive style. As you know, writing is quite a bit faster than printing in all capital letters, so it saved time and space. Miniscules began to be used sometime between the 8^th and 9^th centuries.
  Again, in case you didn’t know, the headings, accents, punctuation marks and even some of the book titles that you find in your English or Greek Bible, were not added into the text until about the 8^th century.

• The third type of document that will be referred to in the textual apparatus of your NT is called a lectionary. Lectionaries come from the 10th to 12th centuries, though are few are dated earlier.
  Lectionaries were manuscripts containing selections of Bible lessons or programs for worship services. 2,280 lectionaries are available for study today around the world.

• The fourth type of document useful for NT criticism are the versions. In approximately AD 200 Latin began to began to replace Greek as language of the Roman Empire. As the Christian church expanded, other languages such as Syriac, Coptic, Gothic and Armenian began to copy the NT into their language.

The limitations of language translation make some of these versions not as useful as others, but as they are quite old manuscripts they are closer in time to the original NT manuscripts. For example, the Syriac New Testament version known as the Peshitta is still held in reverence by the Syriac church. Translations were made to Latin by the end of the second century in the area of Carthage. However, in the next two centuries the Latin copies of the NT became weird and wild, and so in 382 AD Pope Damasius commissioned Jerome to correct all the variant readings and come up with the official Latin version. This is known as the Latin Vulgate. There are 8,000-10,000 copies of the Vulgate currently available.

The Roman Empire had a developed system of roads and travel, and thus the NT was transmitted and copied around the empire. There became a system of local texts in different areas of the empire.

There were no official scribes for the NT documents until at least 200 AD. The copies of the Gospels or Paul’s letters made in the first and second century would have been done privately by individuals in a church so that they could keep a record of the manuscript before passing it on to the next church.

See map of Western, Alexandrian, Byzantine, Syriac, & Caeserean text areas.

During the 3^rd century, the church endured great persecution including the burning of churches and their Scriptures. When Constantine enshrined Christianity as the official religion of the empire in the 4th century, he commissioned official copies of the Scriptures to be copied for the churches in Constantinople (the capital).

As this city became the center for religious life, all these copies around the empire began to be compared and thus, by the 8^th century a "standardized" text known as the Byzantine text. This text was one of the major texts, along with others, that Erasmus editing in coming to the the "received text" or the Textus Receptus from which the KJV of 1611 is based.

In all this study of textual criticism, there are two main types of errors that occurred:

• Accidental errors – these resulted from missing a letter in the copying (eg. 1 Thessalonians 2:7), breaking the words in the wrong place (eg. 1 Timothy 3:16), mis-hearing of a word as a scribe wrote it down from verbal reading (eg. Romans 5:1), or misspelling of words (eg. honor/honour, centre/center).
• Intentional – the scribe would presume that a previous writer had forgotten or misplaced some linguistic or theological thought so he would put the "proper" reading in. For example, in the introduction to Paul’s letters, there are some textual variants where it simply reads "in the name of God" and some texts indicated the addition of "our Father and Lord Jesus Christ" which scribes may have added to be consistent with Paul’s other letters (also Matthew 6:13).
  

Return to Revelation and Scripture Lectures
Return to Revelation and Scripture Home
© Copyright 1999-2000 Prairie Bible Institute & Steven C. Ibbotson