The Nature of Biblical Criticism

I could not put this book down, because Barton analyses how 'confessing' approaches demand that we draw from the text what we want it to say. This betrays a lack of faith. Barton argues that critical scholarship has always been seeking out the 'plain meaning' of the text, and this desire is what resulted in documentary hypotheses. Such approaches grew out of a recognition that the Bible is a collective work. Barton's defence of this thesis is second to none. To anyone who has training in biblical analysis, this book is a revelation. \\r\\n\\r\\nTwo observations at the end floored me. First, Barton writes that """"far from biblical criticism's having subverted faith, it seems to me that for most people it has not even begun to make an impression"""" (p 185). By keeping critical scholarship away from pastoral activity, we are stunting our appreciation of the Bible. \\r\\n\\r\\nSecond, Barton says that if """" the findings of critical scholarship are of no value in communicating the Christian gospel to ordinary people. . . this is because hardly anyone has ever tried"""" (page 190). What a great point. The church is so faithless in trusting that 'taking the Bible at its word' will be fruitful that it has cut itself off from the benefits of scholarly biblical analysis. \\r\\n\\r\\nThis book is a tremendous challenge to the current impasse and debate. The challenge is indeed between faithful and faithless appropriations of the Bible, but the divide is the inverse of what is…