paper on new testament- Ladd

A REACTION PAPER

THE NEW TESTAMENT AND CRITICISM

by George Ladd

Allen Johnson

Introduction To The New Testament

EBTS — Tuesday

Ian Scott — Instructor

November 16, 1993

Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. (Psalm 119:105)

I opened my mouth, and panted: for I longed for thy commandments. (Psalm 119:131)

The task of every Christian is to seek the will of Christ and to obey as a free response of

love. Although to know the will of Christ involves an attentiveness of heart and soul, individually and corporately, to The Holy Spirit, evangelical Christians are united in their assertion that The Bible is the inspired witness of The Word of God, and therefore authoritative for faith and rule of practice. From that common ground differentiation occurs according to Biblical interpretation involving two basic questions: (1) How do we understand for today passages written thousands of years ago within a specific historical, cultural milieu? (2) What presuppositions do we bring into our reading of the Bible?

George Eldon Ladd brings the passion of a believer and the precision and erudition of a scholar to bear upon the deeply important task of biblical interpretation in his work, The New Testament and Criticism. Critical to his thesis is "... the Bible is the Word of God given in the words of [humans] in history" (p. 12). Ladd explains biblical revelation as the acting of God into human history interpreted by inspired prophetic word. "The deeds [of God] could not be understood unless accompanied by the divine word; and the word would seem powerless unless accompanied by the mighty works" (p. 27). God has chosen to reveal himself through human beings living within historical conditions of culture, tradition, language, and socio-political context.

What is truth? (Pontius Pilate; c 30 CE; John 18:38)

I am the truth. (Jesus of Nazareth; c 30 CE; John 14:6)

The New Testament and Criticism is a basic exposition of the several tools of scientific method applied to the Bible to determine its message accurately in its original form and intent. George Ladd immediately and continuously engages the reader in the ferocious swirling controversies that surround the use of criticism. Modern criticism arose as a parallel and derivative development of 18th and 19th Century Enlightenment rationalistic philosophy which "... assumed that the Bible, like all other literature, must be interpreted in terms of universal laws of human reason" (p. 41). Thus, miracles, the divinity of Jesus, the resurrection of Christ — were all dismissed as rationally impossible. Therefore the task of reputable scholarship was to penetrate through religious myth "... to reconstruct a purely historical portrait, that is, a naturalistic, non-supernatural picture of Jesus of Nazareth" (p. 41).

Thus, biblical criticism developed historically away from biblical faith. Rightly mistrusting this defection away from historical creedal doctrine, many biblical conservatives knee-jerk rejected all biblical criticism as a slippery slope to hell. Many a tale was to be told of devout young men [gender intended], called to ministry, losing their faith in the slithery halls of liberal seminaries. One might well speculate the effect of this carry-over yet today, for while the more agnostic forms of liberal theology are slipping in their capacity to capture the passions of the masses, extreme fundamentalism void of credible scholarly influence continues rapid growth world-wide.

George Ladd seeks rapprochement of the best of biblical criticism to biblical faith. He convinces! Expressing gratitude, even wonderment at the exhaustive work of innumerable dedicated scholars, many of whom are clearly beyond the pale of orthodox believing Christianity, Ladd appropriates their tools to an evangelical theology to strengthen the biblical testimony as reliable. Ladd's passion is to convert Evangelicals to the cause of biblical criticism. Recognizing this to be a delicate balancing act, he dissects the several methods of criticism, lavishing praise on those tools which can amplify biblical faith, while demonstrating the fallacies and illogic of methods which dismiss biblical supernaturalism out of hand.

III

I have chosen the way of truth; I have set my heart on your laws. (Psalm 119:30)

Ladd begins his survey of the several scientific tools with textual criticism, a method which seeks "... to recover the original text" (p. 55) of biblical scripture through comparison and analysis of ancient manuscripts. This so-called "lower criticism" is generally accepted as valid by all but the most die-hard fundamentalists, who resolutely cling to the Authorized Version (King James Version) due in part to excessive apprehension of modern biblical scholarship. Ladd strikingly demonstrates the plethora of anomalies which creep into later-dated texts such as the inferior twelfth-century Greek manuscripts heavily utilized by Erasmus for what eventually formed the basis of the English Authorized Version (KJV). Although Ladd emphasizes that foundational doctrines are unaffected, errors can create misrepresentations. While scholarly textual research and debate continues, Ladd is confident that within this past century a trustworthy text has been achieved (p. 81).

Linguistic criticism proposes that the words of Scripture are "... human words which are historically conditioned and which must therefore be interpreted grammatically and historically" (p. 86). Research of the language, culture, and socio-political aspects of the biblical era help to approximate more closely the meaning of biblical passages.

As Ladd moves into the "higher criticism" methodologies which "... refer to a critical literary analysis of the biblical books themselves..." (p. 109), his endorsements become much more cautious, selective, and tentative. Ladd clearly wants to utilize these tools, but treats them like fire — get careless, get burned. "Literary criticism is the study of such questions as the authorship, date, place of writing, recipients, style, sources, integrity, and purpose of any piece of literature" (p. 112). What?!! The Bible was written by mere mortal persons of like passions as us, using considerable liberty "... to expand, to interpret, to paraphrase..." (p. 121) Jesus's words?!! Ladd attempts to show that the biblical authors wrote out of an historical, cultural context for a specific intended audience to convey certain theological truths. Ladd reminds us again that God has elected to reveal His will into history through human authorship. To understand an author's context is to position oneself for a more complete understanding of God's truth as revealed in Scripture.

Ladd gets the cautious evangelical reader into nodding her or his head in agreement, "Yes, this biblical criticism indeed is a wonderful tool to gain deeper understanding of the Bible!" While he has the reader's enthusiasm, Ladd begins to inject into play the more treacherous critical methods — Form criticism (including redaction); historical criticism; and what he terms as comparative religious criticism. Ladd recognizes the minefields littering these scholastic fields, but feels there are still flakes of gold to be mined. The key to entering these methodologies is to discern presuppositions. Ladd is quick to point out that since these higher critical methods had been historically "... coupled with a liberal theology, the mistaken conviction arose [among conservative biblicists] that criticism itself is a liberal discipline"

(p. 142). Ladd proposes that the Gospels should interpret themselves rather than through outside sources or by modern rational philosophical presuppositions. Ladd therefore counters that rather than disproving the truth claims of New Testament scripture, form criticism properly applied vindicates the Gospels as a coherent, united, trustworthy witness.

By human ways and means we never come to an understanding of the

Holy Scriptures ... The Bible is closed to the scholarly approach. The

Master alone has the key to this Book. ( The Inner Land by Eberhard

Arnold; Plough Publishing House, Rifton, NY; 1976. p. 468)

To the extent that I dare approach the Scriptures out of my own ability,

I understand nothing. To the extent that I am driven by truth itself and

its life-giving Spirit, to that extent do I comprehend the Holy Scriptures;

but then not out of my own ability and merit but out of God's grace.

( Hans Denck, 1495-1527. Quoted in The Innner Land, p. 474)

One could readily challenge Ladd that he, too, brings to his research presuppositions, namely, that the message of the Scriptures is factually true as stated. Ladd would agree. Faith, after all, is outside the domain of the scientific method.

Having engaged the reading of this most instructive book, I have two concerns to pose.

The first concern involves the age-old temptation to "prove" or "disprove" the existence of God as a way of gaining power and control over-against God. That is, once one has God figured out, one can find ways to exert one's will autonomous from God. Thus, the Hebrew proscription against verbally uttering the name of God, the Tetragrammaton, was to acknowledge that The Holy can not be seized, controlled, or fully known. Two of the temptations in the wilderness involved tests to prove God — turning stones into bread, and especially that of a superhuman defiance of death in a leap from the temple pinnacle. Jesus consistently refused to perform miracles until after an expression of trusting faith. To the scoffing Pharisees and scholars who persistently demanded a miracle, Jesus spoke only of judgment (Mt. 12:38; 16:1; Mk. 8:11; Lk. 11:16; Jn. 6:30). To the skeptical, offended people of his hometown, Jesus withheld miracle (Mk. 6:5). Paul taught that the way to God was not through worldly wisdom or miraculous sign, but through the foolishness of the cross (1 Cor. 1:17-31).

The scholar who attempts through reason and knowledge to know God will be forever far from God. It is arrogance, an assumption that ones mind is competent and capable to define the deepest mysteries. It is an usurpation of God (Gen. 3). On the other hand, for the person who enters her or his search for God in a spirit of humility, trust, and love, that ones eyes (mind) is opened and transformed to a capacity to know the perfect will of God (Rm. 12:2). Scholarly training and consequent use of its tools then subsequently come into proper and useful order. George Ladd understands this well. "The critical study of the Bible is necessary, not to grasp its saving power to speak to [persons] of the redemption that is in Jesus Christ, or to bring them through Christ to God, but to answer questions about the historical process by which God has given us His Word" (p. 218).

My other question involves scholastic elitism. George Ladd seems to struggle throughout his book with the desire to impress his academic colleagues. Ladd seems embarrassed at the dearth of competent Evangelical Christian scholars (as of the 1960's), and seems eager to prove that biblical Christianity can be a legitimate participant in the field of critical scholarship. Yet here exists a deep gulf between scientific rationalism and faith. Those who would build a bridge between the two must build carefully, and cautiously prepare as well as enthusiastically encourage those who would tread its steps. Finally, those called by God to the task of scholarship must understand that they are not lords over others but rather servants of the Body, and that their academic and intellectual gifts are not the essence and summation of truth but rather a contribution to the life of the Body when humbly offered up to the use of the working of The Holy Spirit.

George Ladd sums up well the place of the each Christian scholar who would seek the will of God. "In hearing and obeying the Word of God, the scholar must take the same stance as the layman: a humble response which falls to its knees with the prayer, Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth" (p. 218).