Concepts and Methods in the Study of the Qur’ān

This paper addresses methodological issues in Qur’anic studies. At first, it intends to explain, through historiographical analysis, why methods proved fruitful in biblical and New Testament studies, such as form criticism and redaction criticism, have been disregarded in Qur’anic studies; secondly, it vindicates the application of such methods to the Qur’anic corpus; thirdly, it tries to exemplify the relevance of redaction criticism through examples. Two main issues are then discussed: the best way to account for the “synoptic problem” (the presence, in the Qur’ān, of variant parallel narratives), through an examination of some aspects of the Adam-Iblīs narratives (more precisely the composition of Q 2:30–38 and the nature of the relations between Q 38:71–85 and Q 15:26–43); and the beginning of Q 55. Two main conclusions are reached: first, the later versions of a parallel story are, in the examples discussed here, rewritings of earlier stories (namely, re-compositions based on a written version); second, sura 55 features the intervention of different authors, with two different profiles.

Download Full-text

Matthean Posteriority: An Exploration of Matthew's Use of Mark and Luke as a Solution to the Synoptic Problem. By Robert K. MacEwen. Library of New Testament Studies, 501. New York: Bloomsbury, 2015. Pp. xxiv + 309. Cloth, $112.00.

Religious Studies Review ◽

10.1111/rsr.12421 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 42 (2) ◽

pp. 108-108

Author(s):

Thomas E. Phillips

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

New Testament ◽

Synoptic Problem ◽

New Testament Studies

Download Full-text

Judaica in St Mark

Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland ◽

10.1017/s0035869x00132307 ◽

1975 ◽

Vol 107 (1) ◽

pp. 2-15

Author(s):

J. Duncan M. Derrett

Keyword(s):

New Testament ◽

Old Testament ◽

Sources Of Information ◽

Redaction Criticism ◽

Source Criticism ◽

The New Testament ◽

Form Criticism

A difficulty has arisen in exegesis of the gospels. Allowing for variations, scholars figure in two main classes, the first largely introverted, the specialists, and the second “outsiders” who attempt to collaborate with them. The first, far the more numerous, comprises those who examine internally the New Testament, using Qumran and other intertestamental material, and Old Testament texts where they are cited or quoted in the New Testament, to enable the gospels to comment upon themselves and each other, employing in this procedure skills adequately described as “literary-historical”. One may refer to these scholars as “the critics”. Fashion gives great credence to “redaction-criticism”, heir to “source-criticism” and “form-criticism”. National traits tend to emerge, as is not surprising since subjective criteria are bound to operate in an estimate of what the evangelists were about, and national traits easily escape notice amongst their victims. In fact no one knows who the evangelists were or how they worked. Internal evidence alone leads to unending contradictions. Scepticism continues to play a role, and passages (such as one to which we come) which are not internally “corroborated” are more or less confidently dismissed as fabrications. The history, the archaeology of the New Testament is, at its most sensitive and useful point, at the mercy of skills that are principally literary and unashamedly academic. What is literary is of enormous value, but in no other field would it claim to exclude parallel sources of information.

Download Full-text

The Concept of Story and Theological Discourse

Scottish Journal of Theology ◽

10.1017/s0036930600042976 ◽

1976 ◽

Vol 29 (5) ◽

pp. 415-433 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Hugh Jones

Keyword(s):

Social Sciences ◽

Literary Criticism ◽

Oral Tradition ◽

Redaction Criticism ◽

The Bible ◽

The Social ◽

Theological Discourse ◽

New Testament Studies ◽

Form Criticism

Biblical scholars and theologians have sometimes suggested that the concept of story or narration may be used to avoid or even resolve certain long-standing problems in theology. The context of such a suggestion appears to be not only the gradual filtering of ideas from the social sciences into theological awareness but also a much improved understanding of the nature and transmission of the biblical traditions. For instance, literary criticism had tried to tell the story of the making of the Bible as a story of writing and editing. With its analytic interest, form criticism penetrated deeper, concentrating on the crucial role of oral tradition and on the power of communities to shape certain forms. Depending on these prior analytical activities, tradition criticism (or ‘redaction criticism’ in New Testament studies) felt free to seek larger unities in the material before it. That is, whereas form criticism's interest lay in describing separately the variety of ‘;scenes’ that later took their respective places in the story, tradition criticism concentrated on telling the whole story of the making of the Bible.2

Download Full-text