Considering the location of meaning from an exegetical point
of view, scholars divide the study of biblical texts along the same lines as
the diagram in our previous discussion. Biblical interpretation is thus generally divided into three
major fields of study; Historical Criticism (what the author intended), Literary
Criticism (what the text itself says), and Ideological Criticism (the text’s
effect on society) (Walsh,
2009, p. 5).
One of the major obstacles for many Christians is the use of
the term “criticism” for the respective fields of study. This is due to two
reasons. Firstly, in English this term have a very negative connotation –
especially when applied to the Bible. Secondly, for many Christians the idea of
studying the Bible ‘critically’ is not only strange but also ludicrous. How can
we study God’s Word critically?
In terms of the first issue, it is important to ask for the
meaning of a term within the context it is used. In theological and biblical
studies it refers to the “Analysis and evaluation (of something)” (Deist,
1984, p. 61).
Historical Criticism, for example, refers to the “analytical inquiry into the
history of biblical literature with a view to reconstructing the growth of each
book prior to its canonization” (Deist,
1984, p. 115).
Thus, within the context we use the term, ‘criticism’, we refer to the
scientific research of the biblical text.
That brings us to the other issue, “Should we study the Bible
in this way?” Who are we to analyse and evaluate God’s Word critically? We do not have
much of a choice. We need to use the best tools to our avail to understand the
text, exactly because we want to understand God and his Word better (see The Bible, stories and method).
Furthermore, we are dealing with a complicated communication process with a
multitude of distortion between the original author and us. The reality is that
we are not only dealing with the text in our analysis but we are also busy with
critical self-analyses. Interpreting the Bible involves both the text and the
interpreter (VanGemeren,
1997, p. 7).
Because the danger always exist that we read into the text what the text do not
communicate but what we want to hear (or brought up to hear), means that we
need to ask critical questions to the text (Human,
2003, p. 270).
The purpose of a critical analysis of the text is thus more to critically question
and evaluate what I ‘belief’ or ‘think’ the Bible says, than ‘criticising’
the text itself. It is only when we critically engage with Scripture that we
can put our own presuppositions under the spotlight. That provides the opportunity, in the light of God’s Word, to make ‘corrections’ to what we belief the Bible
is communication.
This process sometimes unleash a deep conflict within ourselves as we weigh
up what we always thought the Bible communicates and what our interpretation of
the text brings to light. This conflict takes us out of our comfort zone into
one of uncertainty. It certainly makes us humble before God and his Word. This struggle
need not be a negative experience because in this process, we come to know God and
ourselves better. It is when we pose these critical questions about God and the
Bible that spiritual growth takes place (Human,
2011, p. 57).
Do we value all three approaches we started of with equally? Probably
not. As I already indicated, my preference lies with the text itself. That does
not mean, however, that I could not and should not consider the results of the
other disciplines. To the contrary, without Text Criticism I would not have a proper text
to work with. Without Feminist Criticism, that I do not agree with, I would probably
not have re-considered what (I thought) the Bible says about the place and role
of women in the church. Thus, although my personal emphasis lies with the study
of the text itself, I need to consider and use the results of the other
disciplines in order to understand God’s Word better.
Taken and adapted from Walsh (2009)
Human, D. J. (2003). Teologie Kroniek: Skrifverstaan En Die Nuwe
Hervorming. Verbum et Ecclesia, 24(1), 260–275.
Human, D. J. (2011). Die Uitdagings Van Bybellees, in: Vos, C. and
Human, D. J. (Eds.), Vaste rots op wie ek bou, (pp. 53–78). Kaapstad:
Lux Verbi.BM.
VanGemeren, W. (Ed.). (1997). New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology & Exegesis. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub.
House. Retrieved from
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0633/96015006-d.html
Walsh, J. T. (2009). Old Testament Narrative: a Guide to
Interpretation. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press.
