Form criticism

Last updated

Form criticism as a method of biblical criticism classifies units of scripture by literary pattern and then attempts to trace each type to its period of oral transmission. [1] [ failed verification ] "Form criticism is the endeavor to get behind the written sources of the Bible to the period of oral tradition, and to isolate the oral forms that went into the written sources. Insofar as this attempts to trace the history of the tradition, it is known as tradition criticism." [2] Form criticism seeks to determine a unit's original form and the historical context of the literary tradition. [1]

Contents

Hermann Gunkel (1862-1932), Martin Noth, Gerhard von Rad, and other scholars originally developed form criticism for Old Testament studies; they used it to supplement the documentary hypothesis with reference to its oral foundations. [3] Karl Ludwig Schmidt, Martin Dibelius (1883-1947) and Rudolf Bultmann later applied form criticism to the Gospels.

While enjoying near-dominant support in both Old and New Testament studies during the 20th century, form criticism has been the subject of increasing criticism in the academic community in recent decades and its influence on the field is waning.

Literary forms and sociological contexts

Form criticism begins by identifying a text's genre or conventional literary form, such as parables, proverbs, epistles, or love poems. It goes on to seek the sociological setting for each text's genre, its "situation in life" (German: Sitz im Leben ). For example, the sociological setting of a law is a court, or the sociological setting of a psalm of praise (hymn) is a worship context, or that of a proverb might be a father-to-son admonition. Having identified and analyzed the text's genre-pericopes, form criticism goes on to ask how these smaller genre-pericopes contribute to the purpose of the text as a whole.

The Evangelists

Studies based on form criticism state that the Evangelists drew upon oral traditions when composing the canonical gospels. This oral tradition consisted of several distinct components. Parables and aphorisms are the "bedrock of the tradition." Pronouncement stories, scenes that culminate with a saying of Jesus, are more plausible historically than other kinds of stories about Jesus. Other sorts of stories include controversy stories, in which Jesus is in conflict with religious authorities; miracle stories, including healings, exorcisms, and nature wonders; call and commissioning stories; and legends. [4] [5] [6] The oral model developed by the form critics drew heavily on contemporary theory of Jewish folkloric transmission of oral material, and as a result of this form criticism one can trace the development of the early gospel tradition. [7]

Criticism and decline

In Old Testament Studies

Following the publication of Abraham in History and Tradition by John van Seters, Der sogenannte Jahwist ("The So-Called Yahwist") by Hans Heinrich Schmid, and Das überlieferungsgeschichtliche Problem des Pentateuch ("The Tradition-Historical Problem of the Pentateuch") by Rolf Rendtorff, form criticism's emphasis on oral tradition has waned in Old Testament studies. This is largely because scholars are increasingly skeptical about the ability to distinguish the "original" oral traditions from the literary sources that preserve them. As a result, the method as applied to the Old Testament now focuses on the Bible's literary genres, becoming virtually synonymous with genre criticism.

In New Testament studies

Starting from the final decade of the 20th century, Bultmann's theories about the New Testament have been the subject of increasing criticism in the academic community: scholars such as Martin Hengel, James D. G. Dunn, Richard Bauckham and Brant J. Pitre have directly attacked form criticism as an erroneous theory, and have instead argued that the Gospels were written either by eyewitnesses or by authors who had reliable written and oral sources.. [8] [9] [10] [11] Though aspects of form criticism are still in the scholarly mainstream, many now admit that Bultmann's original positions have become untenable, [12] [13] to the point that, according to Werner H. Kelber, "Today it is no exaggeration to claim that a whole spectrum of main assumptions underlying Bultmann's Synoptic Tradition must be considered suspect." [14]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gospel of Matthew</span> Book of the New Testament

The Gospel of Matthew is the first book of the New Testament of the Bible and one of the three synoptic Gospels. It tells how Israel's Messiah, Jesus, comes to his people but is rejected by them and how, after his resurrection, he sends the disciples to the gentiles instead. Matthew wishes to emphasize that the Jewish tradition should not be lost in a church that was increasingly becoming gentile. The gospel reflects the struggles and conflicts between the evangelist's community and the other Jews, particularly with its sharp criticism of the scribes and Pharisees with the position that through their rejection of Christ, the Kingdom of God has been taken away from them and given instead to the church.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gospel of John</span> Book of the New Testament

The Gospel of John is the fourth of the four canonical gospels in the New Testament. It contains a highly schematic account of the ministry of Jesus, with seven "signs" culminating in the raising of Lazarus and seven "I am" discourses culminating in Thomas' proclamation of the risen Jesus as "my Lord and my God". The gospel's concluding verses set out its purpose, "that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name."

Gospel originally meant the Christian message, but in the 2nd century it came to be used also for the books in which the message was reported. In this sense a gospel can be defined as a loose-knit, episodic narrative of the words and deeds of Jesus, culminating in his trial and death and concluding with various reports of his post-resurrection appearances. Modern biblical scholars are cautious of relying on the gospels uncritically, but nevertheless, they provide a good idea of the public career of Jesus, and critical study can attempt to distinguish the original ideas of Jesus from those of the later Christian authors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Second Epistle of Peter</span> Book of the New Testament

The Second Epistle of Peter is an epistle of the New Testament, and it identifies the author as "Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ". The epistle is traditionally attributed to Peter the Apostle, but most scholars consider the epistle pseudepigraphical Scholars estimate the date of authorship anywhere from 60 to 150 AD. The original text was written in Koine Greek.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marcan priority</span> Hypothesis about Christian Bible Gospel of Mark

Marcan priority is the hypothesis that the Gospel of Mark was the first of the three synoptic gospels to be written, and was used as a source by the other two. It is a central element in discussion of the synoptic problem; the question of the documentary relationship among these three gospels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Two-source hypothesis</span> Hypothesis in biblical criticism

The two-source hypothesis is an explanation for the synoptic problem, the pattern of similarities and differences between the three Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. It posits that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke were based on the Gospel of Mark and a hypothetical sayings collection from the Christian oral tradition called Q.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Synoptic Gospels</span> Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the synoptic Gospels because they include many of the same stories, often in a similar sequence and in similar or sometimes identical wording. They stand in contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct. The term synoptic comes via Latin from the Greek σύνοψις, synopsis, i.e. "(a) seeing all together, synopsis". The modern sense of the word in English is of "giving an account of the events from the same point of view or under the same general aspect". It is in this sense that it is applied to the synoptic gospels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biblical criticism</span> Scholarly study of biblical writings

Biblical criticism is the use of critical analysis to understand and explain the Bible. During the eighteenth century, when it began as historical-biblical criticism, it was based on two distinguishing characteristics: (1) the scientific concern to avoid dogma and bias by applying a neutral, non-sectarian, reason-based judgment to the study of the Bible, and (2) the belief that the reconstruction of the historical events behind the texts, as well as the history of how the texts themselves developed, would lead to a correct understanding of the Bible. This sets it apart from earlier, pre-critical methods; from the anti-critical methods of those who oppose criticism-based study; from the post-critical orientation of later scholarship; and from the multiple distinct schools of criticism into which it evolved in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rudolf Bultmann</span> German theologian (1884–1976)

Rudolf Karl Bultmann was a German Lutheran theologian and professor of the New Testament at the University of Marburg. He was one of the major figures of early 20th-century biblical studies. A prominent critic of liberal theology, Bultmann instead argued for an existentialist interpretation of the New Testament. His hermeneutical approach to the New Testament led him to be a proponent of dialectical theology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">M source</span> Hypothetical source for Matthews Gospel

M source, which is sometimes referred to as M document, or simply M, comes from the M in "Matthean material". It is a hypothetical textual source for the Gospel of Matthew. M Source is defined as that 'special material' of the Gospel of Matthew that is neither Q source nor Mark.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hermann Gunkel</span> German evangelical theologian

Hermann Gunkel, a German Old Testament scholar, founded form criticism. He also became a leading representative of the history of religions school. His major works cover Genesis and the Psalms, and his major interests centered on the oral tradition behind written sources and in folklore.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Bauckham</span> British theologian (born 1946)

Richard John Bauckham is an English Anglican scholar in theology, historical theology and New Testament studies, specialising in New Testament Christology and the Gospel of John. He is a senior scholar at Ridley Hall, Cambridge.

The Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles make up a two-volume work which scholars call Luke–Acts. The author is not named in either volume. According to a Church tradition, first attested by Irenaeus, he was the Luke named as a companion of Paul in three of the Pauline letters, but "a critical consensus emphasizes the countless contradictions between the account in Acts and the authentic Pauline letters." The eclipse of the traditional attribution to Luke the companion of Paul has meant that an early date for the gospel is now rarely put forward. Most scholars date the composition of the combined work to around 80–90 AD, although some others suggest 90–110, and there is textual evidence that Luke–Acts was still being substantially revised well into the 2nd century.

The historical reliability of the Gospels is evaluated by experts who have not found a complete consensus. While all four canonical gospels contain some sayings and events which may meet one or more of the five criteria for historical reliability used in biblical studies, the assessment and evaluation of these elements is a matter of ongoing debate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oral gospel traditions</span> Oral stage in the formation of the gospels

Oral gospel traditions is the hypothetical first stage in the formation of the written gospels as information was passed by word of mouth. These oral traditions included different types of stories about Jesus. For example, people told anecdotes about Jesus healing the sick and debating with his opponents. The traditions also included sayings attributed to Jesus, such as parables and teachings on various subjects which, along with other sayings, formed the oral gospel tradition. The supposition of such traditions have been the focus of scholars such as Bart Ehrman, James Dunn, and Richard Bauckham, although each scholar varies widely in his conclusions, with Ehrman and Bauckham publicly debating on the subject.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Johannine community</span> Ancient Christian community that supposedly authored the Johannine literature

The term Johannine community refers to an ancient Christian community which placed great emphasis on the teachings of Jesus and his apostle John.

Historical criticism is a branch of criticism that investigates the origins of ancient texts in order to understand "the world behind the text" and emphasizes a process that "delays any assessment of scripture’s truth and relevance until after the act of interpretation has been carried out". While often discussed in terms of ancient Jewish, Christian, and increasingly Islamic writings, historical criticism has also been applied to other religious and secular writings from various parts of the world and periods of history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Independence hypothesis</span> Proposed solution to the synoptic problem

The Independence hypothesis is a proposed solution to the synoptic problem. It holds that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are each original compositions formed independently of each other, with no documentary relationship.

Paul N. Anderson is an American New Testament scholar conducting research on the historical, cultural, and theological background of the Gospel of John, the historical Jesus, Quakers and Spirituality studies. He is Professor of Biblical and Quaker Studies at George Fox University since 1989 and was a founding member of the John, Jesus, and History Project at the Society of Biblical Literature (2002-2016). He also serves as Extraordinary Professor of Religion at North-West University in Potchefstroom, South Africa and has served as a visiting professor or researcher at Haverford College, Yale Divinity School, Princeton Theological Seminary, the Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, the Radboud University of Nijmegen, and Chapman University.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intertextual production of the Gospel of Mark</span> Viewpoint about a book of the New Testament

The intertextual production of the Gospel of Mark is the viewpoint that there are identifiable textual relationships such that any allusion or quotation from another text forms an integral part of the Markan text, even when it seems to be out of context.

References

  1. 1 2 "form criticism." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2007. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2 Dec. 2007 read online
  2. ↑ Erickson, Millard (1998). Christian Theology (Second ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. p. 113.
  3. ↑ Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
  4. ↑ Schmidt, K. L. (1919). Der Rahmen der Geschichte Jesu. Berlin: Paternoster.
  5. ↑ Dibelius, M. (1919). Die Formgeschichte des Evangelium 3d Ed. Günter Bornkamm (ed). Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
  6. ↑ Bultmann, R. (1921). Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.
  7. ↑ Bailey, Kenneth E. (1995). "Informal Controlled Oral Tradition and the Synoptic Gospels". Themelios. 20 (2): 4–11.
  8. ↑ Hengel, Martin (2000). The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Collection and Origin of the Canonical Gospels. SCM Press. ISBN   978-0-334-02759-1.
  9. ↑ Dunn, James D. G. (2003-07-29). Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, Volume 1. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN   978-0-8028-3931-2.
  10. ↑ Richard, Bauckham (2017). Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, 2d ed. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN   978-0-8028-7431-3.
  11. ↑ Pitre, Brant (2016-02-02). The Case for Jesus: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Christ. Crown Publishing Group. ISBN   978-0-7704-3549-3.
  12. ↑ Ehrman, Bart D. (2012-03-20). Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth. Harper Collins. p. 86. ISBN   978-0-06-208994-6. among our ranks there are no more form critics that agree with the theories of Bultmann, the pioneer of this interpretation
  13. ↑ Meier, John P. (1991). A Marginal Jew: Mentor, message, and miracles. Doubleday. p. 9. ISBN   978-0-385-46992-0. Bultmann had a disconcerting way of solving problems with a few evasive sentences, his arguments do not hold up, despite having been handed down for generations
  14. ↑ Kelber, W. H. (1997). The Oral and Written Gospel: The Hermeneutics of Speaking and Writing in the Synoptic Tradition, Mark, Paul, and Q. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. p. 8.

Bibliography

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.