Higher Criticism vs Lower Criticism

Higher Criticism

Higher criticism, also known as the historical-critical method, focuses on the "world behind the text." It investigates the literary and historical context of the biblical books. Scholars using this method ask questions about authorship, date of composition, sources, and the historical development of the text. For example, a higher critic might analyze the book of Isaiah to determine if it was written by one author or multiple authors over different periods. This approach treats the Bible like any other ancient text, using methods from history, linguistics, and literary analysis.

Lower Criticism

Lower criticism, more commonly called textual criticism, focuses on the "text itself." Its goal is to establish the most accurate and original wording of the biblical books. Since we don't have the original manuscripts (autographs), textual critics compare thousands of surviving manuscripts, fragments, and ancient translations to identify and correct scribal errors, additions, or omissions that occurred over centuries of copying. Their work involves meticulously examining differences in wording to reconstruct a text that is as close as possible to the author's original. For example, a textual critic might compare Greek manuscripts of the New Testament to determine the correct wording of a particular verse.

Key Distinctions

The simplest way to distinguish the two is by their primary focus:

Higher criticism is concerned with the history and authorship of the biblical books.

Lower criticism is concerned with the words and transmission of the biblical text.

Think of it this way: a textual critic (lower criticism) tries to figure out what the original author wrote, while a historical critic (higher criticism) tries to figure out who the original author was and why they wrote it.

The Harm of Higher Criticism

The primary concern with higher criticism lies in its foundational presupposition that the Bible is a purely human document, subject to the same literary and historical forces as any other ancient text. This approach often leads to:

Undermining Divine Inspiration: By seeking naturalistic explanations for biblical events and authorship, higher criticism can dismiss or reinterpret miraculous accounts and prophecies, thus denying the supernatural element of the Bible.

Challenging Traditional Authorship: Theories like the Documentary Hypothesis, which posits that the first five books of the Bible were written by multiple, anonymous authors, directly contradict traditional religious belief that Moses was the sole author.

Creating Doubt and Disbelief: For many believers, the conclusions of higher criticism can lead to a loss of faith in the Bible as a trustworthy, authoritative, and infallible Word of God. This can be seen as a "disintegration" of the text's message.

The Role of Lower Criticism

In contrast, lower criticism (textual criticism) is generally seen as constructive rather than harmful. It operates from a different premise and has a different goal.

Restoring the Original Text: Textual criticism does not question the divine origin of the Bible; rather, it aims to purify the text by identifying and removing errors introduced by scribes during centuries of manual copying. The goal is to get as close as possible to the original, divinely-inspired words.

Strengthening Faith: For scholars and believers, the meticulous work of textual criticism provides a stronger foundation for the biblical text. The vast number of manuscripts and the high degree of agreement between them often reinforce confidence in the Bible's transmission over time.

In summary, higher criticism is viewed as harmful because its methods can lead to a fundamental rejection of the Bible's spiritual authority, while lower criticism is viewed as beneficial because it helps to preserve the integrity of the Bible's physical text.