A Biblical Criticism Assignment

Editor’s Note: This is from my Biblical Criticism class. I’m working on a longer piece covering the early Church and the topic of Divine will, but with exams and such going on this Spring I figured I’d present some coursework. The reason being is 1) I get anxious if I do not put something out—it’s an inappropriate mentality born from my stand-up days where if one wasn’t grinding, one wasn’t getting booked. This is not always true. And 2) I really want to start working on a senior thesis. My goal is to solidify two workable theses: one for the secular, academic world—analytical in nature—the second within the theological field, with room to explore metaphysical theory built on a scholastic foundation.

An interesting challenge is finding a way to have both the analytical side and ecclesiastical aspects in one thesis with enough interdisciplinary aspects to walk between worlds without overindulging in one or the other. We cannot hope to understand the Divine without a sure footing in the mundane nor should we consider the terrestrial without concern for the transcendent.

Some of what is in the proceeding text and the short essay on St. Paul’s epistles that will follow it may be repeated in the longer piece, but my hope is that the ideas are given as much context as possible within the (mostly) academic framework in which they are presented.

Anyway, I’m heading to California in less than a week to be with my partner before the Summer term begins. I hope this isn’t too dry, but whatever—its supposed to be all academic and shit.

The academic study of Biblical texts requires a contextual framework because of the circumstances that surround the development of the variety of texts found within the pages of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian New Testament. Strictly in terms of codification, the Hebrew Bible has no scholarly consensus as to when the text was fixed with some saying that perhaps this would have occurred in the second or first centuries, BCE, while some argue that the text became crystallized as late as the second century, CE. The historical periods when these texts were supposedly being fixed were of great importance to the Jewish people with the argument for the former hypothesis of the codification being undertook during the domination of Greek culture spanning to the Romans gaining control of Judea.

The latter argument for the second century, CE, takes the academic eye to the establishment of the Mishnah, a major landmark for the Jewish tradition solidifying the oral Torah into the written word. Beyond the development of the Jewish canon, context for the content of the contents is important due to the theological principles that may have influenced the Hebrew people through the various geographical power structures that they were surrounded by from one point to another, from Egypt to Babylon. The Canaanite tribes’ Ugaritic cycles and Babylonian myths, arguably, play no small role in the development of the Hebrew Bible’s narratives, poetry, and even the qualities that make the Hebrew God stand apart from others, or find similarities.

The Christian New Testament, with context, finds its development with the backdrop of the Greco-Roman Empire and Hellenistic philosophy inspiring the contents of the narratives as well as the language used in the writing itself. Where the Hebrew Bible was written in the abjad language of the Israelites the New Testament was written in Aramaic and koine Greek, by Jewish authors living under Roman occupation. The historical relevance of authorship under occupation plays a significant role in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament demanding an academic perspective as to the reason behind the development of the scriptures, specifically the Synoptic Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistles. The Christian New Testament cannot be understood without the Hebrew Bible giving context for the theological explorations already given through the latter.

The development of the Christian Christ figure, the θεάνθρωπος, in the context of historical influence can be directly linked to the Hellenistic culture of the day, a deified, exalted leader that was an opposing force to the Roman rule in the area (before being adopted, of course). The gospels themselves come from Greek, εὐαγγέλιον, or evangelion, meaning “Good news,” which was historically used to depict the birth of the savior-figure, Augustus Caesar recorded on a stone in Priene. The deified Augustus, being the “Son of God” as he was the heir to the divine Julius. The Son of God, or Jesus the Christ, bearing the moniker of the earthly ruler in the Roman empire, theologically removing the position from Augustus and bestowing it upon the Christ as a way to, perhaps, depose Roman authority amongst the then cult of Christian Jews.

Context in Biblical criticism is important for academic understanding of the way in which these texts were influenced and adopted other cultural ideas, philosophies, and theology that, in turn, influenced Western civilization before expanding to the rest of the world. If we objectively look at the ways in which the geo-political landscape of the day influenced the composition of these sacred texts than we can understand what they are trying to convey, how they’re conveying it, and why they are trying to convey it as well as why these texts have had such an impact, culturally, while other tribes and traditions were lost to time or conquest. The Jewish exodus and diaspora, the Christian’s genesis under Greco-Roman rule, the historical relevance is important to consider the staying power of such traditions, doctrines, and dogma. The context in which these theologies developed helps us academically understand them, and without that the study of theology might be considered a faith-alone approach, which does not offer the full breath and dimensions of these religious institutions. 

The New Testament of the Christian faith begins with four “Gospels,” rendered from the Greek euangelion, meaning “good news.” The good news delivered by the Gospel accounts regards the life and death of Jesus Christ, the Godman of the Christian tradition. Jesus of Nazareth is the Christian God, associated with the orthodox Trinitarian Deity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Gospel evangelists, or authors of the books of the New Testament deliver the good news of God’s incarnation as well as the revelation of the Triune Godhead that was, by Christian thought, the same God that delivered the Israelites out of Egypt and made a covenant with their people. The Gospel narratives are a continuance of this covenant which, through the life and death of the Christian savior Jesus Christ, is brought to a fuller realization through the new covenant.

The synoptic Gospels are the first three books of the New Testament. These initial Gospel accounts share many similar themes and structure of the life and death of the Christian messiah. The reason for this might be due to the Gospel of Mark, the second book of the New Testament, being the earlier written text. The Gospel according to Mark, like other biblical texts, is anonymous with the content of the book introducing the Christ figure to an audience of people probably less versed or interested in Jewish lore or customs; the audience for this book may have been converts who were facing persecution under Roman authority which makes the Gospel account focus on a Christ figure that is also under threat of attack by the power structures of His time.

The audience would have found solace in a misunderstood and mistreated savior figure that does not find a home even with his own family. The Gospel of Mark refers to Jesus as the “Son of Man,” inferring a Hellenistic view toward the Messiah, this making Jesus function as a servant of God. The title also alludes to a community pulling away from a Roman leader, as the euangelion and the “Son of Man” would refer to Roman authoritative figures, propelling them to divine spheres of influence. The Gospel of Mark concerns itself with shifting the peoples’ allegiance away from earthly leaders toward the Christ figure, and within the tense environment of the time in the Greco-Roman Empire for Christians, it is as much a political narrative as it is a theological confession (A Summary and Analysis of the Gospel of Mark).

The Gospel according to Matthew is the account written after Mark’s narrative, using roughly ninety percent of the latter Gospel. The Book of Matthew constitutes the typological nature held between the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament. The author of this Gospel concerns themselves with presenting the account of the life and death of Christ to a primarily Jewish audience, showing the Godman as a “New Moses” delivering the people of God from death through His sacrifice and resurrection. Christ, by this account, is the fulfillment of the Old Covenant. The Gospel account connects the Christ to the coming Messiah prophesied by the prophets in the Hebrew Bible, maintaining a continuation from the Hebrew Bible’s narrative to the evangelist’s record. The opening of the New Testament and the Gospel of Matthew begins with the birth of Christian God incarnate after showing the ancestry of Christ, this is incredibly important to the intended Israelite audience. The audience the next Gospel had in mind broke away from the Jewish community and even the Christians facing persecution, the third Gospel narrative took a broader approach.

The Gospel according to Luke shows a Christ figure that is not here just to deliver the Israelite people out of the Law of Moses; He is not merely a fulfillment of the Old Covenant. The Christ figure is savior of the world. The author of this Gospel has a strength in writing, too, conveying an implied educated audience for this narrative. This portrayal of the Godman is unique in that His message becomes universal rather than for the Jewish community or Gentile converts. Where Mark’s Gospel alluded to a coming end time this Gospel takes from Matthew’s concerns with the church organization and uses it to presuppose a future bereft of cataclysm (Harris). An important aspect of this Gospel is the centrality of the Holy Spirit, this concept acts as a means to show Jesus Christ’s connection with God, The Father, as well as a demonstration of the catholicity of the Christian tradition.

The Holy Spirit, critically speaking, is a device to portray the connectivity of the Kingdom of God and the Body of Christ that is built up through faith and members of the church (The Holy Spirit in the Gospels). This church, though Eastern and Western Christianity are theologically divided on who the foundation of this church is, can be seen made manifest in the second half of the Gospel of Luke, at Pentecost in the Acts of the Apostles. The central theme of universality and connectivity runs through this Gospel account, most likely meant for an educated audience. The fourth Gospel takes these themes and builds on them through the exploration of the universality of the Christ figure and the transcendence of the Triune God.