Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

$5.00

Understanding Bible Criticism: Its Origins and Objectives

Bible criticism, particularly higher criticism, emerged prominently during the 18th and 19th centuries. This method aimed to analyze the Bible through the lens of human reason, often leading to assumptions that the Scriptures were primarily human constructs rather than divinely inspired texts. One of the most influential figures in higher criticism was Julius Wellhausen, a German scholar who proposed that the early books of the Bible, such as Genesis and Exodus, were not written during the time of Moses but rather around the fifth century B.C.E., much later than traditionally believed. Wellhausen’s theory, also known as the Documentary Hypothesis, suggested that the Bible was composed of multiple sources, each reflecting different theological perspectives and historical contexts.

According to this hypothesis, the first five books of the Bible (the Pentateuch) were supposedly composed of different documents identified by various names for God—such as ‘Elohim’ and ‘Jehovah’—indicating different authors. These documents, labeled as the Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), Deuteronomist (D), and Priestly (P) sources, were believed to have been combined into one final text during the post-exilic period. Such claims undermined the traditional view that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch and that the Bible was a unified and divinely inspired revelation from Jehovah.

Wellhausen and his followers promoted the idea that the events described in the early parts of the Old Testament, such as the accounts of the patriarchs and the Exodus, were not literal history but rather myths and traditions that reflected the later experiences of Israel as a nation. For example, they argued that the story of Jacob and Esau symbolized the later conflict between Israel and Edom, rather than being an actual historical account.

Refuting the Assumptions of Higher Criticism

The Assumption of Human Origin

One of the major flaws in higher criticism is the assumption that the Bible is merely a product of human evolution, much like the development of other ancient religious texts. Critics such as Wellhausen approached the Bible with the preconceived notion that it could not have originated from divine inspiration. This assumption is fundamentally contrary to the biblical teaching that “all Scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16). By starting with the assumption that the Bible is a purely human document, higher critics dismissed the possibility of divine revelation and, as a result, their conclusions were inevitably skewed.

Gleason L. Archer, a prominent biblical scholar, pointed out that Wellhausen’s theory rested on unproven assumptions. As Archer observed, the higher critics “hardly bothered to demonstrate” their initial assumption that Israel’s religion was of human origin and merely evolved over time. This biased starting point led to speculative conclusions that were not supported by solid evidence.

The Documentary Hypothesis and the Use of Divine Names

Higher critics often base their theories on the presence of different names for God in the Bible, suggesting that these indicate multiple authors. For example, the use of ‘Elohim’ in some passages and ‘Jehovah’ in others is taken as evidence that different writers contributed to these sections of Scripture. However, this reasoning is flawed. The variation in divine names does not necessarily indicate multiple authors but can instead reflect the different aspects of God’s character being emphasized in various contexts.

In Genesis 1, the name ‘Elohim’ emphasizes God’s power and majesty as Creator, while in Genesis 2, the use of ‘Jehovah’ highlights His personal relationship with humanity. The consistent theological message of these passages points to a unified authorship, not a fragmented one. Ancient Semitic literature, including the Bible, often used repetition and variation in names for stylistic and theological reasons. To claim that this is evidence of different authors is to misunderstand the literary conventions of the time.

The Reliability of the Old Testament

Higher critics have also challenged the historical reliability of the Old Testament, suggesting that many of the events recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures, such as the Exodus and the existence of the Tabernacle, were later fabrications. However, such claims have been increasingly challenged by both internal evidence within the Bible and external evidence from archaeology.

For example, the Bible’s account of the Tabernacle, a central feature of Israelite worship during their wilderness journey, has been called into question by critics. They argue that the Tabernacle was a later invention to legitimize the priesthood. However, there is no solid evidence to support this claim. Instead, the detailed descriptions of the Tabernacle in the book of Exodus (Exodus 25-31) demonstrate a coherent and consistent understanding of Israel’s worship practices, which would be difficult to fabricate centuries later.

Furthermore, archaeology has repeatedly confirmed the reliability of the biblical account. Excavations in the ancient Near East have uncovered evidence that supports the existence of the nations, cities, and cultures mentioned in the Bible, refuting the claims of critics who dismiss these records as myth. For instance, the discovery of the Merneptah Stele, which dates to around 1207 B.C.E., provides the earliest extrabiblical reference to Israel as a distinct people in Canaan. Such discoveries bolster the historical credibility of the Old Testament and undermine the claims of higher criticism.

The Historical-Critical Method and Its Ideological Bias

The Influence of Secular Humanism and Enlightenment Thought

One of the key problems with higher criticism, particularly the historical-critical method, is that it is rooted in secular humanism and Enlightenment thinking, both of which reject the supernatural. The Enlightenment, a philosophical movement of the 17th and 18th centuries, emphasized human reason and skepticism of religious authority. This worldview gave rise to the assumption that the Bible, like any other ancient text, must be scrutinized as a purely human product without any divine intervention.

This philosophical bias against the supernatural has shaped much of modern biblical criticism, leading scholars to dismiss miracles, prophecy, and divine revelation as impossible. For example, critics often argue that the prophecies in the book of Isaiah must have been written after the events they describe, because they reject the possibility that God could reveal the future. This approach is inherently flawed, as it imposes a secular worldview on the biblical text rather than allowing the text to speak for itself.

Speculative Nature of Modern Criticism

Higher criticism often operates on speculative theories that are not grounded in evidence. As one commentator noted, even at its best, “criticism is speculative and tentative, something always liable to be modified or proved wrong.” This speculative nature is especially evident in the way higher critics attempt to dissect the biblical text into various sources based on changes in style or vocabulary.

Modern literary criticism tends to treat the Bible like any other piece of ancient literature, assuming that changes in style or repetition of events indicate multiple authors. However, this approach ignores the possibility that a single inspired author, such as Moses or the prophet Isaiah, could use different styles depending on the subject matter. It also fails to account for the use of repetition as a common feature in ancient Hebrew literature, intended to emphasize key themes or events.

Archaeology as a Reliable Test of Biblical Truth

In contrast to the speculative nature of higher criticism, archaeology provides a much more reliable and objective means of testing the historical accuracy of the Bible. Archaeologists have uncovered numerous artifacts and inscriptions that corroborate the biblical record, often vindicating the Bible against the claims of its critics.

For instance, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 was a major archaeological breakthrough that confirmed the textual accuracy of the Old Testament. These scrolls, which date back to the second century B.C.E., contain portions of almost every book of the Hebrew Bible and demonstrate that the text has been faithfully preserved over the centuries. The scroll of Isaiah, in particular, is nearly identical to the Masoretic Text used by Jews and Christians today, providing strong evidence for the reliability of the biblical transmission.

Other archaeological discoveries, such as the city of Jericho and the Pool of Bethesda, have confirmed specific details mentioned in the Bible. The excavations at Jericho, for example, revealed evidence of a city wall that had collapsed, consistent with the biblical account of Joshua’s conquest (Joshua 6:20). Similarly, the discovery of the Pool of Bethesda in Jerusalem confirmed the accuracy of John 5:2, where Jesus healed a man at the pool.

These archaeological findings demonstrate that the Bible is not merely a collection of myths or legends, as higher critics claim, but a historically accurate record of real events. While archaeology cannot prove every detail of the Bible, it consistently supports the reliability of Scripture, providing a solid foundation for faith.

The Motivation Behind Higher Criticism

A Desire to Reject Divine Revelation

One of the underlying motivations behind higher criticism is the desire to reject the supernatural and divine revelation. Many higher critics, such as Wellhausen, were influenced by the theory of evolution, which posits that life and human society developed gradually through natural processes. In a similar vein, higher critics argue that religion evolved over time, and that the Bible reflects the gradual development of Israel’s religious beliefs.

This evolutionary approach to religion is incompatible with the biblical teaching that God revealed Himself to His people in specific historical events. The Bible consistently presents itself as the inspired Word of God, given to mankind through divine revelation (2 Peter 1:20-21). The accounts of creation, the Exodus, and the giving of the Law at Sinai are not myths or legends that evolved over time; they are historical events through which Jehovah revealed His will to His covenant people.

The motivation to reject divine revelation is evident in the way higher critics approach prophecy. Rather than accepting that God could foretell future events, critics argue that the prophecies in books like Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel were written after the events they describe. This approach reflects a philosophical bias against the supernatural rather than an objective analysis of the text.

The Appeal of Higher Criticism to Intellectuals

Higher criticism has gained popularity among intellectuals because it appeals to their desire for autonomy and freedom from religious authority. By undermining the authority of the Bible, higher criticism allows scholars to create their own moral and philosophical systems without being bound by the teachings of Scripture. As one 19th-century scholar admitted, he welcomed Wellhausen’s theory because it aligned with his evolutionary view of religion and freed him from the need to believe in divine revelation.

In the modern intellectual climate, where secularism and humanism are dominant, higher criticism provides a way for scholars to dismiss the Bible as a relic of the past. This rejection of Scripture reflects a broader cultural shift away from belief in absolute truth and toward relativism, where each individual is free to define their own truth. However, as believers, we must recognize that the authority of the Bible is not determined by the opinions of intellectuals but by the fact that it is the inspired Word of God.

Defending the Authority of Scripture

The Inerrancy and Inspiration of the Bible

At the heart of the conservative evangelical response to higher criticism is the belief in the inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture. The Bible is not merely a collection of human writings but the very Word of God, breathed out by Jehovah (2 Timothy 3:16). As such, it is without error in everything it affirms, whether in matters of faith, history, or science.

This belief in inerrancy is rooted in the character of God. Jehovah is a God of truth (Deuteronomy 32:4), and He cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Therefore, the Scriptures, which are His inspired Word, must be completely trustworthy. Jesus Himself affirmed the authority of the Old Testament, stating that “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35). If we believe in the authority of Jesus, we must also believe in the authority and reliability of the Scriptures He upheld.

The Role of Faith in Understanding the Bible

While higher criticism approaches the Bible with skepticism and doubt, believers approach Scripture with faith, trusting that it is the inspired Word of God. This does not mean that we ignore difficult questions or avoid scholarly investigation. However, our starting point is one of faith in the Bible’s divine authorship rather than a presumption of human error.

Hebrews 11:6 reminds us that “without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.” Approaching the Bible with faith allows us to see it as more than just an ancient document; it is the living Word of God that speaks to our hearts and minds today.[1]

[1] BIBLICAL EXEGESIS: Biblical Criticism on Trial– July 16, 2023, by Edward D. Andrews (Author)

BIBLICAL CRITICISM: What are Some Outstanding Weaknesses of Modern Historical Criticism? – October 27, 2017, by Edward D. Andrews (Author), F. David Farnell (Author)

INTERPRETING THE BIBLE: Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics – July 31, 2016 by Edward D Andrews (Author)

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).