Abstract
Christopher M. Hays and Christopher B. Ansberry (eds),
Evangelical Faith and the Challenge of Historical Criticism
, SPCK: London, 2013; 256 pp.: 9780281067329, £17.99 (pbk)
This book stems from recent debates about whether and how evangelical Christians may engage with historical-critical study of the Bible. To a British eye, the debate looks a little dated, for such questions have been long considered in the UK. British evangelicals generally do not have the same suspicion of historical-critical scholarship of the Bible as there appears to be in some American circles.
What is new here is the attempt to engage with specific historical judgements concerning the Bible in the context of theological reading of Scripture. The authors see a ‘rule of faith’ as determining the boundaries of valid Christian biblical interpretation, and argue that this opens up space for historical scholarship without fear of its consequences.
After Christopher Hays sets the scene (ch. 1), the core essays (chs 2—8) engage with historical questions where mainstream critics’ conclusions are at variance with views traditionally held by evangelical (and most other orthodox) Christians. These essays sketch the views of historical critics on the issue, and ask how far these views are compatible with orthodox Christian faith. They cover: Adam’s historicity, the exodus, the status of Deuteronomy, prophecy’s apparent failures, pseudepigraphy (in both Testaments), the historical Jesus, and Paul in Acts. The authors do not necessarily endorse the historical-critical views they expound: the focus of discussion is in the second part of each chapter.
The closing essay (ch. 9) draws the threads together by identifying what has been learned, and what a faithful criticism and a critical faith look like. They rightly argue that historical criticism is unavoidable for Christian faith, for Christians appeal to God’s intervention in history, not least in the Incarnation, death and Resurrection of Jesus. The approach relocates some evangelical scholarship within the mainstream of Christian scholarship, rather than driving it away into a ghetto. The appeal to a ‘rule of faith’ here is a significant foundation for the argument: the ecumenical creeds become the measure of what counts as faithful criticism. It is good to see, after the (properly) intellectual grappling in the core chapters, a stress on personal engagement with God and the Church as a key feature of Christian scholarship (pp. 218–20).
The appeal to a ‘rule of faith’ (such as the creeds) throughout reflects recent discussion on theological interpretation of Scripture, which has good potential to help in the issues in this book. Proper critical thought, however, and a secure evangelical stance under the authority of God through Scripture imply that such formulations are in principle open to critique from Scripture. It is not clear whether these authors see the creeds as immutable, and further discussion on this would be valuable.
This is a valuable book for evangelical students and scholars. It faces the central issues raised by historical criticism squarely, and considers how far mainstream critical views are compatible with an evangelical Christian faith. It offers helpful avenues for reflection and models of how to think faithfully and critically about the issues, without giving up on either angle.