Ron Price-Question from a novice about Redaction Criticism
I have found the ongoing discussion between you
and Rikk interesting. I appreciate both of your
willingness to discuss in such an open forum.
Before reading the discussion, I was not familiar
with the term Redaction Criticism (please note
that I am not a scholar).
Is it correct to say Redaction Criticism looks
what is included, what is excluded, and how the
text is formed to understand what the author is
trying to get at?
The analogy that comes to my mind would be
State-approved literature in the era of Stalin;
how it would, in some fashion, point to the
goodness of the State (and its leader) and
criticize the West.
I know this is simplistic, but is that the
Greenville, SC, USA
____________________________________________________________________________________Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
- on 5/29/07 1:52 PM, Gregory Leiby at gleiby@... wrote:
> Ron,Redaction criticism looks to the editorial process and motivations. This
> I have found the ongoing discussion between you
> and Rikk interesting. I appreciate both of your
> willingness to discuss in such an open forum.
> Before reading the discussion, I was not familiar
> with the term Redaction Criticism (please note
> that I am not a scholar).
stems from the look at sources for the current biblical texts. The
identification of multiple sources woven together into a final form creates
the question of the editors role in creating that final form.
For a very brief introduction to various kinds of "criticisms" see:
Hayes, John Haralson, and Carl R. Holladay. Biblical Exegesis: A Beginner's
Handbook. Rev ed. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1987.
Steve Puluka, MA Duquesne University
Cantor, Holy Ghost Church, Mckees Rocks PA