Changes

[[Image:bible3.jpg|left|frame]]Based on this understanding of the primacy of reason for Christian faith and theology, the German liberals introduced the historical-critical method to the field of biblical studies.  Basically this academic approach to the Bible has two components:  (1) the Bible, like any other document,  is a product of history and therefore can only be properly studied and understood within its own historical context, and (2) the Bible must be subjected to the critical scrutiny of reason in the same way that we would treat any other object of examination.  This method obviously presents a formidable challenge to the popular and devout use of the Bible in which it is read purely in the context of one's personal faith, or one's community of faith. One important example of the kind of work the historical-critical method pursued was the effort to establish the authorship of the various books of the Bible.  Genesis, for instance, was traditionally attributed to Moses but critical scolars have established that it is in fact a collection of sources redacted by several editors.  Typically the historical-critical method was accompanied by the denial of miracles such as the virgin birth and the resurrection.  The presence of miracles in the biblical narrative were attributed to the pre-scientific understanding of the biblical writers.  Not surprisingly, the church often went to great lengths to distance itself from university theology over the next one hundred years.   

[[Image:bible3.jpg|left|frame]]Based on this understanding of the primacy of reason for Christian faith and theology, the German liberals introduced the historical-critical method to the field of biblical studies.  Basically this academic approach to the Bible has two components:  (1) the Bible, like any other document,  is a product of history and therefore can only be properly studied and understood within its own historical context, and (2) the Bible must be subjected to the critical scrutiny of reason in the same way that we would treat any other object of examination.  In summary we could say that where the church regarded the words of scripture as pure truth, the liberals saw those same words as reflecting the historical limitations and cultural conditioning of their authors.  The truth was something to be discovered beneath the words.  This method obviously presented a formidable challenge to the popular and devout use of the Bible in which it is read purely in the context of one's personal faith, or within one's community of faith.  

 

 

One important example of the kind of work the historical-critical method pursued was the effort to establish the authorship of the various books of the Bible.  Genesis, for instance, was traditionally attributed to Moses but critical scolars have established that it is in fact a collection of sources redacted by several editors.  Typically the historical-critical method was accompanied by the denial of miracles such as the virgin birth and the resurrection.  The presence of miracles in the biblical narrative were attributed to the pre-scientific understanding of the biblical writers.  Not surprisingly, the church often went to great lengths to distance itself from university theology over the next one hundred years.