Class VIII:Class VIII:Redaction CriticismRedaction Criticism

ApologeticsApologetics

Glenn GilesGlenn Giles

December, 2009December, 2009

Redaction CriticismRedaction Criticism

A. Definition:A. Definition: ““Redaction criticism is a historical and Redaction criticism is a historical and literary discipline which literary discipline which studies both the studies both the ways the redactors/editors/authors ways the redactors/editors/authors changedchanged their sourcestheir sources and the seams or and the seams or transitions they utilize to link those transitions they utilize to link those traditions into a unified whole” traditions into a unified whole” (Grant Osborne, “Redaction Criticism,” in (Grant Osborne, “Redaction Criticism,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the GospelsDictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, I. Howard Marshall, eds. (Downer’s Grove: , Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, I. Howard Marshall, eds. (Downer’s Grove:

IVP, 1992).IVP, 1992). B. Purpose:B. Purpose: The purpose of this critical The purpose of this critical

methodology is to determine the theology methodology is to determine the theology of the author of the writing and the setting of the author of the writing and the setting that may have been the impetus for the that may have been the impetus for the writing. writing.

Redaction Criticism AnalysisRedaction Criticism Analysis

1. Individual pericope analysis1. Individual pericope analysisa. The pericope is studied to find the a. The pericope is studied to find the readings that are unique to one of the readings that are unique to one of the Gospels. It thus builds upon Form Crit.Gospels. It thus builds upon Form Crit.b. This data is evaluated with respect to b. This data is evaluated with respect to

seven possible ways Evangelists may seven possible ways Evangelists may have edited their materialhave edited their material (1) They may “conserve” the data for (1) They may “conserve” the data for

theological reasonstheological reasons (2) They may “conflate two (2) They may “conflate two

traditions”traditions”

Redaction AnalysisRedaction Analysis

(3) They may “expand the source” and add (3) They may “expand the source” and add material (cf., Mt. 14:22-33 and Mk. 6:45-material (cf., Mt. 14:22-33 and Mk. 6:45-52).52).

(4) They may “transpose the settings” (cf., Mt. (4) They may “transpose the settings” (cf., Mt. 23:37-39 with Lk. 13:34-35).23:37-39 with Lk. 13:34-35).

(5) They may “omit portions” (cf., Mt. 17:14-(5) They may “omit portions” (cf., Mt. 17:14-21 and Mk. 9:14-29).21 and Mk. 9:14-29).

(6) They may “explain details” (cf. Mark’s (6) They may “explain details” (cf. Mark’s explanation of hand washing in Mk. 7:3-4)explanation of hand washing in Mk. 7:3-4)

(7) They may “alter the tradition to avoid (7) They may “alter the tradition to avoid misunderstandings” (cf. Mk 10:18 with Mt. misunderstandings” (cf. Mk 10:18 with Mt. 19:17 with respect to the concept of 19:17 with respect to the concept of “good”).“good”).

Redaction AnalysisRedaction Analysis

2. Holistic analysis of thematic and 2. Holistic analysis of thematic and narratives of a whole Gospelnarratives of a whole Gospel

(a) Study the “seams”(a) Study the “seams” (i.e., (i.e., “introductions, conclusions and “introductions, conclusions and transitions” and summaries which connect transitions” and summaries which connect pericopes and “episodes” in each Gospel). pericopes and “episodes” in each Gospel). These can help determine the theological These can help determine the theological emphases of each Gospel writer. Note Mk. emphases of each Gospel writer. Note Mk. 1:21 and 3:1 and the setting provided 1:21 and 3:1 and the setting provided there.there.

Redaction AnalysisRedaction Analysis

(b) “Editorial asides and insertions.”(b) “Editorial asides and insertions.” These can provide information on the These can provide information on the theological emphases and significance of a theological emphases and significance of a narrative (Note John 3:16-21 following the narrative (Note John 3:16-21 following the dialog with Nicodemus).dialog with Nicodemus).

(c) Theme or “motif” analysis(c) Theme or “motif” analysis. This studies . This studies the development of theological emphases the development of theological emphases through the whole gospel. For instance note through the whole gospel. For instance note the anti-Jewish lead polemic in Matthew.the anti-Jewish lead polemic in Matthew.

(d) Note how the material is arranged(d) Note how the material is arranged in in comparison with other Gospels as well as comparison with other Gospels as well as which material has been selected and which which material has been selected and which left out.left out.

Strengths and ValueStrengths and Valueof Redaction Criticismof Redaction Criticism

1.1. It helps us to understand that the It helps us to understand that the Evangelists were authors and not just Evangelists were authors and not just biographers of Jesus and his messagebiographers of Jesus and his message

2.2. It helps us understand that the Gospels are It helps us understand that the Gospels are theological not just treatises. As a result it theological not just treatises. As a result it encourages us to find various theological encourages us to find various theological truths in each Gospel. It thus “increases our truths in each Gospel. It thus “increases our appreciation of the multiplicity of the appreciation of the multiplicity of the Gospels” Gospels” (Carson and Moo, 112).(Carson and Moo, 112).

3.3. It gives us tools to help understand each It gives us tools to help understand each pericope as the author of each Gospel pericope as the author of each Gospel intended.intended.

Strengths and ValueStrengths and Value

4.4. When done from a conservative approach When done from a conservative approach it helps us to see the life and teachings of it helps us to see the life and teachings of Jesus historically with various theological Jesus historically with various theological emphases that speak to both the emphases that speak to both the contemporary church and the world.contemporary church and the world.

5.5. With the composition criticism element With the composition criticism element (i.e. how everything fits together in the (i.e. how everything fits together in the whole gospel) it helps us to see each whole gospel) it helps us to see each Gospel as a whole and not from an Gospel as a whole and not from an atomizing perspective of Form Criticism.atomizing perspective of Form Criticism.

Weaknesses of Redaction CriticismWeaknesses of Redaction Criticism

1. Since Redaction Criticism builds on 1. Since Redaction Criticism builds on other critical methodologies it can other critical methodologies it can suffer from the same weaknesses suffer from the same weaknesses and pitfalls of Source, Form, and pitfalls of Source, Form, Tradition, and literary criticisms.Tradition, and literary criticisms.

2. Redaction critical results sometimes 2. Redaction critical results sometimes rest on whether or not one accepts rest on whether or not one accepts the two-source theory. If this is the two-source theory. If this is erroneous then results can be erroneous then results can be erroneous also.erroneous also.

WeaknessesWeaknesses

3. Some practitioners come to the text with strong 3. Some practitioners come to the text with strong historical skepticism which unwarrantedly colors historical skepticism which unwarrantedly colors their conclusions about the historical reliability of the their conclusions about the historical reliability of the Gospels. Gospels. E.g., Some say the Gospels are a creation of the E.g., Some say the Gospels are a creation of the church church and not historical. They proceed not with and not historical. They proceed not with an attitude an attitude of “innocent until proven guilty” but of “innocent until proven guilty” but “guilty until “guilty until proven innocent” with respect to proven innocent” with respect to their historicity their historicity --“As long as the evangelists’ redactional --“As long as the evangelists’ redactional modifications are consistent with what actually modifications are consistent with what actually happened or with what Jesus actually said—even if happened or with what Jesus actually said—even if they select, summarize, and reword—historical they select, summarize, and reword—historical integrity is maintained” integrity is maintained” (concepts and quotations are from Carson and Moo, 111).(concepts and quotations are from Carson and Moo, 111).

Weaknesses of Redaction CriticismWeaknesses of Redaction Criticism

4. Not all changes (additions, 4. Not all changes (additions, omissions, expansions, etc.) an omissions, expansions, etc.) an evangelist might have made in the evangelist might have made in the tradition is necessarily theologically tradition is necessarily theologically motivated as is assumed by motivated as is assumed by practitioners. Hence “redactional practitioners. Hence “redactional emphases” cannot always be emphases” cannot always be equated with the “evangelist’s equated with the “evangelist’s theology” theology” (Carson and Moo, 109).(Carson and Moo, 109).

ConclusionConclusion

Redaction criticism does less atomizing of Redaction criticism does less atomizing of the text than Form Criticism and focusses the text than Form Criticism and focusses on the overall theme(s) of each gospel and on the overall theme(s) of each gospel and as such can be used effectively to help as such can be used effectively to help determine the message the writer wants determine the message the writer wants conveyed as well as to see different conveyed as well as to see different perspectives and truths that come from perspectives and truths that come from Jesus’ life and teachings. Hence it does Jesus’ life and teachings. Hence it does necessarily have to be seen as an enemy of necessarily have to be seen as an enemy of inspiration.inspiration.

One must watch for its weaknesses One must watch for its weaknesses however when using it.however when using it.