Biblical Criticism

The Bible as a text can be read with or without reference to its compilation as a theologically constructed collection of sacred Jewish and Christian books. When read without such framing concerns, it may be approached with the full range of literary and theoretical interpretive tools and read for whatever purpose readers value or wish to explore. Less straightforwardly, in the former case where framing concerns come into play, the Bible is both like and unlike any other book in the way that its very nature as a “canon” of scripture is related to particular theological and religious convictions. Such convictions are then in turn interested in configuring the kinds of readings pursued in certain ways. Biblical criticism has undergone many transformations over the centuries, sometimes allowing such theological convictions or practices to shape the nature of its criticism, and at other times—especially in the modern period—tending to relegate their significance in favor of concerns with interpretive method, and in particular questions about authorial intention, original context, and interest in matters of history (either in the world behind the text, or in the stages of development of the text itself). From the middle of the 20th century onwards the interpretive interests of biblical critics have focused more on certain literary characteristics of biblical narratives and poetry, and also a greater theological willingness to engage the imaginative vision of biblical texts. This has resulted in a move toward a theological form of criticism that might better be characterized as imaginative and invites explicit negotiation of readers’ identities and commitments. A sense of the longer, premodern history of biblical interpretation suggests that some of these late 20th- and early 21st-century emphases do themselves have roots in the interpretive practices of earlier times, but that the Reformation (and subsequent developments in modern thinking) effectively closed down certain interpretive options in the name of better ordering readers’ interpretive commitments. Though not without real gains, this narrowing of interpretive interests has resulted in much of the practice of academic biblical criticism being beholden to modernist impulses. Shifts toward postmodern emphases have been less common on the whole, but the overall picture of biblical criticism has indeed changed in the 21st century. This may be more owing to the impact of a renewed appetite for theologically imaginative readings among Christian readers, and also of the refreshed recognition of Jewish traditions of interpretation that pose challenging framing questions to other understandings.

A History of Biblical Interpretation in China

Since its first Protestant translation by Robert Morrison in 1823, the Chinese Bible has been earnestly used for devotional and apologetical purposes by Chinese Christians. This essay discusses why it is necessary to construct a history of biblical interpretation in China now and suggests how best to conceive it and what to include. A history of biblical interpretation has historical and hermeneutical value and it may help clarify three elements of “Chinese biblical interpretation.” It can be divided into four stages of development in correlation to the radical changes in national history and the main challenges in church history, to provide proper socio-historical contexts. For basic content, it should assess major interpreters and influential approaches in four settings, i.e. translation, church, society, and universities and discuss four inquiries regarding its reception, interpretation, appropriation, and consequence in China.

Questions and Responses

In the history of biblical interpretation, ‘questions and answers’ are both a method of exegesis and a literary genre. Both go back to the classical tradition of Graeco-Roman philosophy and literature, starting with Aristotle’s Poetics. Within Christian exegesis, the method is applied to scriptural passages that are seen as problematic. As a genre, ‘questions and answers’ are not easy to distinguish from other exegetical genres, in particular the scholia.Their target audience is readers who wish to study the Bible more deeply as well as a variety of critics of the Bible. But when the genre takes on more accessible forms like ‘catechisms’, it is able to address a larger audience. Exegesis in the mode of ‘questions and answers’ seems to prefer a literal interpretation, but this is not a fixed rule. The genre enjoyed great success in Greek, Latin and Syriac literature. Though Philo of Alexandria wrote questions on Genesis and Exodus, after Origen’s rich exploitation of the method the proper initiator of the genre among Christian authors is Eusebius of Caesarea. Its diffusion in Late Antiquity and the early Byzantine period is witnessed by the many successors, most notably, Theodoret and Maximus Confessor. In the Latin West Augustine wrote several writings of ‘questions’.

Ancient Chronography on Abraham’s Departure from Haran: Qumran, Josephus, Rabbinic Literature, and Jerome

This paper examines how the chronological contradiction in Abraham’s departure from Haran (Gen 11:26, 32; 12:4) has been explained in the history of biblical interpretation, especially in rewritten Scripture from Qumran (4Q252 and Jubilees), Josephus, and rabbinic literature (Genesis Rabbah), including the lost Jewish tradition preserved by Jerome. According to Ben Zion Wacholder, who dealt with a different case of chronology in Genesis, the rabbinic and the Qumranic views are too different to be reconcilable, whereas the Graeco-Jewish writers and Qumran literature present similar views. This study, however, demonstrates that rabbinic interpretation of Abraham’s departure share some important ideas both with Qumran literature and Josephus.

“Mary puts us all to shame”

This article examines Martin Luther’s interpretation of Saint Mary Magdalene throughout his career, from his Psalms lectures of 1513 to his sermons on John’s Gospel in 1529. In particular, it will be argued that Luther both adopted and reshaped the exegetical tradition flowing from the twelfth-century theologian, Bernard of Clairvaux. The final result was a Reformation reading of the Magdalene that was neither fully medieval nor “Protestant” as the tradition would later develop. Luther’s journey with the saint thus illumines his ambiguous place in the history of biblical interpretation, as well as his fraught relationship to the medieval past.