Dr. Mike Russell from In Search Of Arete recently wrote this excellent series on higher criticism based on a question I posted on Theologica. The posts poke fun while doing a great job explaining the different forms of higher criticism applied to Scripture. He graciously allowed me to repost them here at The Bible Archive.
Category: text/language
A while ago, I shared some rambling thoughts on Romans 5:12 trying to decide how Paul envisions our relationship to Adam: is it akin to that of a Federal Head (whereby he acts as a representative for the whole within a covenantal situation and the whole’s decision is subsumed in his action) or to that of Corporate Solidarity (whereby people identify and unite in the way an individual, head of the family, leader—whatever—acts ). In this post I want to see how people have assumed one view and point out where I think the text leans.
Categories
The True and Perfect Word
I have taken it to heart to write to you, dear brother, what really happened and why it is important to our faith. Yes, I know you received two earlier letters but I have heard that you were confused by their content, thinking (somehow) as if those things of which I wrote, really occurred. Therefore, I have taken it to heart to write you these things, most excellent Theophilus, things I have researched so that you may fully understand.
Evolution is a funny word that gets bandied about. Saying it in different context evokes different responses, sometimes laughter and sometimes justified anger. In fact, I’ve been in conversations where a person is using evolution in one sense and me in a completely different sense and both of us have gotten riled up until we pinned down our terms.
Justin over at Politics and Religion has begun a series on Christianity’s Downfall by starting off and highlighting fundamentalism. In hopes of education rather than attacking he points out that fundamentalism (in general and in Christianity particularly) is (1) dangerous (2) intolerant (3) rigid (4) illogical and (5) surface-reading which he equates with literalism. Of course, he doesn’t delineate his points as such and is careful to point out what the fundamentalist is rigidly adhering to (and thus obviously dangerous) are the specific doctrines that make Christians who they are: but he does point out that “in many cases, the fundamentalist Christian believes what he…does because it was told to him†and he adheres to a strict literalism. I’ll deal with both these points below.