Old Testament Poetry and Wisdom Literature, Part 4

‘Critical’ Scholarship

In the field of biblical interpretation there are a wide variety of perspectives from which scholars begin. One of those perspectives is called ‘critical’ scholarship, a term that represents a very broad segment of modern biblical interpreters. Critical scholars are well-entrenched in many schools and seminaries across denominational boundaries and across countries. If we were to succinctly explain this perspective, we could say that critical scholars are highly suspect of texts and of the message of texts and that they must have plentiful evidence in order to be convinced of the veracity of those texts. When a text is studied, the scholar will disbelieve anything that cannot be proven scientifically or historically to their satisfaction.

As you might imagine, this sets a high standard for texts to achieve in order to be received as ‘true’ (where ‘true’ means historically factual, trustworthy, authoritative, and the like). In one sense this is a commendable perspective for a scholar because no person should ever accept any system of teaching without examination. What I am saying is that everyone should critically examine the ‘truths’ that others present to us to see if they are logically coherent, valid, and if they conform to reality. No one should uncritically follow every person who wishes to lead them—that would be folly.

Sadly, though, critical scholars have rejected most of the Bible’s teaching on almost every matter. The perspective of critical scholarship has eroded many people’s trust in the teaching of Scripture. The result has been a widespread departure from what is considered to be the ‘uncritical,’ traditional understanding of the Bible; many people no longer believe in miracles as recorded in Scripture, or in resurrection, or in God as He is described in the Bible.

This topic has a huge bearing on biblical studies because the Old and New Testaments describe events and persons that are not independently verifiable in the way that critical scholars desire. Many critical scholars, then, write off the Old Testament as an undesirable set of myths at best, and at worst as an embarrassment to humanity.

The question, then, is this: how can it be good to be critical when ‘critical’ scholars deny what we believe to be the most important truths imaginable?

My answer is as follows. It is good to be ‘critical,’ but only in one sense. We should examine whether or not texts are logically coherent, valid, and if they conform to reality. The problem is, we also need to be humble and to allow for the fact that we do not understand all of reality. We are not the arbiters of all truth in the universe! As human beings, we are not supreme and omniscient and we cannot prima facie rule out the existence of authoritative revelation from God just because it does not measure up to our standards.

Two questions remain. First, in what way are critical scholars wrongly critical—what is their error? Second, if critical examination of others is right, how should we be critical, and how does that relate to the study of Scripture?

We will pick up these important questions in our next post.

--Dean of Admissions