Redaction Criticism And Reaction Criticism

Originally, redaction criticism was restricted to the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), but it has been applied to other areas of Scripture. Being the successor of form criticism, its main concern is to discover the contributions which the evangelists themselves have made to the Gospel tradition. Norman Perrin in his book What is Redaction Criticism? states, “The prime requisite for redaction criticism is the ability to trace the form and content of material used by the author concerned or in some way to determine the nature and extent of his activity in collecting and creating, as well as in arranging, editing, and composing.”

The emergence of redaction criticism was anticipated long ago by New Testament scholarship in both Germany

The work of the earliest redaction critics – Gunther Bornkamm on Matthew, Hans Conzelmann on Luke, and Willi Marxsen on Mark, pointed out the inadequacy of this portrayal. Redaction criticism is thus associated with these three names. Independently they published on the three synoptic Gospels. Marxsen coined the term redaktionsgeschichte for their common approach. These works attempted rigorously to identify and explain the ideas imposed in the utilization of the available materials by the evangelists. These studies introduced and cemented the place of the evangelists as creative theologians, but not as mere editors or collectors of the material. Redaction criticism claimed that the evangelists showed their artistically designed plan, plot, and character development, which form criticism had disclaimed. Therefore, the evangelists are “people who kept a clear theological and ideological intention while crafting their works.” Moreover, here one has to take into account what Robert H. Stein had mentioned in his article, ‘it was not until form criticism separated the pericopes from the redaction that redaktionsgeschichte was really

The distinctive theological outlook of the evangelist could also be detected by the changes they imposed to the sources they utilized. Stephen S. Smalley notes that redaction criticism identifies the exact contribution of the evangelists to their traditions. He further notes that it is possible to detect how the evangelists handled their sources and their intentions. Thus, this approach provides insight not only into how each evangelist understood the material at his disposal, but also into how they interpreted the material in their own unique way for his readers. J. Donahue rightly stated, “Redaction criticism as a literary enterprise was a precursor to many of the literary approaches that later became popular in interpreting the New Testament.” Due to its attention to the creative work of the evangelists and its focus on the finished form of the text, it is an appropriate tool to be used in conjunction with newer literary methods. This method also made it clear that the authors of the New Testament were religiously sensitive, and were also struggling with their traditions on the question of how to present them to their changing situations. Thus, this method greatly contributed to New Testament scholarship, especially providing a framework to understand the author’s life situation and his/her theological